TEHRAN: Iranians are divided over the nature of the Arab uprisings that have swept the region, and whether the protests have strengthened or weakened Iran’s position in the Middle East, two analysts told The Daily Star in a joint interview.

“The power of the U.S. administration is being curtailed and the power of Islamists is growing and flourishing,” said Abdolhosein Allahkaram, the founder and former leader of Ansar-e Hezbollah and a retired brigadier general of the Revolutionary Guards, echoing views that have been expressed by Iran’s senior religious leaders.

But Sadegh Zibakalam, a liberal political science professor at Tehran University, argued that the Arab Spring had undermined Iran’s position in the region, particularly because of the Islamic Republic’s unwavering support for Syrian President Bashar Assad.

“We have been sticking to Bashar Assad, a despicable regime, and I can understand that if I were a Syrian I would hate the Islamic Republic,” said Zibakalam, arguing that such sentiment could linger for a long time in any post-Assad Syria.

He added that the uprisings had largely passed over Iran’s chief Arab adversary, Saudi Arabia, leaving the Islamic Republic more isolated in a Middle East that was increasingly hostile toward Iran.

“Things don’t look very good for the Islamic Republic in the region, as far as I can see. We don’t have good relations with practically any Arab country,” said Zibakalam.

Allahkaram countered that in the aftermath of the U.S.-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Iran’s position in the region has never been stronger, while the Arab uprisings were giving rise to governments that would no longer tolerate U.S. or Israeli aggression.

“The U.S. and its allies, Europe and also Israel are in a state of confusion in terms of strategy because [former U.S. President] George W. Bush’s policy of pre-emptive war has led the U.S. to a devastated economy. Now we see the power of the West in decline and the power of Iran rising in terms of geopolitics,” he said.

“Israel is now in a situation that’s losing its power in the region, but at the same time, opposite to that, Iran has been empowered,” said Allahkaram.

As an example of Israel’s diminishing stature in the region, Allahkaram pointed to recent protests in Egypt which led to the evacuation of Israeli diplomats from the country.

But Zibakalam noted that the Israeli diplomats had quietly returned to Cairo in the aftermath of the protests, proving that little had changed in the Arab world’s relationship with the West and Israel. “None of these Arab protest movements are overtly anti-American, anti-Western, even I dare say they are not anti-Israel, anti-Zionist,” he said.

“Because of that I don’t think they will change very substantially the relationship between the Arab world and the West, between the Arab world and the United States, and between the Arab world and the state of Israel.”

The two analysts differed over how the protests should be described, with Zibakalam calling them pro-democracy movements and Allahkaram describing them as Islamic uprisings driven by middle classes who sought greater empowerment.

“At its core it is a religious movement,” said Allahkaram. “Middle classes are after what has been called democracy, but what is in fact a desire for rule by the people [based on Islam], not Western democracy.”

But Zibakalam dismissed the label “Islamic awakening,” which the Iranian government and its supporters use to describe the protests, as “nonsense.”

“The people in Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Bahrain, Syria simply want democracy, they want free elections, they want press freedom, they want rule of law, they want the end of despotism and dictatorship. It has nothing to do with Islam,” he said.

Zibakalam conceded, however, that the pro-democracy uprisings would in all likelihood benefit Islamist political parties, since they were the most organized and would therefore have an advantage in any democratic election.

“But at the end of the day these countries won’t be like Iran; they will be like Turkey, like Malaysia, modern democratic countries,” he added.

The two analysts also disagreed as to whether foreign interference was driving the unrest in Syria.

“In Syria we see almost the same thing happening, where middle classes seek empowerment, but of course the difference is the involvement of foreign forces in Syria,” said Allahkaram.

Zibakalam countered: “I think what is happening in Syria is exactly the same that is unfolding in all the Arab countries. Bashar Assad is just a despot he’s just a dictator, just like Hosni Mubarak, Ali Abdullah Saleh, like Moammar Gadhafi – you tell me, what’s the difference between Bashar Assad and Moammar Gadhafi? As far as I’m concerned, nothing, there’s no difference between them.”