The fall of the Assad regime is a historic watershed event that will have significant regional and international ramifications. The question is, will the rebels fulfill their promise to be inclusive and lift the Syrian people out of their misery, and what can the US and Israel do to help shape the trajectory of the new regime
The Fall Of The Assad Regime: The Rebels’ Prospect For Success Or Failure
It is hard to exaggerate the jubilation of the Syrian people when they heard the news about the fall of Bashar al-Assad, which ended a 52-year-old ‘dynasty’ that will be remembered as the darkest chapter of the country’s existence. How long the public’s jubilation will last, and whether normalcy will be restored to a shattered country, will depend on whether the new government fulfills its promise to be inclusive, focusing on rebuilding the country and seeking peace and reconciliation, or simply replaces one ruthless dictatorship with a new one. Perhaps it is premature to determine whether or not the rebels will keep their word with respect to their promises to be inclusive and treat every citizen, regardless of their ethnicity, equally before the law. However, there are important and positive signs that the new leaders are likely to follow what they have been saying to demonstrate that they are committed to establishing responsible and legitimate governance.
To that end, they called for national unity and a peaceful transfer of power. The rebels’ leader, Abu Mohammed al-Golani, met with the outgoing prime minister Mohammed al-Jalali to discuss the transition of power to demonstrate his desire to work with experienced officials to ensure a smoother power transfer and temporarily supervise the bureaucracy. Hadi al-Bahra, president of the Syrian National Coalition, outlined plans for an 18-month transitional period and extended his hand to help draft a new constitution and hold elections as desired by the rebel leaders.
To show the rebels’ leaders' commitment to justice, they swore to hold accountable many army officers who were involved in torture and commit themselves to establishing “a state of freedom, equality, rule of law and democracy,” as Syria’s UN ambassador Koussay Aldahhak stated. They instructed their followers to preserve the state’s institutions, restore essential services, and reopen banks to ensure economic stability. They further directed their rank and file to prevent the desecration of shrines and cultural centers of many ethnic groups, including the pro-Assad Alawites, making them feel reassured and optimistic that they would not be excluded from joining the political transitional process. Given the reign of horror that was inflicted on the Syrian people, the new leaders appear to be committed to a new beginning that the public is yearning for, not simply replacing the ruthless Assad dictatorship with a new one. They want to write a new chapter that would end the public’s pain, suffering, and despair, especially over the past 14 years since the outbreak of the Arab Spring, and bring hope for a better and promising future. On the whole, it appears as though a new era has dawned on Syria.
The above positive signs, however, are not free from the many challenges in regime change, which include integrating the armed groups into a unified structure and preserving all state institutions, as well as laborious negotiations between the numerous opposition groups with different ideologies and loyalties. There are also concerns that hasty changes might invite other militant groups to emerge and plunge the country once again into a civil war and destroy what was left under Assad. Finally, the more troubling concern is about the Islamic roots of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), and the question is raised as to whether or not its leader, Abu Mohammad al-Jolani, formerly affiliated with al-Qaida, would revert to extremism. To alleviate these concerns, he clarified that his severing of ties to al-Qaeda goes back several years and pledged to pursue pluralism, ethnic equality, and religious tolerance.
What transpires domestically will affect foreign powers, especially Turkey, Iran, and Russia, which have vested geostrategic interests in Syria. How the rebel leaders navigate between these rival powers will have significant repercussions for Syria and its place in an unstable region ladened with conflicts and competition for greater sway with the new leaders in Damascus. Setting this aside, for now, the most urgent matter is for the US and Israel, in particular, to take several actions to encourage the new Syrian leadership to pursue what they have publicly promised and maintain the initial social, economic, and political steps they have taken. The US should first remove HTS from the terrorist list to send a clear message that the US is willing to demonstrate its initial trust that the new leadership will indeed follow what they have promised. Since legitimacy is critical to the new leadership, the US should offer diplomatic recognition, conditional upon the rebels’ commitment to democracy and the rule of law. In addition, the US should engage in back-channel diplomacy to discuss regional security and offer cooperation. The US could provide economic assistance by first removing the sanctions that date back to 2012, assisting in the efforts to recover funds stolen by Assad himself and his government, and supporting reconstruction efforts, which can significantly help improve living conditions and stabilize the country. Finally, the US could offer technical know-how and training for civil society organizations and help promote independent media and democratic institutions. By taking these and other measures, the US can demonstrate its commitment to supporting the Syrian peoples’ aspiration for democracy and the prospect of growth and prosperity while addressing the US’ concerns over regional stability. To prevent any potential conflagration with the new Syrian government, Israel has established three red lines for the rebels, daring them not to cross. These include: 1) not letting chemical weapons fall into the hands of Jihadist rebels; 2) preventing Iran from deploying Iranian troops to rebuild any military installations on Syrian territory; and 3) no hostile forces deployed near the Israeli border. Israel has already taken several precautionary measures to prevent any misunderstanding, which include temporarily seizing control of a demilitarized buffer zone in the Golan Heights, bombing suspected chemical weapons sites, and implementing a curfew in several villages within the buffer zone. Having conveyed that those are preventive measures, Israel can take several steps to encourage peaceful relationships with the new government while mitigating the rebels’ traditional hostilities toward Israel. To begin with, Israel should establish a line of communication with the rebels and extend humanitarian aid to develop goodwill. In addition, Israel can offer economic incentives and demonstrate its interest in addressing Syria’s security concerns. By combining diplomatic outreach, strategic security measures, and financial incentives, Israel can develop a stable relationship with the new Syrian government while maintaining its security.
There are and will be several other critical issues that separate Israel and the rebels; chief among them is the future of the Golan Heights. However, whether or not the new government accepts Israel’s gestures, by taking these measures, Israel can create a positive atmosphere that can facilitate constructive negotiations about any conflicting issue in the future.
The stunning victory of the Syrian rebels opens up new possibilities for a more peaceful Middle East, or it can set the stage for even more intense violence, death, and destruction. The new Syrian authority must decide which way they choose to go. One thing, however, is certain. Although other powers, especially Turkey, Russia, and Iran, have a unique interest in Syria’s future, what the US and Israel do will have the greatest impact on the path the new regime in Damascus will choose to travel.
____________ Dr. Alon Ben-Meir is a retired professor of international relations, most recently at the Center for Global Affairs at NYU. He taught courses on international negotiation and Middle Eastern studies.
