Bashar al-Assad’s latest pronouncement on the Syrian crisis is that his most loyal friends, Russia and Iran, are still standing firmly by him. Like any politician, Assad is sending a careful message to his own people, as well as to his allies and to his enemies. But is his confidence any more than spin or wishful thinking?

Four and half years into the war, Syria is an unmitigated disaster. The last two weeks have seen the deaths of 250 people in regime action. The UN condemned the 18 August air strikes on rebel-held Douma near Damascus as devastating and unacceptable – and was rebuked by Assad for its criticism. In Palmyra, Isis blew up the Temple of Baal after beheading the ancient site’s chief archaeologist. The world’s largest humanitarian catastrophe continues unchecked.

Earlier this month some detected signs of hope that the impasse over a political solution for Syria might be ending. Barack Obama talked of a window of opportunity opening in Moscow and Tehran. The background to that was a changing military situation and Assad’s admission that he was losing territory, endangering the heartland of his Alawite sect, and running out of resources.

Better coordinated efforts by Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar have brought a flow of weapons and greater cohesion to the rebels. Turkey announced it would join US-led air strikes against the jihadis and create a security corridor along the Syrian border. Khaled Khoja, leader of the western-backed Syrian opposition, sounded a rare note of optimism.

The long-awaited international agreement on Iran’s nuclear programme in mid-July has been accompanied by hopes of a shift in Tehran – or at least of a more friendly climate. Russia even supported a UN security council resolution calling for an investigation into Assad’s use of chemical weapons – when in the past it has always vetoed any censure. Russia and Saudi Arabia have met at the highest level. Assad sent his intelligence chief, Ali Mamlouk, to talk to the Saudis. Mamlouk, interestingly, is said to be unhappy with growing Iranian influence in Damascus.



In situations of this kind it is hard to read the runes and to distinguish exploratory contacts or conditional signals from something more significant. It is clear, however, that something needs to change: efforts by the UN special envoy Staffan de Mistura have gone no further than the work of his predecessors, Kofi Annan and Lakhdar Brahimi. Talk of “freezing” front lines evaporated long before the summer heat.



Interviewed by Al-Manar TV, organ of Lebanon’s Hezbollah, the Syrian president swatted away Obama’s claim that Moscow and Tehran now “recognise that the trend lines are not good for Assad”. But the Russians in particular, say western officials, are dismayed by the way Iran has replaced them as the most influential power in Syria. Their concerns about Isis – with homegrown jihadis in the Caucasus – are also greater, and closer to home, than European ones.

Indeed, Syrian opposition figures think the west may be getting too close to Moscow. They fear the argument that Assad must play a key role in any transition to preserve the institutions of the state. Unlike the Russians, the US and Britain insist he has lost legitimacy, but worry that the alternative to the regime is likely to be a jihadi one. Europeans are hoping for more intensive engagement by the US. Obama’s forthcoming talks with King Salman of Saudi Arabia will be closely watched.

Interpretations differ. Britain’s foreign secretary, Philip Hammond, sounded upbeat in Tehran this week, speaking of a new phase for peace efforts. Others believe that the recent manoeuvring has already run its course.

“As hopes for a joint Saudi-Russian initiative that could resolve the crisis in Syria were evaporating, the Assad regime’s bear hug of Tehran was growing increasingly tight,” argued the Doha-based Arab Centre for Research and Policy Studies.



In that sense, Assad is right: there is no sign in this recent flurry of diplomacy that his backers are ready to dump him, or that his worst enemies are ready for compromise over his fate. But that could change over time.



“No, it doesn’t add up to anything much, not yet,” said one western diplomat involved in formulating Syria policy. “But in the scheme of things there is some new activity and some slightly new themes. It will create a bit more space for talking. There is more scope for a basic alignment between the west and Russia.

“The problem is that the big regional powers, the Saudis and Iranians, are not looking to make any early concessions. They are still in it for the long haul.”

