Syria's fragile peace and the looming threat of wider conflict

The recent surge in violence across Syria, following the December overthrow of Bashar al-Assad's regime, has left hundreds dead, many of them civilians. This unexpected upheaval reveals the ongoing instability in a country still grappling with the consequences of over a decade of war. In a recent analysis, the Council on Foreign Relations delves into the complexities behind the crisis and its potential global consequences.

Despite Assad's departure and his family's flight to Russia and the UAE, significant pockets of his loyalists remain, particularly in the western coastal and mountainous regions. These loyalists, predominantly Alawites, staged an uprising against the new government led by Ahmed al-Sharaa and his group, Ha’yat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a faction with roots in al-Qaeda.

The violence was likely sparked by a mix of local grievances and the struggle for control, with al-Sharaa's security forces moving swiftly to suppress Assad's loyalists. This suppression, alongside the intervention of various armed groups including HTS affiliates, led to widespread violence that left hundreds of civilians dead. Among the reports are claims of massacres targeting Alawites and Christians, though these remain difficult to verify amidst the flood of misinformation.

The crucial question is whether this violence threatens to spiral into a broader civil war. While Assad loyalists remain deeply unpopular due to their association with decades of brutality under the Assad regime, al-Sharaa and his new government face significant challenges in maintaining peace. The Syrian economy has contracted drastically—by a staggering 84 percent during the war—and rebuilding efforts are essential. Al-Sharaa's government has expressed commitment to respecting minority rights and has refrained from imposing an Islamist agenda, though the lingering influence of HTS, a group tied to al-Qaeda, raises concerns. Should al-Sharaa fail to address Syria's economic and social needs, especially regarding minorities, he could fuel further unrest.

While the primary violence appears to stem from internal factions, the possibility of external intervention remains. Iran, which lost its foothold in Syria with Assad’s flight, has been accused of inciting some of the violence, although these claims lack definitive evidence. Russia, keen to see al-Sharaa fail, sees a Syrian government under Turkish influence as a setback. Türkiye itself has positioned itself as a major powerbroker in Syria, aiming to counter Kurdish nationalist threats and cement its influence in the region. Meanwhile, Israel has established a buffer zone in southern Syria, pledging to protect minority groups like the Druze.

The role of the United States in stabilizing Syria remains unclear. Despite strong statements from U.S. officials condemning the killing of civilians, there is no indication that the Trump administration intends to take an active role in the conflict. However, the recent agreement between Damascus and the U.S.-backed Syrian Democratic Forces marks a crucial step in potentially uniting the country’s fractured factions.

Ultimately, Syria’s future remains uncertain. While regional powers like Türkiye, Iran, and Russia continue to jockey for influence, the internal divisions and the question of how to rebuild a shattered nation are the true tests of Syria’s future stability.

By Vugar Khalilov