WANA (Dec 11) – 1. The Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran explicitly stated that defending any country against foreign invasions is the duty of its military and armed forces. He highlighted that retreating or displaying weakness by the Syrian army was a major factor that enabled the invading forces to occupy and seize Syrian territory, compromising its independence and territorial sovereignty.

 

2. In his remarks, the Supreme Leader did not endorse any of the recent accusations leveled against Bashar al-Assad, even by some pro-Resistance figures. He only emphasized that setbacks and failures are natural in any struggle and should not lead to despair. Instead, he indirectly encouraged standing firm, fighting, and resisting. This was perhaps the only part of his speech that could be interpreted as a reference to Assad.

 

3. Referring to points 1 and 2, the Leader mentioned repeated warnings issued by Iranian security agencies to Syrian officials since September. He expressed doubts about whether these warnings reached the highest and most relevant Syrian authorities, hinting at possible collusion or conspiracy among certain Syrian political and military officials with the invaders and occupiers.

 

 

4. The Leader’s emphasis on the “brave Syrian youth” as the liberators of Syria, who with faith and patriotism will save their country from foreign invaders and domestic terrorists, was a clear reference to the Syrian National Defense Forces (NDF). This group, also known as the Syrian militia, was formed in 2012 from volunteer forces and played a significant role in liberating and cleansing occupied Syrian areas.

 

The NDF was initially organized to combat ISIS and other active terrorist groups in Syria, under the guidance of General Soleimani and other commanders like General Hamdani. At its peak, the group was estimated to have over 100,000 members. Although its numbers have since decreased, its legacy in defending Syrian soil suggests it still has the potential to recruit and operate effectively as a popular force.

 

5. Contrary to some current and former Iranian officials, the Leader did not suggest engaging with the terrorist invaders who have now taken power and are seeking to establish a new Syrian government. Instead, his speech focused on the uprising, struggle, and resistance of the Syrian people against foreign aggressors, Zionist occupiers, and armed terrorists who have seized Damascus.

 

 

6. The Leader presented a third narrative that contrasts with the dominant ones in both domestic and international media. According to him, the issue was not the principle of assistance but the impossible field conditions that disrupted aid delivery:

 

“Even under these tough circumstances, we were ready [to help]. They came to me here and said we’ve prepared everything Syria needs and are ready to go. The skies were closed, the ground routes were blocked. The Zionist regime and the U.S. closed both Syrian airspace and land routes. It was impossible. This is how things are. If the motivations within that country had remained intact, and they could have stood up to the enemy, the enemy would not have been able to close their skies or land routes. Assistance could have been delivered.”

 

This statement clearly differs from the two prevailing narratives:

 

In the first, Assad refrains from directly requesting military and logistical aid from Iran, and Iran cannot act without a formal, explicit request from the Syrian government.

 


In the second, Iran declines to assist Syria despite Assad’s direct and explicit request.

 

Furthermore, the speech subtly criticized the Syrian army for retreating too quickly, suggesting that their lack of resistance facilitated the enemy’s advance and hindered Iran’s ability to provide support.

 

7. The overarching theme of the Leader’s speech was that the temporary loss of Syria does not equate to the disintegration of the Resistance front in the region. While it may take time, Syria will eventually rejoin the Resistance, and the movement will expand in other parts of the region. This expansion might even extend beyond West Asia, although its influence in those areas has not yet become visible.