Introduction
Dawn broke over Damascus yesterday morning as the sound of takbir (“God is greater”) echoed through the ancient streets, signaling rebel forces' takeover of Syria's capital. Before sunrise, President Bashar al-Assad fled the country, his convoy leaving the presidential palace under cover of darkness. This secretive exit marked the end of the Assad family's fifty-year rule. By morning, portraits of Assad were being removed from government buildings, and Syrian state television announced the rebels’ victory.
The fall of Damascus marks the most significant shift in Middle Eastern power dynamics since the 2003 Iraq War. In just two weeks, a regime that seemed unbreakable after thirteen years of civil war collapsed rapidly. Led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), opposition forces moved systematically—from Aleppo to Hama and Homs—before taking Damascus. Their highly coordinated campaign effectively dismantled the regime’s ability to resist.
Yesterdays events call for a reevaluation of the regional order. As rebels secure the capital, the consequences extend beyond Syria, affecting everything from major power rivalries to local alliances.
How We Got Here: Key Factors in the Syria Conflict
The collapse of Assad's power structure resulted from a complex mix of military and political factors that gained momentum once key strategic thresholds were crossed. The opposition's coordinated offensive revealed the vulnerabilities of an apparently stable authoritarian regime, demonstrating how determined internal forces, combined with waning external support, can lead to rapid disintegration.
A key factor in this downfall was the systematic neutralization of the regime's air power, particularly through the capture of critical bases like the T-4 Airbase near Palmyra and the Kuweires Airbase in the north. Without reliable air support, Assad's forces struggled to maintain territorial unity. The loss of the Damascus-Aleppo corridor proved especially decisive, cutting off vital economic lifelines that had long upheld Assad’s control.
Syria’s Political Evolution: Internal Power Struggles and Emerging Authorities
With the Assad regime’s collapse, Syria’s political future now rests in the hands of a diverse constellation of factions. The rebels’ decisive victory in Damascus leaves a leadership vacuum, forcing once-marginalized opposition groups to consider the hard work of governance.
Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS)
now wields significant control over Damascus and other major urban centers, marking a profound shift in Syria's political landscape. Under the leadership of Abu Mohammad al-Jawlani, HTS has taken steps toward state-building by establishing administrative bodies such as the Syrian Salvation Government (SSG) in the Idlib Governorate, along with basic security structures in northern regions. Formed in November 2017 by HTS and other opposition groups, the SSG serves as the de facto governing authority in Idlib, aiming to provide essential civil services, education, healthcare, and infrastructure under a Salafi-influenced administration.
The group's recent ascendance has been accompanied by notable shifts in its public positioning. During the offensive on Damascus, HTS leadership issued unprecedented guarantees regarding minority rights and religious freedoms. Most striking was the directive issued today, explicitly prohibiting members from interfering with women's appearance or enforcing dress codes, affirming personal freedom as "a guaranteed right." These declarations represent a stark departure from HTS's historical approach to social control and religious enforcement.
This attempted transformation must be viewed against HTS's troubling origins as a Syrian offshoot of al-Qaeda, where it gained notoriety through brutal tactics, including targeted assassinations, public executions, and indiscriminate violence. Its early operations were grounded in an uncompromising jihadist ideology that alienated local populations and drew international condemnation. While HTS now presents itself as a more moderate, localized Islamist movement focused on governance rather than global jihad, the sincerity and depth of this evolution remain uncertain.
The contrast between past actions and present declarations highlights the complex challenge of assessing HTS's trajectory. This history continues to hamper its pursuit of international legitimacy and access to vital foreign aid. Designated a terrorist organization by the United Nations, the United States, and other influential powers, HTS remains diplomatically isolated. This isolation complicates efforts to rebuild war-torn areas, deliver humanitarian assistance, and establish sustainable governance. While recent pronouncements on women's rights and religious tolerance suggest an effort to align with international norms, the group's governance model remains fundamentally conservative. The ultimate test will lie not in public statements but in HTS's ability to transform its ideological foundations and operational practices while maintaining internal cohesion. These factors collectively raise significant questions about HTS's capacity to complete its attempted transition from an insurgent movement to a stable, legitimate governing authority..
The Turkish-backed Syrian National Army (SNA),
primarily composed of Sunni Arab factions, has emerged as a potential counterbalance in Syria's fractured landscape. Heavily influenced by Ankara’s strategic objectives—such as curbing Kurdish autonomy, ensuring border security, and promoting a moderate Sunni-led governance structure—the SNA plays a crucial role in northern Syria. With Turkish military and logistical support, the SNA has participated in significant operations, including Euphrates Shield and Olive Branch, targeting ISIS and Kurdish-led groups directly. Linked to the SNA is the Syrian Interim Government (SIG), established in 2013 by the National Coalition for Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces. The SIG operates primarily in SNA-controlled areas, aiming to present itself as an alternative to Assad's regime by focusing on administrative functions, public services, and coordination with international actors. However, its effectiveness is frequently undermined by internal divisions and a heavy reliance on external support, limiting its ability to establish a unified governance structure. The connection between the SIG and the SNA underscores Türkiye’s influence in shaping governance in regions under SNA control, aligning administrative efforts with Ankara’s strategic goals. Due to its alignment with Türkiye, the SNA has the potential to serve as a mediator, facilitating a power-sharing arrangement with Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS). Such an agreement could lead to a federal or confederal political framework that accommodates Syria’s diverse local identities while addressing longstanding ethnic and sectarian divisions. However, the SNA's internal divisions and competition with HTS over territorial control pose significant obstacles to achieving such a compromise.
The Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF),
firmly established in northeastern Syria, face an uncertain future without Bashar al-Assad as a moderating force. The SDF is a coalition of Kurdish, Arab, and Assyrian militias, with the People’s Protection Units (YPG) as its main Kurdish component. The YPG serves as the armed wing of the Democratic Union Party (PYD), a significant Kurdish political party in Syria, and is closely linked to the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK). The PKK is designated as a terrorist organization by Türkiye, the United States, and the European Union, and has been engaged in an armed struggle against the Turkish state since the 1980s, advocating for greater autonomy and rights for Kurds in Türkiye.
The SDF is associated with the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (AANES), also known as Rojava, which governs northeastern Syria, including regions such as Afrin, Jazira, and Raqqa. The AANES operates through the Syrian Democratic Council (SDC) and promotes a model of democratic federalism that emphasizes ethnic and religious inclusivity, gender equality, and local governance. Despite facing external pressures, including military operations by Turkey and intermittent confrontations with the Syrian government, the AANES continues to advocate for a decentralized Syria that accommodates its diverse populations. The close connection between the AANES and the SDF highlights the significance of Kurdish leadership in shaping governance and military strategies in these regions.
The SDF’s control over critical oil fields, water resources, and fertile farmlands provides it with substantial leverage in negotiations. These resources sustain its governance and enhance its negotiating power in shaping Syria’s post-conflict political landscape. However, the SDF is under increasing pressure on multiple fronts. Türkiye views the SDF's Kurdish leadership—especially its YPG component—as an extension of the PKK and a direct threat to Turkish security interests. Consequently, Türkiye has conducted several military operations against the SDF in northern Syria to prevent the establishment of a continuous Kurdish-controlled region along its border.
Simultaneously, tensions are rising between Arab opposition factions and emerging Sunni Arab blocs in areas like Deir ez-Zor. These tensions underscore the ethnic and political complexities of maintaining unity and governance in SDF-held territories. Kurdish aspirations for greater autonomy often conflict with the nationalist ambitions of Arab groups, creating a delicate balance that the SDF must navigate to preserve stability and cohesion.
In the face of these challenges, the SDF may need to make pragmatic compromises, scaling back nationalist ambitions in favor of regional autonomy within a broader Syrian framework. Potential power-sharing agreements with Arab factions and de-escalation arrangements with Türkiye could help maintain the SDF's territorial gains while contributing to stability. In post-war Syria, the long-term viability of the SDF as a political and military actor will largely depend on its ability to balance its aspirations for Kurdish self-rule with the realities of regional and local opposition.
Regional Implications: A Shifting Strategic Landscape
Syria’s dramatic transformation extends its effects well beyond its borders, compelling regional powers to reassess established strategies and alliances. The collapse of the Assad regime not only reshuffles regional power dynamics but also presents new opportunities and risks for states that have long been invested in Syria's future. Iran, Russia, Israel, Türkiye, and Arab states now find themselves at a strategic crossroads, each grappling with the implications of Damascus’s downfall.
Iran: Losing the “Axis of Resistance” Hub
The disintegration of the Iran-Assad-Hezbollah nexus disrupts a vital channel for Iran regarding arms, logistics, and influence. With Damascus no longer a dependable stronghold, Tehran must seek alternative avenues to maintain its presence in the Levant. This may involve strengthening ties with non-state actors or adopting more covert supply routes. However, these strategies will be challenging as Iranian influence diminishes under the pressures of a newly fragmented Syria.
Russia: Protecting Strategic Assets Under Strain
Moscow’s long-standing ambitions in the eastern Mediterranean have hinged on a stable Syrian ally. Now, with its military installations and naval facilities increasingly at risk, Russia must evaluate the costs of sustaining its presence in such an unpredictable environment. Whether it opts to negotiate with emerging authorities, scale back its involvement, or attempt a costly reassertion of power, Russia’s next moves will redefine its role as a regional power broker.
Israel: Securing the Golan Heights
Israel faces a significantly altered security landscape along its northern border. With the Assad regime ousted, the IDF has deployed in the Golan Heights buffer zone for the first time since 1974, driven by concerns over jihadist infiltration and the proliferation of advanced weaponry. Israel, intent on thwarting new threats, has conducted strikes against fleeing Hezbollah convoys, chemical weapons sites and weapon caches. Even as the traditional Iranian route to Hezbollah is dismantled, groups like Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) now present their own challenges. By balancing opportunities to undermine adversaries with the risk of empowering extremist factions, Israel’s vigilant stance will influence how it navigates this new strategic landscape.
Türkiye and Arab States: Seeking Influence in a Fragmented Arena
Türkiye’s support for the Syrian National Army positions Ankara to enhance its regional influence and shape Syria’s future governance. With the collapse of Assad’s regime, Türkiye may gain new diplomatic leverage and play a pivotal role in post-conflict arrangements. Meanwhile, Arab states view the regime’s fall as a potential turning point. They may advocate for moderate, internationally recognized leadership in Damascus, aiming to restore regional norms and prevent any single external actor from dominating the area.
A Region in Flux
The end of the Assad era has reset the strategic landscape of the Middle East. Whether these changes will lead to a more balanced and stable arrangement or incite renewed competition remains uncertain. What is indisputable, however, is that the dynamics of regional power and influence have been irrevocably transformed.
In the coming months and years, these shifting alliances and political structures will determine if Syria’s transformation results in lasting stability or ignites a new era of uncertainty. The path forward will be shaped by the decisions made now—by rebels and regional powers alike—amid the ruins of a half-century-old regime’s swift and dramatic collapse.
Kommentare