Syria’s Fragile Peace: Beyond Disarmament, a Battle for Legitimacy
More than a thousand people died in a week of violence in early 2025. This stark figure isn’t a relic of Syria’s recent past; it’s a chilling reminder of the precariousness of the country’s transition, even after the formal end of the Assad regime. While the fall of Bashar al-Assad in December 2024 marked a turning point, it didn’t usher in peace. Instead, it unleashed a complex struggle for power and legitimacy, fought not just with weapons, but with political maneuvering, regional rivalries, and the very fabric of Syrian society.
The Illusion of Demilitarization
The initial phase of Syria’s transition focused on demobilization – dissolving the al-Assad regime’s armed forces and offering former soldiers a path to civilian life or re-enlistment in a new army. Thousands participated, seeking to clear their names. However, the process was deeply flawed. A significant number, particularly from the Alawite community on the coast, abstained, forming the seeds of new anti-government factions. This wasn’t simply a rejection of the new order; it was a symptom of deep-seated distrust and a fear of marginalization. The subsequent coordinated attack in March 2025, claiming over 100 lives, exposed the fragility of this approach.
The challenge isn’t simply about collecting weapons; it’s about addressing the underlying grievances and power dynamics that fueled the conflict. As long as these remain unaddressed, the cycle of violence will continue. The emergence of the Ministry of Defence (MOD) as a catch-all for former opposition groups, while seemingly pragmatic, has created a bloated and unwieldy force plagued by discipline issues and questionable leadership – particularly within factions tied to Turkiye, like elements of the Syrian National Army (SNA).
The Rise of the Ministry of Interior and Localized Security
Recognizing the MOD’s shortcomings, the transitional government shifted responsibility for domestic security to the Ministry of Interior (MOI) in the latter half of 2025. This proved to be a turning point, particularly in the coastal region. Unlike the MOD’s divisions, the MOI’s public security forces were largely composed of newly recruited personnel, reducing pre-existing factional allegiances. Crucially, the MOI prioritized community engagement, fostering trust and significantly reducing violence. This demonstrates a critical lesson: sustainable security in Syria requires a localized approach, built on reconciliation and accountability.
However, the MOI isn’t without its own complexities. Specialist units remain heavily influenced by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) personnel, raising concerns about the long-term implications for human rights and the rule of law. This highlights the difficult compromises inherent in any transitional process, and the need for ongoing monitoring and reform.
Geopolitical Fault Lines: Suwayda, the SDF, and Regional Interference
The most significant obstacles to Syria’s stability lie in its unresolved territorial issues. The standoff with the Kurdish-dominated Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) in the northeast and the situation in the Druze-majority governorate of Suwayda represent existential threats to the transitional government’s authority. Negotiations with the SDF have stalled, and recent clashes in Aleppo risk escalating the conflict.
Suwayda presents an even more complex challenge. The emergence of a “National Guard,” backed by Israel, and the alarming 400% increase in drug trafficking towards Jordan (documented by Syria Weekly) demonstrate the region’s descent into a de facto autonomous zone. This isn’t simply a local uprising; it’s a proxy conflict, with regional powers vying for influence. Israel’s support for Druze authorities directly undermines Damascus’s control and complicates relations with Jordan and regional backers of the new Syrian government.
The coordination between the Suwayda National Guard and the SDF, coupled with communication between Alawite figures and both groups, reveals a broader attempt to forge a united opposition to Damascus. This underscores the deeply political nature of the challenges facing Syria’s transition.
The Role of External Actors
While the international community largely supports Syria’s transitional government, the actions of external actors continue to complicate the situation. Financial support from exiled al-Assad regime figures in Lebanon and Russia fuels instability, and the geopolitical maneuvering of countries like Israel and Turkiye exacerbates existing tensions. Successfully navigating these external pressures is crucial for Syria’s long-term stability.
Looking Ahead: A Fragile Future
Syria’s path to lasting peace is fraught with challenges. The process of integrating armed factions is inextricably linked to the country’s political and geopolitical landscape. The success of the transition hinges on addressing the root causes of the conflict, fostering inclusive governance, and mitigating the influence of external actors. The focus must shift from simply disarming groups to building legitimate institutions and addressing the grievances that fuel extremism. Without a comprehensive approach that prioritizes reconciliation, accountability, and regional cooperation, Syria risks descending back into chaos. What steps can the international community take to support a truly inclusive and sustainable peace in Syria? Share your thoughts in the comments below!
