Prospects of the new Syria rely on optimism and pragmatism

The line between success and failure in politics is often thin; there aren’t much nuances in some cases, and the building of a narrative which stays in the hearts and minds of citizens is essential. Building on this, assessing the early days of any new administration is challenging; these challenges are multiplied even more so when considering the fact that said administration is essentially building a new state from the ground up. 

The Syrian Transitional Government, officially appointed on the 29 March, is approaching its five-month anniversary, and whilst there are a number of obstacles in its way, there has been progress in areas too. Ahmed Al-Sharaa, the President of Syria, has work to do but there are a number of areas where cautious optimism should be encouraged, and where the Syrian people should be allowed to hope for something better following decades of Assad’s repression.

The first place to start is in the Transitional Government’s pragmatism. Crucially, what matters is what works and how it can be implemented for Syria.  This is an administration that has been clear in its aim to improve the lives of ordinary Syrians and rebuild the state. Despite Al-Sharaa’s past in HTS which was known for its “Islamist” background, or perhaps because of it, the new Syrian President has been keen to stress that political parties and ideologies are not what matter at the moment. 

HTS has been dissolved, as has the Baath Party which ruled Syria since 1963.  Crucially, the delivery of basic public services and the transition to a democracy are what matters. And whilst the latter necessitates the creation of political parties at some point, it is worth noting that George Washington, the most famous Founding Father and first President of the US warned against the creation of political parties in his farewell address.  There are parallels here; in the nascent days of a new state, competing parties and polarisation can easily tear apart a society that has suffered trauma for half a century. Being told that “the walls have ears” for decades has an effect on a population. Trust between citizen and citizen is not built overnight.

Building on the Transitional Government’s pragmatism, Al-Sharaa has been wise enough to make the distinction that ruling Syria is not like ruling Idlib, a small province in North Western Syria. HTS, originally an Al-Qaeda offshoot, moderated itself over the years of its rule in Idlib, and seems to have done the same during the past few months (though technically dissolved as mentioned previously, many central figures from the government have a HTS background). 

There is an interesting question for the future of political Islam here – Has Syria developed a new model for political Islam which doesn’t involve the Muslim Brotherhood and has its origins in fighting an oppressive regime? Is it due to Al Sharaa’s youth which meant he grew up close to the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria, having faced years of repression, representing a fading force as its leaders are growing ever older? Regardless, the government’s approach to matters seems to be flexible, and working within an uncertain international political climate, this is positive.

The Syrian Transitional Government enjoys a level of popularity in Syria. Whilst it will never have people marching with banners with pictures of Al Sharaa with people chanting that they love him, these Assad era scenes would be comical if they weren’t so sinister with citizens coerced into hero-worshipping him. 

Lobbying for the removal of US and EU sanctions has been largely successful, and the international community has clearly been impressed with the organisation of the Transitional Government and its early actions. There is clearly a lot of goodwill towards Syria from within the international community, not something that could be taken for granted after 8 December 2024. 

There was little love lost between Assad and most of the international community which meant that there was a level of happiness when he was finally deposed, but trepidation loomed with the prospect of dealing with Al-Sharaa. Most qualms have been addressed, and Al Sharaa has effectively sought the support of the international community. 

READ: Israel vows to keep troops on Syrian territory in pursuit of Greater Israel project

From a security perspective, the situation is improving but the lack of strong internal institutions is still a challenge. The public sector and economic situation has improved with salaries rising and the economy opening up. Under 24 years of Assad rule, the economic situation deteriorated until the war, and then took a huge turn for the worse. 

There are improvements in six months which the Assad Regime in 24 years couldn’t implement. Syria is no longer known to be a narco-economy as the captagon trade is firmly being dealt with, though operations are moving to other countries disrupting the trade, not fully stopping it. 

A new constitution following a national dialogue has been drafted. It is not perfect, but it is an interim document which offers the new Transitional Government a framework. Progress on bringing Assad to justice from Russia has stalled, and whilst there is a realisation that Russia will not give up its former ally easily, there has to be a focus on transitional justice in this arena. A good place to start would be with Syria’s accountability, signing up to the Rome Statute, and being under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court.

There is an elephant in the room however, and a stick with which the Syrian Transitional Government has been beaten with; the coastal violence in early March this year and the violence in southern Syria in July. The former, was a failed coup attempt and a coordinated attempt by remnants of the former regime to create chaos and ultimately bring the Assad regime back to power. Government forces were deployed to the coastal region where the violence started and there were instances of violence by individuals linked to the old regime.

The UN Report on the coastal violence made clear that any violations of international humanitarian law were carried out by individuals, and were in no way state policy.  Moreover, there were positive actions highlighted in that individual units within the ministry of defence stepped up to protect civilians in the local area and the report praised the swift appointment of an independent national inquiry. Interestingly, the findings of this national inquiry were very similar to that of the UN Report, and the fact that the UN had unfettered access and could gather evidence without being harassed is worthy of celebration. 

The violence in southern Syria is at an uneasy truce, having been fueled by the cleric Hikmat Al-Hijri’s refusal to agree to a ceasefire, and claims of representing the entirety of the Druze community in southern Syria. Al-Hijri is essentially the spiritual leader of the Suwayda Military Council which comprises former regime generals. His role in encouraging Israel to intervene in Syria’s affairs (a state which has constantly bombarded Syria since the fall of Assad and has stopped abiding by the 1974 Disengagement Agreement) is dangerous. 

Any talk of Israel wanting to protect the Druze of Syria is fanciful. The Druze in Israel are not even considered equal citizens and face discrimination and suspicion from the broader Israeli population. There is obviously a distraction at play here, in that Netanyahu wants the world to look away from the genocide he is perpetrating in Gaza for a moment and look towards Syria, but there is also a real Israeli fear that a Syria which grows in strength and importance, becomes a part of the “Sunni Crescent” alongside Turkey, Jordan and crucially, Saudi Arabia. 

The mood in Riyadh is no longer in favour of normalisation any time soon, and the genocide in Gaza means this is politically toxic for Mohammed Bin Salman to even contemplate. Any conversations Syria is having at a lower level with Israel are back channeled and security focused as there is work ongoing on revising the 1974 Disengagement Agreement which Israel declared null and void on the 8 December 2024 following Assad’s fall.

As mentioned earlier, politics depends to a large degree, on narratives. Currently, the Syrian Transitional Government must build hope amongst its people that better days are ahead. Not everything has gone to plan, and Al-Sharaa has made mistakes, but the approach itself and the openness from this government compared to decades of Assad family rule is refreshing. Al-Sharaa has credit in the bank due to his role in ensuring the demise of the Assad regime, but this victory was not his alone. 

Countless activists, some of whom are now unfortunately no longer alive, played a part in organising grass-roots opposition to the old regime, and building a proto democratic Syria in places through the work of the Local Coordination Committees. These activists have a role to play in building a new Syria. The Transitional Government must extend its arm to them if it has not done so already. Bickering at a parliamentary level between political parties can wait; a new Syria has to be built first. After all, Syrian parliamentary elections are scheduled to start on 15 September, just around the corner.

OPINION: Syria’s 100 days of opportunities and obstacles after Assad

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.