1. Syria: It is 3 defacto states and You operate under Russia meaning you are a second fiddle and got nothing of the cake but the US, Turkey and Russia did.. You were happy to lose it to them instead of it falling to the rebels which means you gained nothing but lost it all and will be under Russian boot in the russian part under their protection.
The enemy's openly announced, paramount goal in Syria was to overthrow the government in Damascus, as a prelude to disrupting the Iran-led Axis of Resistance. They failed thoroughly on both counts.
As for Russia, Tehran and Moscow are strategic partners on equal footing. Unlike the US regime, Russia is not subjugating allies nor reducing them to client status. Case in point, Iran's supply lines through Syria are intact, Iranian-backed Resistance groups are stationed along the border to occupied Golan.
Even if Russia didn't subscribe to this state of affairs, there's nothing much it could do about it. In effect there were reports early on of Russia trying to have HezbAllah vacate one of these areas (a locality in or around Qalamoun if my memory serves). After a brief mutual show of force, the Russians quickly abandoned the idea. No similar attempt was undertaken ever since. Now that ties between Russia and Isra"el" have deteriorated, there's even less of a probability for Moscow to proceed with such.
In short Russia cannot but concede to Iran everything Iran aims for in Syria.
2. In Yemen: The Local allied coalition controls 80% of Yemen including all oil and ports, the Ocean around it and the stragetic strait connecting to the suez canal and the Yemen Islands. plus nearly 50% of population areas. Not like what some of you were previously claiming 80-20 which was not factual. They have been under blockade on top of that.
Which means the west and their Saudi clients went from control over the entirety of Yemen via the successive regimes of Saleh and Hadi, to partial control only. In other terms they lost rather than gaining sway over that country. Simple math.
Moreover, Riyadh was incessantly stressing how it wouldn't tolerate an Iranian-allied government on its southern flank under any circumstances. Ouster of the San'a government was the declared goal. It failed.
3. In Iraq it is still US and Turkey occupied and the Iraqi Gov't are US allied all Iran has there is proxy entities and if that proxy entity would have launched war against the regime to overthrow them it would have gotten invaded ala Yemen..
Fact is that the USA deployed all sorts of political, economical and military stratagems and hatched plot after plot in a blatantly infructuous attempt to not only neutralize Iran's Iraqi allies - including a whole military corps (the PMU) rivaling the regular Iraqi army in power, but to turn Baghdad into the anti-Iranian government it used to be under Saddam. Needless to say, Iran and her allies resoundingly defeated all these plans.
Iran has grassroots supporters and allies at the social level aplenty, so unlike Washington and Ankara, Iran has no need to militarily occupy nations. This is actually a sign of strength not the other way around.
Iraq went from being a major regional power hostile to Iran, to a country where pro-Iran forces exert decisive influence in the state apparatus and beyond, and from where the Americans will find it hard to stage operations against Iran. A clear win for Islamic Iran, no matter how it's spun.
Thanks in no small part to Iranian military assistance, the only state actor in the world brave enough to extend this kind of help to the Palestinian Resistance.
4. When you don't have deterence against Israel in Syria you have lost whatever proxy you had against Against anyone in the region may it be KSA, Turkey or Israel. The Israeli knew the weakness and just went with it. Hamas has deterence but Iran doesn't have deterence against Israel attacks in Syria including Assad. Which means you got defeated everywhere hence why you were living under Russia in Syria and they got in there because you admitted defeat against fuking non-state actors..
Wars are conducted to serve pre-defined political goals. When these are not attained, then the war effort was unsuccessful.
By way of consequence, deterrence is necessary against game-changing actions of the enemy. Not against symbolic acts of aggression which will score psy-ops points at best but nothing to alter the geostrategic balance. As a matter of fact, zionist (no legitimate government by the name Israel today) airstrikes against governmental assets and pro-Iranian paramilitary in Syria have been utterly insufficient to dislodge the latter from that country. They failed to cut off Iranian supplies to HezbAllah next door, considering that HezbAllah hasn't ceased expanding its arsenal in volume and technological sophistication.
KSA has all the friends in the region Israel, Egypt, Turkey, UAE, Pakistan, Jordan, US, UK, NATO etc etc etc the Saudis wouldn't have lost anything denying this friendship..
The Chinese knew that Iran got battered and it would have eventually lead to an invasion on Iran and Nethanyu plan coming to fruition and the end of Iran this was what it was leading upto. Basically your end
@Beny Karachun knows whats up
Proof's in the pudding rather than in rhetoric.
Iran won't have conceded anything in this agreement. More precisely Riyadh's demands, which perfectly mirror those of its American patrons, have been summarized in recurrent public declarations over the years:
1) Dissolution or at the very least disarmament of paramilitary organizations allied with Iran (which the Saudi regime fallaciously refers to as "meddling in Arab domestic affairs through sectarian militias"), from Lebanon to Yemen via Iraq and Syria. It's not going to happen. On the contrary, Iran will keep transferring arms and defense technology to these actors in order to increase their power even more.
2) Downgrading of Iran's peaceful nuclear program. The present accord didn't result in such a thing.
3) Putting brakes on one of the cornerstones of Iranian military deterrence, namely the development and mass-production of ballistic and cruise missiles as well as UAV's. Imposing transparency and international control mechanisms on these. Again not going to happen - watch out everyone for sophisticated missiles and drones unveiled by Iran in the future.
4) This one's more specific to Arab kingdoms of the Persian Gulf, persuading Iran to enter negotiations about her islands of Abu Musa and the Tunbs claimed by the UAE. Call me when Iran agrees to negotiate her sovereignty on these.
Saudi Arabia on the other hand is reported to be have agreed to drop its support for the exiled Iranian opposition, for anti-Iranian terrorists (MKO cult and separatist grouplets), and its financing of Persian-language media outlets spreading propaganda against the Islamic Republic.
So it clearly appears that Islamic Iran conceded little to nothing in exchange for a non-negligible gain.
China knows Iran is unassailable by her enemies. Beijing needs stability and a secure environment without fears of escalation to prevail in the region, in order to advance its grand geo-economic project, centerpiece of China's strategy to surpass the USA.