Iran might have avoided isolation through hosting the summit of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), and heading the organization in the future, with regard to international pressure and the Western blockade over its nuclear program. However, it certainly cemented, along with Syria's, its isolation vis-à-vis the Syrian crisis. If Tehran avoided the international isolation that the West would like to continue, because of the continuing dispute over its nuclear program, in form, one should remember that the 118 members of NAM, which attended this week's summit in the Iranian capital, form the overwhelming majority of countries that voted on 3 August for a United Nations General Assembly Resolution that condemned the Syrian authorities' "increasing use of heavy weapons" and the "continued widespread and systematic gross violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms by the Syrian authorities and pro-government militias, in addition to violations committed by armed opposition". Iran has promoted its success in breaking the isolation by hosting the summit, believing the attendance of the former president of the NAM, Egyptian President Mohammed Mursi, would be proof of this. However, Mursi surprised the Iranian leadership in what he said about the Syrian regime, an ally of Iran, which is doing everything possible to see it survive. Mursi said the Syrian regime had "lost legitimacy and is oppressive and unjust," adding new political weight to the regional and Arab stance that rejects Iran's regional role, of which its alliance with the Assad regime constitutes a fundamental pillar. It quickly became evident that Egypt had a presence, along with other countries involved in founding NAM, which was based on respecting human rights, state sovereignty and equality among these states, and not exerting any pressures on others. It was an announcement from a significant forum, such as the Tehran Summit, that Egypt has begun to regain its regional role; Iran (and Turkey) had earlier filled the vacuum that had resulted from the Hosni Mubarak regime refraining from playing a balancing role on the regional and international levels. In short, Tehran might have seen the event as a breaking of the isolation it faces, while other countries, by attending the summit, saw it as a prevention of Iran's hijacking of the Non-Aligned Movement. Tehran supported its promotion of the idea that it exited isolation by promising two days earlier that it would come out with a solution to the Syrian crisis and "the problems of the world." This would be based on a truce as a prelude to the reconciliation, and dialogue between Syria and the United States over the crisis, but the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khameini and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad avoided any mention of Syria in their speeches. They focused their attacks on the policy of the United States, which they hoped would undertake dialogue with the Syrian leadership in proposing a draft solution that they predicted the summit would produce. All of this took place under the eyes of the assistant UN deputy secretary general for political affairs, America's Jeffrey Feltman, and the official responsible for implementing Security Council Resolution 1559, Terje Roed-Larsen, who took part in the summit along with Ban Ki-moon. Tehran might benefit from its chairman's role in the NAM during the coming year, in terms of "public relations" with other states, as it confronts the possibility of an Israeli war against the Islamic Republic under the pretext of its imminent possession of a nuclear bomb. Khamenei insisted on repeating Iran's denial that it has nuclear weapons, but it is certain that heading the NAM will not help Iran use it as cover for its growing regional role and its intervention in the affairs of several Arab countries, led by Syria. It is exactly the same maneuver as Tehran's earlier attribution of the Arab spring to an "Islamic awakening," with the Iranian revolution as it source. Iran's self-esteem and the belief that the NAM summit Tehran is a huge victory for it and a resounding defeat for the US and Israel, is denial by the Iranian leadership of the reality in Syria, namely that it is an uprising of people against an unjust regime. It is also a denial of what the Egyptian president meant by proposing the establishment of a contact group to resolve the Syrian crisis, one that would include Egypt, Iran, Turkey and Saudi Arabia. He hopes, as he said two days prior to the summit, to help the allies of Assad leave power, while Tehran believes that the situation will improve, to its benefit. Iran's denial of reality on the domestic and regional levels related to the Syrian crisis is in line with the total Syrian denial of the uprising against the regime. This is what prompted Assad to repeat what he has been saying for the last year and a half, namely that "the situation is better and we are making progress, but settling things will require some time." The confusion of the Syrian regime resembles the contradictions mentioned above in terms of Iran propaganda and stances, to the degree that retreat has been made to appear as moving forward.
