Bashar al-Assad has fled, and HTS fighters, backed by Turkey, have taken control of Damascus. It immediately brought to mind the fall of Kabul to the Taliban only a few years ago—how quickly power shifted with little resistance. Afghanistan fell to the Taliban then, and now it seems Damascus may fall to HTS. Yet, this isn’t just a repeat of history; it’s a far more complex situation.
Let me be clear: Bashar al-Assad was no saint. He was a dreadful leader, willing to commit unspeakable atrocities to cling to power. Yet, I genuinely expected him to fight harder to retain his grip. It’s worth noting that Assad wasn’t originally meant to rule; that role was intended for his brother, who tragically died in a car crash. Bashar was thrust into power by circumstance, and his leadership style has always reflected that—a man eager to please but lacking the foresight for the long game.
The timing of this shift couldn’t be worse for Assad’s allies. Iran, preoccupied with Israel and Lebanon, and Russia, entrenched in Ukraine, are in no position to prop him up. In this vacuum, Turkey has made a bold move. I see this as Erdoğan’s masterstroke—a calculated “Ottoman slap,” so to speak. Make no mistake, this wasn’t an HTS-led victory in isolation. This was orchestrated in Ankara, backed by Istanbul, and serves as a clear message to the Middle East: there’s a new sheriff in town.
However, the fall of Assad comes with significant risks. History shows us what happens when iron-fisted regimes collapse without a clear successor. Iraq post-Saddam and Libya after Gaddafi offer grim lessons. Power vacuums invite chaos, and Syria could easily become a breeding ground for ISIS-like groups to reemerge. HTS doesn’t have the monopoly on violence needed to stabilize the region, leaving Syria vulnerable to prolonged instability. I wouldn’t be surprised if Turkey takes further action, possibly carving out a buffer zone to guard against Kurdish aspirations for autonomy.
The bigger picture is even more troubling. A destabilized Syria could spiral into another Libya, worsening the refugee crisis and plunging the region into deeper chaos. For 14 months, there seemed to be a fragile unity between Sunni and Shia factions across the Muslim world, largely due to shared outrage against Israel’s policies. But this fragile unity has unraveled with the Syrian conflict, reigniting sectarian tensions. Assad’s Shia-aligned regime clashing with a predominantly Sunni opposition underscores the complexity of these divides.
And what of the future? Assad’s fall is shocking but not unprecedented. The parallels with other toppled regimes in the region are striking. Could this ignite another Arab Spring? Egypt, with its own discontented populace under dictatorship, might follow suit. But revolutions are rarely straightforward, and the path to stability is fraught with challenges.
As I reflect on all this, I can’t help but feel a deep sadness for the Middle East. Peace seems so distant. Every time hope appears on the horizon, it’s overshadowed by fresh conflict. The international community, particularly the West, must tread carefully. Trump once tweeted that we shouldn’t get involved in other nations’ problems—and on this point, I reluctantly agree. Intervention has often done more harm than good.
For now, all we can do is hope for a resolution that brings stability and unity to a region so deeply scarred by division. But as history has shown, hope alone is rarely enough.
* Mo Waqas is Chair of the Lib Dem’s Stockton branch and was the PPC for Middlesbrough and Thornaby East.
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Weekly Road Report - West End Ward #dundeewestend
Remembering Don Cupitt and his television series The Sea of Faith
How to improve the regulation of political polling - The Week in Polls
Why the government are getting it wrong on local government reorganisation
Rwanda scheme ICT costs revealed
John Mc
Simon R
David Evans
David Raw
5 Comments
“This was orchestrated in Ankara, backed by Istanbul, and serves as a clear message to the Middle East: there’s a new sheriff in town.”
Turkey has provided some protection to Syrians in the northwest – the HTS-aligned ‘Syrian Salvation Government’ and the Turkish-managed Syrian National Army. It sounds like Turkey knew an offensive by both groups was planned, and may even have known when it would be launched. But I’m not aware of any evidence that they intended or expected this to achieve anything more than the pushing back of the frontlines by tens of miles at the most.
“Syria could easily become a breeding ground for ISIS-like groups to reemerge.”
The original breeding ground for ISIS emerging was Assad-run Syria. The victorious rebel factions have all long been enemies of ISIS. Doesn’t mean ISIS won’t seek to exploit the situation, but don’t assume they’ll be successful.
“I wouldn’t be surprised if Turkey takes further action, possibly carving out a buffer zone to guard against Kurdish aspirations for autonomy.”
Here I agree with you. I think the SDF is going to have make a choice: abandon aspirations for independence by throwing in their lot fully with the revolutionary forces, or to shrink the footprint of their control to a more manageable part of the northeast.
“But this fragile unity has unraveled with the Syrian conflict, reigniting sectarian tensions. Assad’s Shia-aligned regime clashing with a predominantly Sunni opposition underscores the complexity of these divides.”
Unity built on mass murder isn’t worth having.
Thank you Mo Waqas for an informed and balanced article. I might take issue a little with the notion that the recent Al Nusra/HTS military push to topple the Assad family regime was orchestrated primarily by Turkiye. Reportedly they had military & intel support from the US, UK and Israel, starting around 2011, and most recently including bombing runs from US-occupied Syria (allegedly A10 Warthogs). There was also a angument between the Russians and Iran, after the Russian government declined to intervene beyond tokenistically. They had long given up on inept Bashar Assad as a leader, wanted to focus on the Don Basin & Kursk, knew what was afoot, and negotiated accordingly. Turkey has two serious problems it is trying to address; the future of US-backed Kurdish forces in Rojava (and Iraq). and ensuring sufficient stability in Syria to support the return or 4 million refugees.
Unfortunately, it does seem Israel is taking advantage of the situation… with it taking “temporary control” of demilitarized buffer zone in the Golan Heights; we can expect such “temporary” land grabs to be very much long-term land grab with settlers moving in…
Roland 10th Dec ’24 – 3:46pm
Unfortunately, it does seem Israel is taking advantage of the situation… with it taking “temporary control” of demilitarized buffer zone in the Golan Heights; we can expect such “temporary” land grabs to be very much long-term land grab with settlers moving in…
The Israeli state desperately needs a change of leadership / politics. They really need to read “How to make friends and influence people.”
Their “security first at any cost to the other” approach, risks making new enemies, and worsening the trajectory for a better Syria. A sensible government was use this opportunity to make new friends in Syria to achieve security through long-term peace.
Mo you say: ‘I can’t help but feel a deep sadness for the Middle East.’ I agree.
Patrick Cockburn wrote yesterday: ‘The US, Israel and the rest of the world do not know who or what will replace Assad in Damascus. Wishful thinking abounds.
Supposedly, Abou Mohammed al-Golani, along with the former al-Qaeda affiliate, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), have converted since 2016 into pluralists, tolerant of Syria’s religious and ethnic diversity. Golani said all the right things about abjuring revenge and respecting the religion of others while he was on the road to Damascus but speaking in the great Umayyad Mosque he spoke critically about “Shia Iranians”, frightening Syrian Alawites, who belong to a branch of Shi’ism and were formerly the ruling elite. Some are already in flight.
It is not every day that Western states cautiously welcome into power a man and a movement they had formerly labelled as “terrorists”. The Taliban has also congratulated them for having the correct “Islamic values”.
Moreover, Golani was not first radicalised by Assad’s atrocities, but by the Palestinian second intifada in 2000.
He went to Baghdad in 2003 to fight against the American invasion and occupation, becoming a member of al-Qaeda until he was detained and imprisoned.