Assad’s fall reshapes Syria, impacts globally.
The collapse of Assad’s Syrian government and the broader shift in the Middle East are poised to have profound and far-reaching consequences. As the region continues to grapple with the effects of civil war, sectarian divides, and foreign interventions, the fall of Assad’s regime could trigger a new wave of instability, both within Syria and across neighboring countries. This collapse would not only dismantle a longstanding power structure but could also spark further fragmentation, especially in a region already struggling with political volatility and social unrest.
If the ongoing regional problems—such as sectarian conflicts, refugee crises, and the rise of extremist groups—are not addressed with comprehensive and locally-driven solutions, the situation could worsen. Countries like Iraq, Lebanon, and Turkey, which have been affected by Syria’s conflict, could find themselves dealing with the spillover effects, including more refugees, increased terrorist activity, and regional power struggles.
The role of global powers, particularly the United States, Russia, and Iran, in Syria’s future will also be crucial in shaping the outcome. These external actors, each with their own interests, may contribute to the continued fragmentation of Syria, or they could act to stabilize the situation, but only if they can agree on a framework that prioritizes peace and regional cohesion. Ultimately, the future of Syria will depend on the capacity of regional actors to find common ground, while avoiding a further descent into chaos that could destabilize the entire region.
The Syrian civil war, which had largely been in a dormant phase, has reemerged with intensity following the collapse of Bashar al-Assad’s government. This marks the end of a 60-year reign by the Assad family and the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party, which came to power through a military coup in 1963. The demise of Assad’s regime was not the result of a dramatic or sudden overthrow but rather a gradual unraveling of power. A coalition of rebel militias, led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS)—a group that traces its origins to Al-Qaeda—has emerged as a dominant force in the country. At the helm of HTS is Abu Mohammed al-Jolani, a 42-year-old leader who has proven himself to be a significant player in the current struggle for Syria’s future.
HTS, which has long fought against Assad’s forces, has taken control of several key cities in Syria in recent weeks. Over the past few years, the group has developed a quasi-state model, establishing its own governance structures, taxation and revenue systems, and even providing healthcare. This model is not unique to HTS, however. Al-Shabaab in Somalia and the Taliban in Afghanistan have pursued similar strategies, using militant control to provide basic services and exert authority in the territories they control.
Jolani himself has sought to distance HTS from sectarian and ethnic divisions, instead advocating for the creation of an “Islamic government.” Despite his stated goal of avoiding sectarianism, he has also made it clear that his primary objective is to end the influence of Iran and Russia in Syria. His opposition to these foreign powers is a position that resonates with many Arab nations and Israel, but it also complicates his potential as Syria’s future leader. His ideology clashes with that of the Arab powers, such as the UAE and Saudi Arabia, who have long sought to undermine the Muslim Brotherhood, a movement from which HTS derives some of its ideological roots.
In the long run, Jolani’s aspirations to lead Syria will present a difficult challenge for many players in the Middle East, not least because of his opposition to the existing geopolitical and ideological order. While Arab powers and Israel may share an interest in undermining Assad’s influence, they are unlikely to accept a figure like Jolani, whose leadership could potentially threaten the regional balance of power. Jolani’s rise represents a significant challenge for Syria, the region, and the broader international community, as it ushers in a new phase of uncertainty and political fragmentation.