---

After the celebrations end and the last statues of the Assads are toppled, Syrians will face a new and uncertain day. Who will govern them? Will it be a single individual or a committee? Or will there be more than one Syria — three or four perhaps?

The situation may not be straightforward or smooth, as Bashar Assad left behind a fragmented country divided among various factions. The group that toppled Aleppo and led the change was Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham, under the leadership of Abu Mohammed Al-Golani, which emerged from the Turkish-influenced area.

The force that entered Damascus — the Southern Operations Room led by Ahmad Al-Ouda — advanced from Deraa province. It is a small faction of the remnants of the Free Syrian Army. Meanwhile, the group securing the border with Iraq was the Kurdish-majority Syrian Democratic Forces, operating within the US-influenced zone.

Damascus resembles Berlin in April 1945, when allied forces entered the city: Britain and America from the west and the Soviets from the east. They agreed on the demise of Hitler, who committed suicide just before they arrived, but disagreed on governing Berlin. The Soviets occupied the east, while the western part of the city was handed to the Western allies.

On Damascus’ victory day, all the victors were Syrians arriving from different zones of influence, as toppling the regime would not have been possible without external support. According to the agreements preceding Assad’s departure, governance is expected to transition to Syrian forces, revolutionaries and independents in line with UN Security Council Resolution 2254.

This document, endorsed by the five major powers, stipulates governance by a transitional government, the drafting of a constitution and subsequent elections. However, it is likely that HTS will ultimately emerge as Syria’s de facto ruler, given that it is the most powerful force and it managed to overthrow Assad’s regime in roughly two weeks. The SDF will likely continue ruling eastern Syria, with the Euphrates River effectively serving as a Berlin Wall dividing the two sides — unless the factions agree on a federal distribution of power, as previously proposed by Al-Golani, or something similar.

Even if they agree, Syria is not for the Syrians alone — a reality that has shaped its fate throughout history. Regional and global powers have always had a say. I recently finished James Barr’s book “A Line in the Sand,” which details the British-French rivalry, much of which involved a struggle over the Levant between the two world wars. Iran, Turkiye, Iraq and Israel are unlikely to give up their influence.

Relations with these countries will depend on their interests and policies. Some nations will pose a threat to the stability of the new Syria, fearing it might emerge as a rival power. Others will support stability in the new Syrian government to rebalance the regional power dynamics, which have previously favored Iran. These countries believe that the changes in Damascus will contribute to regional stability.

This means that Damascus faces a choice: Either navigate through landmines or act preemptively to reassure all concerned nations, including its neighbor Iraq, as well as Iran and even Israel. All share apprehensions about the fall of Assad’s regime.

Damascus faces a choice: Either navigate through landmines or act preemptively to reassure all concerned nations.

The interests of Syria and the region lie in forming a new system that reduces dangerous tensions and ends the severe polarization that Assad’s regime contributed to, ultimately causing its downfall. A policy of reconciliation could serve as insurance for the nascent government. This is what Al-Golani hinted at in last week’s televised message to Iraq’s prime minister, in which he stated that the new Syria would not be an adversary to Baghdad and would instead extend a hand of friendship and respect.

Syria has just emerged from a 50-plus-year era and it faces numerous internal and external challenges. The nascent state will need money, advice and patience. It will require support from its fellow Arab countries, not just politically but also in humanitarian efforts.

Providing moral support through presence and participation is crucial, ensuring the new leadership is not left vulnerable to those with harmful agendas and reckless intentions or adventurists who have destroyed their own and other countries. The fires in the region have not been extinguished for the past 13 years and they continue to burn today. Look around and you will see numerous failed changes that serve as sufficient lessons for the new revolutionaries.

Abdulrahman Al-Rashed is a Saudi journalist and intellectual. He is the former general manager of Al-Arabiya news channel and former editor-in-chief of Asharq Al-Awsat, where this article was originally published. X: @aalrashed

This article was originally published on Arab News.
Views in this article are author’s own and do not necessarily reflect CGS policy.