Poor Syria
Washington Watch
October 13th, 2025
Dr. James J. Zogby ©
President
Arab American Institute
Poor Syria! That’s an inauspicious start, but it’s honest, as the country is facing myriad problems, internal and external, none of which can easily be resolved.
From the beginning of the modern era, Syria has been a victim of the machinations of others. It went from Ottoman rule to being a remnant left after the French and British carved the Arab East to satisfy their imperial designs. Because of poor governance and sectarian rifts, like its “other half” (Lebanon), Syria became a playground for the deadly games of neighbors and others.
In recent years, Israel, Iran, Turkey, Russia, the US, Arab donors to Muslim groups, Lebanese and Palestinian factions and militias, Kurds, and of course, ISIS, all were involved in some degree of meddling in Syria, militarily and politically. Like reckless kids engaged in a dangerous game, these “outsiders” paid no attention to the consequences of their behavior.
When Syria’s war on itself began in 2011, those who warned that nothing good could come of it were ignored. When the numbers of dead rose to 5,000 and there were calls in the US and in the Arab World to arm the Syrian opposition, others cautioned that more weapons for the regime’s opponents would only increase the weapons the Assad regime’s allies would provide to protect them. And so, the spiral continued, with the sectarian factions and the Assad regime each drawing in allies until the country was drenched in blood and fractured.
And then, after 13 years of conflict, the group once associated with al Qaeda, that had controlled the northern Syrian province of Idlib for many years, marched into Damascus toppling the Assad regime, which by then had been largely abandoned by its Russian and Iranian backers.
Many in Syria and around the world celebrated. But in reality there was nothing to celebrate. Estimates of those killed in the war range from 560,000 to 680,000. Much of Syria’s infrastructure has been destroyed, more than half of its population has gone into exile or been internally displaced, and the country’s already fragile social and political cohesion has been shattered.
Once installed in the capital, the group formerly deemed a terrorist organization has put on suits and ties and moderated their speech in an effort to demonstrate that they could be responsible stewards of the “new Syria.” But to be honest, the tasks they face may be insurmountable. They may control Damascus, but the rest of the country remains fractured. Iran and its allied militias may have left or been weakened, and Russia has consolidated its position along the coast to protect its Mediterranean port and airbase, but Israel and Turkey have dug in deeper. Israel has been especially aggressive in seizing land, aggravating sectarian strife, and bombing much of Syria’s defense and internal security capabilities. Add to this the internal challenges from Syria’s diverse ethnic and sectarian communities, who remain uncomfortable with the new regime’s past and distrust that they’ve really changed. Signs continue to indicate that the new government in Damascus doesn’t have full control of some armed militias that fought alongside them during the long war.
Early on, the new rulers of Damascus made predictable mistakes that have, if anything, made their job harder. Instead of seeking to reassure the civil service, military, and police forces that worked under Assad, tens of thousands have been dismissed. This has increased insecurity, made the job of governing more difficult, and created a huge pool of resentful newly unemployed, some of whom retain their weapons and may be a source of future unrest.
While the new regime’s rhetoric has been promising, the problems they face present seemingly impossible choices. These choices constrain their ability to move forward and, if the stress becomes too great, may push them to “circle the wagons” and take increasingly repressive measures to avoid losing power.
Just one example: The new regime faces enormous financial pressures to rebuild the country, grow its economy, reconstitute and pay salaries to police and civil service employees. But their ability to raise funds and secure foreign investments is hampered by the fact that the Assad government was under international sanctions and the new government is still listed by the United Nation’s Security Council as a terrorist organization. While many countries justifiably want the new government to demonstrate that it’s no longer the extremist group it once was, delays in support only mean delays in Syria’s rebuilding, restarting needed services, and providing salaries to Syrian public servants. The reasons for the US’s hesitation in sanctions relief appears to be driven in part by US negotiators wanting the Syrians to conclude some sort of security arrangement with Israel. The price of such an arrangement, however, would be to exacerbate domestic tensions, especially with elements allied with the new government who will find any agreement with Israel a bitter pill to swallow.
The bottom line: In assessing how to resolve any problem, personal or political, it’s important to keep in mind that the solution should not rest on a requirement that the parties lack the capacity for or have no interest in doing.
The new government in Syria may have overthrown the old regime, but while they may have ruled their province in Idlib, questions remain as to their capacity for creating national unity and governing the more complex and diverse Syrian polity. Israel, Turkey, Iran and others need to leave Syria and stop exploiting sectarian tensions for their own ends, but they have no interest in doing so.
If there were ever a situation where the world needed a strong and effective United Nations, this is it. Absent a neutral mechanism to assist in the resolution of conflicts and the enforcement of the rule of law, Syria, its people, and its new rulers are left to their own devices and the whim of malign regional forces. Poor Syria!
