Woman waving new green Syrian flag after the fall of Bashar al-Assad in Syria.

From Conflict to Compromise: Can Syria Redefine Its Regional Role?

As Syria surfaces from the wreckage of conflict, its future rests on how the new leadership crosses a minefield of internal and external pressures. The choices made now will shape not only the country’s governance and social structure but also its place in a Middle East undergoing deep rearrangements. While Syria’s long road to recovery remains difficult, this transformative phase offers a unique chance to rearrange strategies and establish a more sustainable path forward.

A Shift in Alliances and Commitments

For years, Syria has been a key supporter of Palestinian armed groups fighting against Israel. The groups were backed both logistically and politically, which helped define the country’s regional identity and allied Damascus with regional powers like Iran. Yet, as the geopolitical landscape has changed considerably, a question is raised about whether the new regime will maintain these conventional relationships, or yield to regional and international pressures forcing their termination.

The decision to maintain ties with groups like the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine or Islamic Jihad is a complex one, which could also have significant geopolitical implications. Instead, changing strategy could open doors to better relations with Gulf states, the West, and other powerful players. Either choice will echo within Syria and beyond, possibly redrawing the region’s political map.

The Hamas Conundrum

Rebuilding ties with Hamas is a risky move for the new Syrian leadership. As Hamas was once a key player in Syria’s alliance with the Iran-led ‘Axis of Resistance,’ embracing the movement would indicate a return to the past and convey an obvious message that Damascus remains committed to its old ideological principles. Such a move may also risk isolating states now favorable toward containing Iranian influence. In a region where nations are persistently re-aligning and carefully mending old ties, Syria’s perspective on Hamas will be a key signal of its future diplomatic direction.

Temptations and Risks of Normalization with Israel

This mutual threat perception has led to a cycle of military readiness and occasional confrontation


The question of making peace and establishing official diplomatic relations with Israel remains a complex issue for Syria. While other Arab states have tracked this path, enticed by the promise of economic and security benefits, Syria faces long-standing issues of historical animosity, a strongly negative public opinion, and deep-rooted questions related to the country’s national identity. Any attempt at even a tactful understanding with Israel could incite significant domestic opposition and challenge the regime’s legitimacy at a delicate time of transition when internal unity is a precondition for building a new state.

The security situation is further complicated by Israel’s increasingly assertive military posture in the region. Recent Israeli operations have focused on strengthening its position in the Golan Heights through enhanced fortifications, surveillance systems, and periodic security operations. These actions are viewed with growing concern by the new Syrian leadership, which sees them as direct threats to Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. Meanwhile, Israel considers certain Syrian rebel groups, particularly those with potential ties to Iran or its proxies, as significant security risks to its northern border. This mutual threat perception has led to a cycle of military readiness and occasional confrontation, with Israel conducting preemptive strikes against what it identifies as strategic threats within Syrian territory. Therefore, a more practical approach for the short term might be to find a middle ground – one that avoids open normalization while maintaining lines of communication between the two countries to prevent unintended escalation.

The Kurdish Issue: Between Ankara and Autonomy

The situation in northern Syria is equally complicated, particularly regarding the Kurdish question, and represents another minefield for the new leadership. The Kurds, who have long fought for recognition and autonomy, see the present situation as a unique opportunity to secure their rights, which clash with Turkey’s security priorities for the area. The new Syrian leadership must navigate this delicate balance, choosing between preserving a key regional relationship through siding with Ankara to contain Kurdish ambitions, or supporting the Kurds and currying favor with their Western backers. Siding with Turkey could alienate Western powers who support Kurdish autonomy, potentially losing crucial reconstruction aid and diplomatic support, while also risking renewed Kurdish insurgency in northern Syria. Conversely, supporting Kurdish aspirations could provoke Turkish military intervention, destabilize the border region, and potentially lead to the loss of territory to Turkish-backed forces.

Recalibrating Historic Ties with Iran and Hezbollah

Beyond the complexities of the Palestinian and Kurdish issues, Syria must also carefully consider its relationship with Iran and Hezbollah. These allies played a decisive role in the conflict, providing critical support when Damascus was at its weakest. However, as Syria longs for rebuilding itself and re-engaging with the international community, it may be persuaded to untie these bonds, hoping to attract Western and Gulf cooperation. This decision may carry significant risks. Without Iranian military advisers and Hezbollah’s experienced fighters, Syria could face increased threats from multiple actors: ISIS cells could exploit security gaps in the eastern desert regions, Turkish-backed opposition groups might push southward from their northern strongholds, and jihadist factions in Idlib could launch operations against government-held areas. Additionally, Israel might intensify its air campaigns against Syrian military positions, particularly if it perceives a weakening in Syria’s air defense capabilities currently supplemented by Iranian systems.

What Comes Next?

At this critical moment of reconstruction and recalibration, the new leadership could assume a forward-looking approach that prioritizes diplomacy over conflict and rational alliances over rigid ideology.


Some opposition groups have referenced the term “Liberation of the Levant” (Bilad al-Sham), which historically encompasses a broad region, including parts of Lebanon, Palestine, Jordan, Iraq, and Turkey. While such rhetoric might resonate symbolically with certain groups, Syria’s pressing domestic issues will likely restrict its focus to its internationally recognized borders. With many pressing issues, such as security, reconstruction, and economic recovery, it is questionable that Damascus will have the capacity to pursue expansive regional ambitions.

Syria’s future is intertwined with the interests of various global powers. The United States, Russia, Iran, and Turkey all have their own interests at stake, and their influence has often shaped Syria’s course, particularly since 2015. While complete disconnection from Iran or Russia is unrealistic, Syria must circumnavigate a complex diplomatic landscape, balancing old alliances with new opportunities. Russia’s role remains particularly crucial, as it maintains both military bases and significant political influence in Syria. Despite its current focus on Ukraine, Moscow shows no signs of abandoning its strategic foothold in the Mediterranean. Russian military advisers continue to play key roles in Syrian military operations, while Russian diplomats actively work to protect Syrian interests in international forums. Even with stretched resources, Russia is likely to maintain its presence in Syria through a combination of direct military support and increased cooperation with Iran, viewing the Syrian theater as essential to its broader Middle Eastern strategy. This sustained Russian involvement suggests that any major shifts in Syrian policy will require Moscow’s tacit approval, if not direct support.

In the end, Syria’s path towards a new era may not seem different from its turbulent past, considering the immense turmoil and complex challenges it still faces. But, at this critical moment of reconstruction and recalibration, the new leadership could assume a forward-looking approach that prioritizes diplomacy over conflict and rational alliances over rigid ideology. The years ahead will determine whether Syria can fruitfully transform itself into a more settled and active regional actor, or if it will remain restrained by the shadow of its violent history. The results of this choice are far-influential and will have a significant impact beyond its borders.

Similar Articles

Search the site for posts and pages