Bashar al-Assad: The legacy of a divided Syria
The brutal 54-year rule of the Assad family in Syria appears to be over.
Within days, opposition forces captured Aleppo’s main city, Hama, Homs and finally, on December 7, 2024, the capital, Damascus, before advancing south to other government-held areas.
The offensive was most surprising, with the 13-year civil war largely at a standstill following a 2020 ceasefire brokered by Russia and Turkey.
Bashar al-Assad resigned and left the country, but what did he leave and what happens next?
As an expert on Middle East security, I believe that the ability of opposition forces to maintain unity will be critical in the transition to post-Assad Syria. Since the civil war began in 2011, many of Syria’s opposition factions have been divided by ideological differences and the interests of external backers – and this is true despite their current victories.
Meanwhile, the rapid turn of fortunes in Syria’s civil war has raised serious questions for countries supporting one side or the other in the conflict. For Iran and Russia, their ally, the fall of Assad will harm regional aspirations. For supporters of the opposition elements – notably Turkey but also the US, both of which maintain a military presence in Syria – there will also be challenges.
Fear of ‘catastrophic success’
Iran, America, Russia and Turkey were important players in the Syrian civil war.
Recent opposition offensives have spread Assad’s three main allies — Russia, Iran and Lebanon’s Hezbollah — thin. Russia’s focus on Ukraine and Iran’s failure to respond to Israeli strikes have limited its ability to provide strong support to Assad, while Hezbollah appears reluctant to commit more fighters as before.
Then, on December 2, as opposition forces advanced, Russia began withdrawing naval assets from its strategic Mediterranean base at Tartus, Syria. This erosion of external support substantially weakened Assad’s ability to regroup and mount an effective counteroffensive.
The US will certainly welcome the reduced influence of Russia and Iran in Syria. But concern in Washington is already being aired over a scenario of “catastrophic success” in which Bashar al-Assad is replaced by an Islamist group that many in the West see as terrorists.
It was members of the Islamist group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham who led several opposition gains in Syria, fighting alongside the Turkish-backed Syrian National Army.
And while Hayat Tahrir al-Sham has not directly targeted U.S. forces stationed in the northeast — which is controlled by the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces — instability and the potential for conflict between opposition factions and U.S. allies could increase the risk. 900 US personnel based in Syria.
A fragmented landscape
The fact that different opposition groups have taken control of once-government-controlled areas points to an important fact: Syria is de facto divided. The northwest is controlled by Islamist Hayat Tahrir al-Sham and the Turkish-backed Syrian National Army. The northeast is under the control of the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces, which is backed by the United States.
Despite the common goal of ousting Assad and the joint offensive in Aleppo, clashes between Hayat Tahrir al-Sham and the Syrian National Army have continued. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, led by Abu Mohammed al-Golani, aims to consolidate control over opposition-held areas, including areas currently administered by the Syrian National Army.
And the Syrian National Army and Hayat Tahrir al-Sham maintain complex, often contentious relations with the Syrian Democratic Forces, shaped by ideological, regional and strategic differences. The Turkish-backed Syrian National Army frequently engages in direct clashes with the Syrian Defense Forces, which Turkey views as a terrorist organization and an offshoot of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, which has been fighting in southern Turkey for more than four decades.
The internal division of the opposition could undermine its ability to bring stability to Syria in the long term.
adjustment problems
Assad’s fall will have a major impact on countries with stakes in the region.
Iran’s grand strategy of protecting the “Shia Crescent” — connecting Tehran to Beirut via Baghdad and Damascus and confronting Sunni Islamist factions in the process — has failed.
For Washington, Assad’s departure does not bode well for any hoped-for outcome.
The US has prioritized balancing, potentially reducing, and reducing Russian and Iranian influence in Syria. But so far this has not meant removing Bashar al-Assad. The Biden administration also signaled in early December that it would be prepared to lift sanctions on Syria if Assad cut ties with Iran and Hezbollah.
There was also talk of Assad’s government forming an alliance with the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces. But as city after city fell to Hayat Tahrir al-Sham and the Turkish-backed Syrian National Army, Kurdish groups became increasingly likely to align with the weakened Assad army — especially as Kurdish forces themselves made significant territorial gains.
The Syrian Democratic Forces will have to adapt in response to the fall of Bashar al-Assad. This will be doubly true if, as many predict and President-elect Donald Trump has indicated, the US withdraws from Syria. Currently, 900 US troops are in eastern Syria, with a military base in al-Tanf near the Iraqi and Jordanian border.
If U.S. forces are to withdraw, the Syrian Democratic Forces and the autonomous region — known as the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria — will need to negotiate their autonomy with both the opposition and Syria’s neighbor Turkey.
Kurdish and Islamist alliance?
The uncertain role of the Syrian Democratic Forces in the transition to a post-Assad era could pose a significant foreign policy headache for the US.
Given Turkey’s history of military offensives and campaigns against Syrian Democratic Forces in northern cities such as Afrin and Kobani, the Kurdish group and some factions of the opposition, possibly Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, may have to back off from the US.
Lately, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham has largely avoided opposing the Syrian Democratic Forces. 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-Qaeda.
By adopting a range of policies such as issuing amnesties for Syrian army personnel, facilitating eviction deals and using language that calls for an ethnically and religiously diverse governance structure, the Islamist group has sought to soften its hard-line image – or at least neutralize it – in international circles like the US. From stakeholders
Yet doubts persist about Hayat Tahrir al-Sham’s ultimate objectives.
Strategic calculations for Turkey
Turkey’s stance on Syria is equally complicated. Turkey is home to 3.6 million Syrian refugees – the largest refugee hosting country globally. A prolonged economic downturn and growing anti-refugee sentiment have pressured Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan to signal a willingness to engage with Assad before the opposition strikes.
Turkey had hoped that normal relations with Syria would help return refugees and address concerns about a possible Kurdish state in northeastern Syria.
But Bashar al-Assad dismissed such efforts, and he intensified airstrikes in Idlib – triggering new waves of displacement near the Turkish border.
Turkey’s Syria policy is also linked to the new peace process with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party. These talks include discussions about the possible release of Abdullah Öcalan, the leader of the imprisoned Kurdistan Workers’ Party – who has deep influence in Kurdish-led areas in northern Syria.
A chance for a new Syria
The apparent end of the Assad family’s rule after half a century of brutal repression marks a defining moment for Syria – offering an opportunity to rebuild the nation on the basis of inclusiveness, pluralism and stability.
Achieving this vision depends on the ability of opposition factions to navigate transitional challenges. This includes fostering unity among diverse groups, addressing grievances from years of conflict, and establishing governance structures that reflect Syria’s ethnic, religious and political diversity. That will not be an easy task.
This article has been republished from conversation Under Creative Commons License. Read on Original article.