Syria After Assad: 4 Urgent Challenges
Al-Ittihad, UAE, December 14
The downfall of Bashar Assad’s regime in Syria could be considered the most monumental strategic development in the Middle East since the Iranian revolution of 1979. However, revolutions seldom culminate in a seamless transition to stable governance. While Assad’s rapid removal has thus far resulted in minimal bloodshed, history paints a mixed picture of potential outcomes. For instance, the Iranian revolution was succeeded by intense internal strife, and within a year, the nascent Islamic Republic was embroiled in a full-scale war with Iraq. Similarly, Ukraine’s 2014 revolution, which resulted in the ousting of its pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych, quickly provoked Russia to annex Crimea and assert its presence in eastern Ukraine. The first hurdle facing the new leadership in Damascus is to reassure key global powers that the extensive arsenals, including chemical weapons and ballistic missiles, left by Assad’s forces are secure and will not fall into the hands of extremist factions such as the Islamic State or other groups with divergent agendas. Both Israel and the United States have already initiated military actions to dismantle many of Assad’s weapons caches. The second, equally vital task, is to assure significant minorities, such as the Alawite and Christian communities that supported Assad, that they will be protected. The new leaders in Damascus would be wise to heed the lessons from Iraq following the US-led toppling of Saddam Hussein in 2003. The American occupiers made the grave error of disbanding the Iraqi army and banning the Baath Party, effectively eliminating numerous essential civil servants. A functioning bureaucracy is the backbone of any society. The post-World War II Allied occupation of Germany and Japan demonstrated the importance of maintaining essential services by retaining local personnel to ensure the continuity of complex societal functions. The third challenge, particularly in light of the Taliban’s egregious treatment of women after their resurgence in 2021, is to prevent radicals from imposing oppressive gender policies. Should Syria’s new regime adopt a similar approach, it would quash prospects for international cooperation, recognition, and the myriad benefits arising from the equitable treatment of women and minorities. The fourth challenge requires outside powers to reach a consensus on their expectations for the new order. Central to this is an understanding among Turkey, the Gulf states, the United States, and Israel on handling Iran and Russia. Both nations have seen their sway in Syria diminish and are wary of external pressures pushing them to relinquish regional strategic goals. Iran faces a decision: whether losing Syria and strategic access to Hezbollah would prompt it to accelerate its nuclear ambitions or whether it might seize the opportunity to engage diplomatically with the incoming Trump administration to alleviate sanctions. This would demand Iran freezing its nuclear activities and permitting the revival of rigorous UN inspections. The Russian quandary may prove to be the most formidable. Deprived of Syrian access, Russia’s objectives in Africa could falter, and its crucial access to warm-water ports and airbases on Syria’s Mediterranean coast might vanish. Such a scenario would likely provoke Moscow to intensify its efforts in Ukraine. However, it could encounter a more unified Europe and possibly a new Trump administration less sympathetic to Russia than some have speculated. —Geoffrey Kemp (translated by Asaf Zilberfarb)
This holiday season, give to:
Truth and understanding
The Media Line's intrepid correspondents are in Israel, Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and Pakistan providing first-person reporting.
They all said they cover it.
We see it.
We report with just one agenda: the truth.
