KEY TAKEAWAYS
KEY TAKEAWAYS
Less than took weeks ago, a rebel offensive led by al-Qaida offshoot Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) rekindled Syria’s long-frozen civil war, rapidly leading to the fall of Syria’s largest city, Aleppo. In short order, HTS and associated rebel groups then marched through Hama, the strategic city of Homs and took Damascus this weekend. Bashar al-Assad, who led the family dynasty that ruled Syria with an iron grip for over 50 years, fled the country and then resigned. Syria’s armed forces put up little fight, unwilling to put their lives on the line for the regime. While Syrians are rightly rapt with joy over the death of the Assad dictatorship, there are many questions about what comes next, particularly given HTS’ roots as a hardline Islamist force.
In the region and beyond, key actors are already feeling the ripple effects of Assad’s fall. This stunning development also evidences the dramatic and far-reaching geopolitical repercussions of the wars in Ukraine, Gaza and Lebanon. For the United States, Assad’s demise — and the strategic blow to Russia and Iran — advances its interests in the region. But Washington will be watching warily to see how this hopeful but precarious situation develops.
USIP’s Mona Yacoubian looks at what led to Assad’s rapid demise, the key challenges ahead for Syria and what it means for the United States.
After 14 years of brutal civil war, the Assad regime collapsed in just over 14 days. Three key factors account for Assad’s rapid demise. First and perhaps most significant, Assad’s key allies withdrew their support. Russia and Iran have been essential to Assad’s survival; both played a critical role in propping up the regime for more than a decade. Yet the calculus of each clearly shifted over the past several months. With Moscow focused on Ukraine and Iran weakened by its conflict with Israel, Assad’s erstwhile allies appear to have concluded that the cost of continuing to support the stubborn dictator outweighed the strategic benefits.
This calculus was likely informed by the second key factor: the deepening rot that permeated the regime at an accelerating pace. Corruption, warlordism and intransigence combined to hasten the hollowing out of the regime’s foundations — the Ba’ath party, the army and security services, and even basic government functions. Yet Assad seemed impervious to Russia’s efforts to broker normalization with Turkey or to engage in even the most cosmetic reforms. The depth of the rot became apparent in the face of the HTS offensive, when Syria army soldiers melted away, shedding their uniforms rather than fight.
Third, while Assad failed to adapt or respond to his patrons’ demand signals for change, HTS seized the opportunity to dispatch its rivals, build greater coherence among its forces, and instill greater discipline and training to improve its fighting capability. It also capitalized on its control over Idlib governorate to hone its governance skills at the local level. It adapted lessons learned and has appeared to moderate its rigid ideological stance — although whether this newfound moderation is genuine and enduring remains to be seen. Taken together, HTS evolved into a capable fighting force, projecting significant power in its rout of regime forces.
Syrians are understandably euphoric over Assad’s ouster. Early indications from HTS suggest a desire to promote an inclusive Syria for all Syrians. Anecdotal reporting from across the country reflects this desire from a broad spectrum of Syria’s diverse population. Yet the coming period is also fraught with challenges and dangers. Throughout the civil war, efforts to unify the opposition were stymied by rivalries among the various factions. As such, a key question revolves around whether the armed groups remain cohesive or descend into infighting. If the latter, dangerous power vacuums will open. If they remain unified, will these armed groups be willing to cede control to civilians and if so, who? What will be the nature of governance in Syria? Will it be pluralistic, inclusive and respectful of minorities? This is critical in a country of such significant diversity.
A key question revolves around whether the armed groups remain cohesive or descend into infighting. If the latter, dangerous power vacuums will open.
Beyond issues around security and governance, Syria faces monumental post-conflict challenges. In particular, the safe return and reintegration of Syria’s forcibly displaced must be a key priority. Already, hundreds of Syrian refugees are streaming back to the country, but they may not have homes to which to return. Given the war’s widespread devastation reconstruction costs will be massive, with no clear sources for funding. Equally important, Syrians have endured unspeakable suffering; the horrific conditions of the “human slaughterhouse” Sednaya prison, only now becoming fully apparent, are just one dramatic example. Trauma-informed care and psycho-social services should be integrated fully into assistance as Syrians begin the long healing process.
President Biden has called the sudden collapse of the Assad regime, “a fundamental act of justice” but also “a moment of risk and uncertainty.” For the United States, a Syria without Assad, and in which Russia and Iran no longer hold significant sway, is a positive development. However, HTS — a designated terrorist organization — poised to take the helm of power raises new questions regarding Syria’s trajectory. Syria’s turn toward becoming a radicalized Islamist regime would have negative implications for U.S. interests in the region. A potential ISIS resurgence stands as another key challenge to U.S. interests in Syria. On December 8, U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) forces conducted strikes on 75 targets, sending a strong signal of continuing U.S. resolve to ensure against an ISIS resurgence.