March 07, 2025
Nasser Kandil
• Two days before the end of the third month since Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) seized power in Damascus, backed by Turkey and Qatar, endorsed by the U.S. and Europe, blessed by Arab states, and welcomed by Israel, it has become evident that Syria is descending into a dark tunnel. The swift takeover and the reformist rhetoric of HTS’s leader now face serious challenges. Hopes that U.S. sanctions on Syrian banking transactions would be lifted have evaporated, dashing the expectations of war-weary Syrians who had initially welcomed the new regime, hoping for relief from poverty and hunger. Disillusionment is setting in, exacerbated by mass dismissals from the military and security institutions, leaving hundreds of thousands unemployed, destitute, and on the verge of displacement. An additional half a million civil servants have been removed from their posts, their salaries cut off, while electricity supply deteriorates further due to stalled negotiations with the U.S.-backed Syrian Democratic Forces, which control the country’s oil and gas fields.
Meanwhile, Israeli attacks, once expected to cease with the fall of the previous regime and the withdrawal of Hezbollah and Iran, have only escalated. Within just three months, Syrians have realised that their hopes were illusions, paid for with their livelihoods. They have come to see themselves as victims of a grand deception, where Washington, which dictates Turkish policy, ultimately prioritises Syria’s submission to Israeli demands, demands that Syrians cannot possibly meet. Until that happens, the crisis with the Kurdish factions will persist, electricity will continue to deteriorate, living conditions will worsen under unrelenting sanctions and mass layoffs, and security conditions will deteriorate under the dual burden of intensified Israeli aggression and retaliatory purges, largely driven by sectarian motives. Even the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights – an opposition-affiliated organisation, has described the situation as intolerable. Within HTS’s own sectarian base, figures like Mufti Ahmed Hassoun face humiliation, while other communities across the south, center, north, and coast cry out in distress.
• In such circumstances, ruling authorities typically seek to expand their social base and use elections to gain legitimacy. However, the new regime has done the opposite, introducing the concept of a “homogeneous government” to justify one-party, one-sectarian rule, ironically echoing one of the opposition’s grievances against the previous regime. Under the former system, political uniformity was the issue; now, sectarian and partisan exclusivity define the new order. No effort has been made to integrate figures, activists, or moderates from other sectarian groups or even from within HTS’s own ranks. As a result, Syrians do not feel like partners in governance but rather as subjects under its rule. They have been told this arrangement will last five years, until elections can be held, by which time everything will be firmly under control, ensuring that the vote does not undo what has been cemented.
• The mere endorsement of Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya is not enough to convince Syrians of this narrative. People had cautiously opened the door to a new phase, hoping that embracing the new system would bring an end to poverty, sanctions, and hunger, improve electricity supply, restore security, and translate the rhetoric of openness and coexistence into reality. Instead, they have found none of their expectations fulfilled. They feel existentially threatened, whether on sectarian or partisan grounds, by an imposed monolithic rule. They are weary of endless complaints, yet in return for surrendering their weapons, they have had guns turned against them, their dignity trampled, and their livelihoods disregarded. This explains why Kurdish communities are hesitant to engage, why southern regions remain wary, and why the coast is now witnessing security unrest.
• The constant rhetoric of “remnants of the old regime” and “foreign hands”, amplified by Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya with dedicated airtime, experts, and advisors, may resonate outside Syria, but Syrians know the truth. They recognise echoes of Lebanon in 1982, when Amin Gemayel’s government was given a chance to be inclusive and to secure an Israeli withdrawal after the expulsion of the Palestine Liberation Organisation, ostensibly the pretext for Israeli invasion. Yet, Gemayel’s administration pursued a factional agenda and failed nationally. The Lebanese Forces’ advance into Mount Lebanon and the army’s campaign to terrorise Beirut’s southern suburbs culminated in a massive explosion of unrest. Within less than a year of assuming power, the first eruption occurred in September 1983, followed by the major explosion in February 1984, and the system collapsed.
• There is still a chance for correction, but it requires the new leadership to display humility and acknowledge that its dreams of political, security, and economic breakthroughs have dissipated. The only viable path forward is through Syrian national unity and genuine popular participation in governance. The starting point must be the restructuring of state institutions on an inclusive basis that rejects exclusion, marginalisation, arrogance, and monopolisation. National interests must be placed above partisan, sectarian, or regional agendas, ensuring that Syria is governed by its people, not by the dictates of foreign actors.
