Syria at a Crossroads: Balancing Power, Stability, and Regional Interests

Introduction:

Al Assad dynasty, which ruled a country with an overwhelming Sunni majority for over 60 years, came to an end, which seemed a distant prospect almost one month ago. A tyrant and repressive regime, which was backed by two main regional powers, Russia and Iran, including a non-state militia, Hezbullah, collapsed at a lightning pace, bringing joy and hope to the Syrians who had endured tremendous suffering for six decades.
Before the commencement of military offensive on the ground against the Assad regime, Hayat Tahrir Sham (HTS), which is the single largest armed group, managed to bring all armed factions under a single command. The military onslaught, nicknamed “Operation Deterrence of Aggression”, went smoothly as per its plan without any major escalation and resistance and there was no looting and revenge action against those affiliated with the Assad regime.
Since capturing the capital, Damascus, Ahmad al Sharaa, the Transitional Administration’s Leader, a pragmatic and disciplined figure, has steadily moved to bolster his image by being in the spotlight of the visiting representatives and diplomats from Arab and Western countries, who promised support for the new Syria, and with some have already reopened their diplomatic representations.

Domestic Challenges in Syria’s Transitional Administration

Domestically, his behavior and promises, including general amnesty for all employees of the Assad government except those who committed crimes against the Syrian people, earned him great respect and popularity among the public.
Following the capture of Damascus, the HTS’s first move was its pledge to protect all civilians including minorities, and protect public institutions and assets, which lent him credibility as all promises being translated into action on the ground. HTS quickly filled the vacuum, replacing the defunct regime with its Salvation Government, an administration that previously administered the northern province of Idlib since 2014.
Although the HTS government in Idlib incurred criticism for excluding its political rivals including local communities from the decision-making process, and in some cases on rights violations, its public service delivery and investment in improvements to the infrastructure of the area under its control was much better than what was in provinces under the control of the Assad government.
But it has a concerning side too, as the current transition administration’s cabinet is almost entirely dominated by ministers affiliated with HTS, and other factions that once fought against the Assad regime, are being alienated.
The Transitional Administration has suspended the Constitution, which was drafted in 2012 by the Assad regime, promising to redraft the Constitution involving law professionals, asserting
inclusiveness and transparency, nonetheless, the ambiguity shrouding the whole process has drawn growing criticism from different stakeholders.
The constitution reform, with a broad base of public participation, is a significant measure for the future stability of the society that endured an unbearable brutal dictatorial regime for over a half-century.
On the ground, the administration forces have launched a campaign of collecting arms from those who affiliated with the former regime, military, police, and intelligence officers, calling them to show up in the designated “Reconciliation Centers”, set by the current administration, and in lieu of which they obtain a temporary ID Card for their reintegration into the society, but those who involved in torture and killing will be held to account.


Post-Assad Syria: A Battleground for Regional and International Influence

Nonetheless, the transitional administration’s mandate, as announced, is temporary and expires in March, Ahmad Al Sharaa’s remarks during his meeting with visiting delegates indicate otherwise reinforcing suspicions that he might exploit the current situation to consolidate his power and extend the timeline further.
Even with the declaration of amnesty for all employees of the former regime, there were incidences of disobedience among remnants of military and security forces in defiance of the order, which, in some cases, ended up in skirmishes in the localities dwelt by predominantly Assad supporters. Besides this, there were some demonstrations in cities with the majority of Alawite ethnicity, drawing suspicion of lurking foreign hands, and inciting such sedition.
Being at the center of suspicion, Iran, as a major player in Syria, has long conducted an expensive and integrated campaign to keep Assad in power to use Syria’s soil to further its regional agenda beyond the country’s borders.
The fall of Iran’s stalwart ally in Syria has dealt a serious blow to it but Iran hasn’t conceded complete loss, as it continues to sponsor activities inside Syria, to undermine the stability and security of a nascent administration, aiming at proactively curtailing its ability to establish stability across the country. To offset its setbacks and disgraceful losses in Syria, Iran may double down on its activities in like-minded countries, including Iraq, Yemen, and Lebanon.
Alternatively, Russia as a key regional player, can help Iran to reestablish its diplomatic presence in Syria.
With a long history of proven skill in exploiting regional anarchy, the recent inciting remarks attributed to the high-ranking officials, in particular Iran’s supreme leader’s call on Syrian youth to revolt against the new administration to free their country, clearly demonstrate their real intentions of addressing the current fragile situation in Syria by fomenting sectarian violence, ethnic hatred, arming Shiite militias, and leveraging internal tribal politics.
Ostensibly, the fall of the Assad regime in Syria seems to be the end of an Iranian great project, at least for the foreseeable future, severely curtailing its capacity to carry on its ambitious regional projects effectively, blocking its vital supply line to the Hezbollah militias in Lebanon.
On the other hand, the regime change in Syria has caused infighting within the Iranian security establishment, blaming one another for the catastrophic failure of not being able to prevent the fall of Bashar al-Assad.
However, it is believed that the remnants of Iranian militias and Hezbollah fighters would be still hiding inside Syria with their heavy weapons, waiting for a suitable opportunity to exploit for spreading chaos. The current prevailing situation in Syria is highly precarious, requiring serious attention from regional countries and the international community.
The consequences of any failure in a smooth political transition for establishing stability will take Syria to square one, and the country will repeat its history. The re-eruption of wars and conflicts in Syria will not remain inside the country but there is a high possibility of spillover to neighboring and regional countries.

Conclusion:

Ahmad Al-Sharaa and Syria face conflicting demands from various factions.
Western countries, including the United States, which still maintains a military presence in Syria, aim to protect minority rights, prevent the establishment of an extremist government, and curb the resurgence of terrorist organizations like ISIS and Al-Qaeda. Meanwhile, key regional players such as Iran and Russia, who show little concern for values like democracy, freedom of expression, and women’s rights, are solely focused on maintaining their presence and influence in Syria to achieve their regional interests. Turkey, having emerged victorious on the battlefield against the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) and Bashar al-Assad's government, is now striving to eliminate the Kurdish threat once and for all.
Formerly allied with ISIS and Al Qaida terrorist organizations, HTS which led a large coalition of armed groups that helped it to achieve victory, is now struggling to meet the growing demands of these groups that bore the major brunt of the battle.
Balancing all these conflicting interests is an incredibly challenging, if not impossible, task. However, Ahmad Al-Sharaa has thus far succeeded in supporting minority rights, individual freedoms, and women’s rights—actions that could potentially secure Western support for Syria. Yet, the continuation of this trajectory depends on the senior leadership of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham and the extent to which their interests and ideologies align with one another.