Syria’s plight echoes Iraq’s experience under Saddam Hussein. The collapse of the Assad regime has exposed the vulnerabilities of an overextended state, drawing clear parallels to Iraq’s rapid downfall in 2003. Prolonged wars, international sanctions and oppressive governance left both nations in economic ruin and military disarray. For Syria, this transformative moment has unleashed a cascade of geopolitical shifts and internal challenges. Both regional and international actors are vying for influence over a fragmented and war-weary nation. It seems like Syria’s uncertain future will be shaped by the power struggles of neighboring states and global powers rather than by the Syrian people.

With Assad’s fall, Syria faces a significant power vacuum that is already attracting competing interests from various regional and international players. Turkey has emerged as a critical actor, leveraging its geographic proximity and political aspirations to play a central role in the country’s transition. Ankara, the capital of Turkey, is actively working to establish Turkey as a regional powerbroker. Turkey’s involvement has included both military actions and economical engagement. Energy Minister Alparslan Bayraktar recently announced intentions to transmit electricity and develop infrastructure. Similar diplomatic moves position Ankara as a key player in Syria’s reconstruction efforts.

However, Turkey’s aspirations also face resistance, particularly from Kurdish factions supported by the United States. The US-backed SDF, predominantly composed of Kurdish fighters, has been instrumental in combating ISIS but seeks greater autonomy in northern Syria. This aspiration has put them at odds with Turkey, which views Kurdish self-rule as a direct threat to its territorial integrity. This is mostly due to concerns about emboldening its own Kurdish population, particularly the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), a group it labels as a terrorist faction. Diplomatic efforts by the US to mediate between Turkey and the Kurds have had limited success. 

Ankara has backed multiple operations in northern Syria via the Syrian National Army (SNA) in order to counter the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). In response, the SDF has launched a counteroffensive to reclaim territory near the northern border. It is clear that Turkey is pursuing a strategy to align northern Syria with its security interests and regional ambitions. Notably, recent developments include intensified Turkish drone strikes targeting Kurdish-held territories, raising tensions with both the SDF and the US. 

The Kurdish issue also resonates across the region. Iraq, with its significant Kurdish population, is closely monitoring developments, wary of potential spillover effects. Iran aligns its policies with Turkey in certain respects. With its own restive Kurdish regions, Iran has a vested interest in preventing any moves toward Kurdish independence. These dynamics ensure that the Kurdish question remains a central theme in Syria’s evolving political landscape, further complicating Ankara’s goal to reshape the balance of power in northern Syria. 

Policies of the US and the EU are shifting

The United States, long criticized for its inconsistent policies in Syria, appears to be adopting a more pragmatic and engagement-focused approach in the wake of Assad’s downfall. A key development has been Washington’s decision to remove the bounty on Ahmad Hussein al-Shara, also known as Abu Mohammad al-Jolani. Al-Shara is the leader of Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), the faction responsible for toppling the Assad government. In a further sign of policy evolution, senior US officials recently visited Syria to meet with al-Shara. The meeting aimed to reaffirm US support for stabilizing liberated areas and explore pathways for more inclusive governance structures. This marked a symbolic shift. The US now prioritizes in recognizing HTS’s transformation into a local governance actor and its potential role in countering Iranian and Russian influence in the region. 

Western allies, notably Germany and France, have mirrored this recalibration in their own approach. Both nations have sent delegations to engage with transitional authorities in Syria. French and German officials have even expressed cautious optimism. European policymakers, particularly those focused on regional stability and security, have welcomed developments to consolidate power and centralize the military as a positive signal. By reducing the risks of further disintegration, this progress aligns with broader international goals of mitigating the spillover effects of instability into Europe.

Nonetheless, challenges remain. The removal of HTS’s terrorist designation and its growing political legitimacy continue to spark debates. Critics argue that such moves could undermine accountability for past actions, while proponents highlight the necessity of pragmatism in addressing Syria’s complex realities. Another sensitive issue is the lifting of sanctions previously imposed on the Assad regime. The US and EU should approach the sanctions issue with careful consideration in order to ensure that such measures align with the aspirations of the Syrian people and support a genuine political transition. Conditional economic engagement could provide a framework to foster transparency and accountability during the transition in a manner that respects Syria’s sovereignty.

HTS will have to think strategically to secure its influence

Even with many regional and global actors at play, HTS has positioned itself as a significant player in post-Assad Syria. Despite its controversial history and designation as a terrorist organization by many Western nations, HTS has undergone notable transformations. The group has sought to rebrand itself as a legitimate actor in Syria’s future and is playing a key role in the formation of a new transitional government in Syria. This government has taken decisive steps to consolidate authority, including the successful disbandment of all armed groups and integrating their members under a unified Ministry of Defense. The unification of armed factions under the new government has been viewed as a critical step in preventing the fragmentation of power and ensuring a more cohesive state structure. This development has also bolstered regional confidence in Syria’s potential for long-term stability and effective governance. 

In the upcoming National Dialogue Conference, it is anticipated that HTS will negotiate its dissolution, paving the way for the creation of a new, inclusive political entity that ensures power sharing. Al-Shara has even indicated that elections will take place in four years. However, a significant challenge remains: the SDF still presents a formidable counterbalance. In a recent interview, al-Shara called for the integration of the SDF, but this remains unlikely unless the SDF is granted political representation in exchange for relinquishing their arms. For long-term stability, he must ensure meaningful power sharing within Syria and outside of it, as failure to do so will only deepen divisions and perpetuate conflict.

Other Arab states begin to rebuild ties with Syria

In December 2024, foreign ministers from eight Arab League nations convened in Jordan. The meeting’s joint statement emphasized inclusivity in Syria’s new government and the preservation of state institutions to prevent fragmentation and chaos. Following this meeting, high-level delegations from Jordan and Qatar visited Damascus, signaling a renewed willingness to reestablish ties with Syria after years of isolation. These overtures reflect pragmatic regional strategies to facilitate Syria’s reconstruction while safeguarding national interests. Jordan’s focus on shared border security and Qatar’s willingness to engage despite earlier backing of opposition factions highlight a shift toward reconciliation and dialogue.

This revival of Arab diplomacy marks a potential turning point. By fostering dialogue and rebuilding ties, Arab nations aim to address challenges such as refugee crises, cross-border terrorism, and economic destabilization. However, the path to normalization faces hurdles, including reconciling differences over the pace of engagement and addressing concerns raised by external powers such as the United States and the European Union.

Success will depend on the Arab states’ ability to align shared objectives and support solutions to the root causes of Syria’s decade-long conflict. This new phase of diplomacy presents an opportunity for Syria’s reintegration into the Arab fold, but it also requires balancing regional aspirations with global dynamics to ensure a lasting and inclusive peace. In addition, divergent priorities among the US, the EU and regional powers – particularly regarding counter-terrorism and countering Iranian influence – complicate the path forward. However, recent diplomatic visits and policy adjustments highlight a growing recognition of the need for coordinated international engagement. Crucially, such efforts must also respect the aspirations and sovereignty of the Syrian people. Stability in Syria’s post-Assad landscape depends not only on external cooperation but also on empowering Syrians to shape their own future. 

[Cheyenne Torres edited this piece.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.