TEHERAN

SO WHO WAS in on the downfall of Bashar Al Assad?

Well, neither the Russians nor the Iranians came to his help.

For the Iranians, his departure means their use of Syria to supply their proxies, Hezbollah, in Lebanon is pretty much gone. One nil to Israel. Hezbollah will remain immobilized for the moment. Shi’ite power across Syria and Lebanon has taken a hit. Clerical power in Teheran may suffer. Of course, it might inspire even more aggression against Israel. But Iran has taken a hit.

For the Russians, if they get to keep their naval base in Syria, Assad’s demise will mean they’re free of commitments to him and they haven’t lost their presence in the Mediterranean. And it probably means they gave the Syrian leader’s removal the nod. Of course, they took him to Moscow. He might be useful if things don’t turn out quite as democratically as promised.

For the Turks, the end of Assad’s regime may mean they can focus on the Kurds. If the seventy odd rebel groups in Syria all come to agreement. Otherwise, Turkey might find itself fighting in all directions.

For the US, Donald Trump really doesn’t care much who is in power in Syria, as long as they don’t interfere with American interests. Bad news for the Kurds, maybe. Perhaps they should grab Al-Jawlani, the reformed Islamist now in charge in Damascus, and hand him over to Washington for the millions the US is offering as a reward for him. So they canbuy more weapons to defend themselves against the Turks and any Islamists that might come knocking.

For Iraq and the Arabian Penninsula, they can only hope this doesn’t see a resurrection of Islamic State, or something like it.

Israel will need to watch for everything and more. And Hamas is still there in Gaza.