The struggle in Syria … the struggle over Syria

Safeguarding victory is often more difficult than achieving it.

That is self-evident, all the more so when powers and factions are eagerly seeking to overturn the shifts we saw in Syria a few months ago.

These actors were caught off-guard by the pace at which the shift unfolded, especially the collapse of the security apparatus in major Syrian cities, one after another. Nonetheless, anyone who understands the fabric of Syrian society recognized, at the time, that multiple actors, both domestic and foreign, had not yet had their final say.

This is not a fleeting phase but is rather the legacy of 54 years of iron-fisted rule, the “deep state” it built, systematic brainwashing and the networks of vested interests and transnational mutual accommodations.

On the other hand, Syria is not, as we are constantly reminded, an isolated island. It is the heart of the Middle East, which is the heart of the world.

Syria is a cradle of civilization, culture and religion — it is a crossroads of trade and military confrontation, as well as the West’s window to the East and the East’s gateway to the West. It gave the world the alphabet. Religions whose faithful span the globe emerged in Syria. It has produced emperors, while empires have relied on the bounty of its land.

It has played a role in most of the major events that have shaped the fate of humanity: from the Islamic conquests and the Crusades to the rise and fall of the Ottoman Empire and the world order established after the First World War. That world order, however, left fragmentation (partition) in the Levant, first through the Sykes-Picot Agreement and second with the Balfour Declaration. As we can see today, we are still dealing with the repercussions of these two major turning points.

Syria is not, as we are constantly reminded, an isolated island. It is the heart of the Middle East, which is the heart of the world

Eyad Abu Shakra

At this critical moment, Syria is undergoing a difficult ordeal that many had anticipated.

First, the state of shock that facilitated the collapse of the Assad regime and the dominance of regional patron Iran’s “Velayat-e Faqih” regime has faded. Tehran has regained its footing and begun to retaliate, undermining the change in Syria. There are many reasons behind its effort to destabilize the country, chief among them proving that it remains a powerful regional player following the blows it received at the hands of Israel in Lebanon. Israel’s blows sought to put a ceiling on Iran’s ambitions for regional dominance, which had come at the expense of the other two sides of the triangle: Israel and Turkiye.

Here, it is worth recalling, once again, that neither Tel Aviv nor Washington has an interest in removing Tehran’s regime. The well-known reasons include Tehran’s role in impeding Palestinian unity, undermining Palestinian resistance and thwarting the state project in Lebanon.

Second, Israel has never, even for a moment, forgotten its geopolitical priorities. Foremost among them is realizing its ancient messianic dream of dominating the land that stretches from the Euphrates to the Nile. This dream emboldens the most extreme Torah adherents, racists and advocates of population transfer, pushing them to impose their will on a region that has become exhausted, dazed and confused.

Exploiting Palestinian divisions is crucial to achieving this end. Facilitated and fostered by the regime in Tehran, this division is a steppingstone toward the displacement of Palestinians, first from Gaza and then from the West Bank. And who knows whether the Palestinian citizens of Israel will be spared from this wave of displacement at a time when the US president is not only signing a blank check to the Israelis, but also seeking to go further, appointing political and diplomatic officials with the goal of further fragmenting the region.

Furthermore, Syria and its mosaic-like social fabric has long been a point of interest for Israeli expansionists, who see potential for exploitation. For quite some time now, Tel Aviv has been leveraging every doubt and fear to convince weak-spirited individuals in Syria and Lebanon that they need protection from their own compatriots — those who share their homeland, identity and fate.

Accordingly, while Iran, which had long-standing and deep ties to the Assad regime, led efforts to overturn the shift in Syria from the coast (Latakia and Tartous) by stirring fear in the hearts of Alawite communities, Israel took the initiative in southern Syria (Quneitra, Deraa and Suwayda) by playing the Druze card. Drawing on old ties with their religious establishment that predate the founding of Israel in 1948, Tel Aviv reminded its local proxies of the 2015 Nusra Front massacre in the village of Qalb Lawzah in Idlib province, as well as the Daesh offensive in eastern Suwayda in 2018.

Syria and its mosaic-like social fabric has long been a point of interest for Israeli expansionists, who see potential for exploitation

Eyad Abu Shakra

Finally, we have the Kurdish separatist project east of the Euphrates, a region home to major recourse and US geopolitical interests, as well as it being a battleground between Iran and Turkiye. Undoubtedly, the weaker Syria’s central authority becomes, the greater the ambitions of Kurdish separatists, who reject Syria’s Arab identity, oppose unity and are willing to make a deal with the devil to achieve their goal.

I believe the current Syrian leadership is fully aware of the grave implications of everything outlined above. However, despite its unquestionably sincere intentions, the steps it has taken on the ground have, so far, fallen short.

A transition from the logic of armed struggle to the logic of statehood is necessary, but it has not yet come. Unfortunately, one side continues to dominate decision-making and appointments and mistakes continue to be justified.

Moreover, the grim legacy of the past 54 years has made its popular base seem content, at times, to remain silent in the face of human rights violations, or to even eagerly defend the indefensible, both morally and politically. This is especially concerning in light of the international scrutiny and regional conspiracies that the Syrian government has to deal with.

The atrocities seen in the coastal region — and the fears, whether genuine or dubious, of similar events in the south — are unacceptable. They legitimize chaos and justify additional conspiracies. What we need is transitional justice, not retribution and revenge.

Eyad Abu Shakra is managing editor of Asharq Al-Awsat, where this article was originally published. X: @eyad1949