The Assad family’s harsh 54-year rule in Syria appears to be around.
In a matter of days, criticism makes took the main city of Aleppo before advancing south into another government-controlled places of Hama, Homs and suddenly, on December 7, 2024, the capital, Damascus.
Given that the 13-year legal battle had been generally at a standstill since Russia and Turkey brokered a ceasefire in 2020, the rude was all the more remarkable. According to reports, Bashar al-Assad reportedly resigned and left the nation. What he left behind, though, and what comes next?
As a specialist on Middle Eastern safety, I think the ability of the opposition forces to maintain cohesion may be crucial for the transition to a post-Assad Syria. Despite their recent defeat, the numerous opposition parties in Syria have been splintered by ideological differences and additional supporters ‘ interests since the civil war started in 2011.
The sudden change in fortunes in Syria’s civil war poses serious concerns for nations that have supported either side of the conflict. For Iran and Russia, the fall of their alliance Assad may damage local objectives.
There will also be difficulties for supporters of some of the opposition’s forces, particularly Turkey and the US, both of which maintain a military appearance in Syria.
Catastrophic victory
Iran, the US, Russia and Turkey have been important athletes throughout Syria’s civil conflict.
The new opposition rude came as Assad’s three important friends — Russia, Iran and Lebanon’s Hezbollah — were stretched thin. Hezbollah appeared hesitant to commit further fighters, as it had done formerly, while Russia’s rely on Ukraine and Iran’s setbacks from Jewish strikes has limited their capacity to provide Assad with strong support.
Then, on Dec. 2, as opposition forces were on the move, Russia began withdrawing naval assets from its strategic Mediterranean base at Tartus, Syria. Assad’s ability to regroup and launch a successful counteroffensive was severely hampered by this erosion of external support.
The US will undoubtedly be pleased with the diminished Russian and Iranian influence in Syria. However, a scenario of” catastrophic success” in which Assad is replaced by an Islamist group that many in the West view as terrorists has already been uncovered in Washington.
Much of the opposition’s gains in Syria were made by members of the Islamist group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, who were also involved in fighting against the Syrian National Army, which was supported by Turkey.
The risks for the 900 Syrian American soldiers may increase as a result of instability and the possibility of clashes between opposition factions and US allies, even though Hayat Tahrir al-Sham has not directly targeted the US troops stationed in the northeast, which is under the control of Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces.
A fragmented landscape
The fact that different opposition groups have taken control of various once-government-held areas points to a crucial fact: Syria is de facto partitioned. The Islamist Hayat Tahrir al-Sham and the Syrian National Army, which are supported by Turkey, rule the northwest. The northeast is under the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces, supported by the United States.
Hayat Tahrir al-Sham and the Syrian National Army fight frequently despite having the same objective: to remove Assad and the joint offensive in Aleppo. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, led by Abu Mohammad al-Golani aims to assert control over opposition-held areas, including those currently managed by the Syrian National Army.
And the Syrian National Army and Hayat Tahrir al-Sham maintain complex, often conflicting relationships with the Syrian Democratic Forces, shaped by ideological, territorial and strategic differences.
The Syrian Defense Forces, which Turkey views as a terrorist organization and an affiliate of the Kurdistan Workers Party, are frequently directly armed clashes between the Turkish-backed Syrian National Army and the Syrian Defense Forces in southern Turkey.
The opposition’s internal dissolution may eventually weaken its ability to stabilize Syria.
Adjustment problems
The fall of Assad will have a significant impact on nations interested in the region.
Iran’s grand plan to preserve the” Shia Crescent” has failed by connecting Tehran to Beirut through Baghdad and Damascus while attempting to combat Sunni Islamist groups.
For Washington, Assad’s departure doesn’t necessarily fit any hoped-for outcome.
The US has given importance to balancing, containing, and possibly reducing Syria’s Russian and Iranian influence. However, that did not until recently mean that Assad had been removed. In early December, the Biden administration even made hints that it would be willing to lift sanctions against Syria if Assad cut ties with Iran and Hezbollah.
There was also talk of Assad’s government collaborating with the Syrian Democratic Forces, which was supported by the US. However, it became increasingly unlikely that the Kurdish organization would join the weakened Assad forces as Hayat Tahrir al-Sham and the Turkish-backed Syrian National Army fell from power to power, especially as Kurdish forces themselves made significant territorial gains.
In response to the demise of Assad, the Syrian Democratic Forces will have to adapt. This will be doubly true if the US withdraws from Syria, as many people anticipate and as President-elect Donald Trump has suggested. Currently, the 900 US troops are in eastern Syria, alongside a military base in Al-Tanf, located near the Iraqi and Jordanian borders.
The Syrian Democratic Forces and the autonomous region it governs, known as the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria, would need to negotiate their autonomy with both the opposition’s various factions and Turkey’s neighbor, in the event that American forces withdraw.
A Kurdish and Islamist alliance?
The US might have a significant headache over the Syrian Democratic Forces ‘ precarious role in the US’s transition to the post-Assad era.
Should the US eventually withdraw, the Kurdish organization may need to align with some of the opposition’s factions, most likely Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, given Turkey’s history of military incursions and campaigns against the Syrian Democratic Forces in northern cities like Afrin and Kobani.
Hayat Tahrir al-Sham has largely stayed away from igniting the Syrian Democratic Forces in recent months. Indeed, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham’s efforts to rebrand and moderate itself are notable, especially given its origins as a Salafist group with ties to al-Qaida.
The Islamist group has attempted to soften its hard-line image and win favor – or at least neutrality from international stakeholders, like the US, by adopting a range of policies, including amnestying Syrian army personnel, facilitating evacuation agreements, and using the language of building an ethnically and religiously diverse governance structure.
Yet skepticism about Hayat Tahrir al-Sham’s ultimate objectives persists.
Strategic calculations for Turkey
Turkey’s position on Syria now is equally complex. Turkey is home to 3.6 million Syrian refugees — the largest refugee-hosting country globally. Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdoan had been under pressure by a prolonged economic slump and rising anti-refugee sentiment to declare a willingness to cooperate with Assad prior to the opposition offensive.
Turkey hoped that normalized relations with Syria would ease concerns about a potential Kurdish state in northeastern Syria.
However, Assad refrained from making such advances, and he launched airstrikes on Idlib, causing new waves of displacement close to the Turkish border.
Turkey’s position on Syria is also closely linked to its renewed negotiations with the Kurdistan Workers Party. Among these discussions, according to reports, are discussions about the potential release of imprisoned Kurdistan Workers Party leader Abdullah Calan, whose influence is strong in northern Syria’s Kurdish-led regions.
The chance for a new Syria
After 50 years of brutal oppression, the apparent end of the Assad family’s rule reveals a pivotal moment for Syria, giving the country the chance to rebuild on the foundation of inclusivity, pluralism, and stability.
The ability of the opposition factions to navigate the enormous challenges of transition is crucial to achieving this vision. This includes fostering social harmony among various groups, addressing grievances from conflict, and creating governance structures that reflect Syria’s racial, religious, and political diversity. That is not going to be simple.
Sefa Secen is assistant professor of international and global studies, Nazareth University
This article was republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.