The Fall of Assad: How Israel, Turkey, and Iran Are Redrawing Syria’s Geopolitical Map

December 12, 2024
Caleb T (Dr.)

Map Showing Regional Alliances in the Syrian Civil War before the removal of President Bashar al-Assad’s regime

Other nations in the Middle East dealing with political instability do not have a unified stance on the issue, while others are disputed territories that lack the diplomatic power needed to take a stance.

When mapped by Newsweek, the stances show that the Middle East remains divided on the civil war, with local geography playing a significant role in how states reacted.

Many of the Gulf states followed a similar response in the initial stages of the war. Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, The United Arab Emirates (UAE), and Qatar, all closed their embassies in Syria and called for the removal of Bashar al-Assad as leader.

The Syrian landscape has been altered significantly following the removal of President Bashar al-Assad’s regime on December 8, 2024. This pivotal moment not only marks the end of a dynastic rule characterized by brutality and neglect but also the commencement of a complex interplay of regional powers—particularly Israel, Turkey, and Iran—as they re-establish their influence over this historically significant nation. Understanding the historical backdrop of Syria is imperative to grasp the current dynamics unfolding in the region.

 

Historical Context of Syria

Syria’s prominence in the Middle East began in the mid-20th century, particularly with the establishment of the United Arab Republic in 1958, a short-lived political union with Egypt led by President Gamal Abdel Nasser. This union represented a moment of potential Pan-Arab unity; however, it unraveled in 1961 due to political tensions and differing national interests. Following this period, Syria’s political landscape became troubled, characterized by coups and a persistent power struggle. Hafez al-Assad rose to power in the 1970s following a coup, cementing a regime marked by a personality cult and nepotism, predominantly favoring Alawites. His regime’s sectarian politics excluded significant Sunni populations from power, which sowed the seeds of resistance and resentment.

The Assad regime’s approach was deeply rooted in a mix of Arab nationalism and sectarian favoritism. By forging tight alliances with groups like Hezbollah and the Islamic Republic of Iran, Assad positioned Syria as a key player in what has been termed the “Axis of Resistance” against Western influence and Israeli expansionism. This led to a sustained adversarial posture against Israel, particularly following the key military conflicts that resulted in the loss of Golan Heights in 1973. The Golan Heights remains a contentious issue, symbolizing not only a territorial dispute but also a significant aspect of national pride and resistance against perceived foreign encroachment.

After Hafez al-Assad’s death in 2000, his son Bashar al-Assad inherited the mantle of leadership. Initially regarded as a potential reformer with a Western education, there was optimism that he might usher in a new era of liberalization. However, over time, Bashar maintained and arguably intensified his father’s authoritarian tactics, effectively squashing dissent through a heavier hand and fostering extensive corruption within the government and state institutions. His regime was marked by an increased reliance on security apparatuses to maintain control, leading to a climate of fear that stifled civil society.

The civil unrest that erupted in 2011, inspired by the broader Arab Spring movement, exposed the fragility of Assad’s rule. The protests initially called for political reform, greater freedoms, and an end to systemic corruption; however, the regime responded with violent repression, leading to a bloody civil war. This conflict fragmented the nation, resulting in the emergence of various factions, including both secular and Islamist groups, each vying for power and control. The backdrop of this civil war allowed an array of terrorist factions to flourish, with groups like ISIS and various Kurdish militias capitalizing on the chaos to gain territory and influence. The country became a battlefield for multiple external powers, deepening its instability as nations like the U.S., Russia, and Iran engaged either directly or indirectly to protect their geopolitical interests.

In effect, the civil war in Syria exemplified a complex interplay of internal strife and external interference, illustrating how deeply rooted historical grievances and regional dynamics continue to shape the conflict and influence its trajectory. The various actors, both domestic and international, contributed to a protracted and multifaceted crisis that has not only devastated Syria but also left a lasting impact on regional stability.

As Assad’s regime has fallen, these historical contexts serve to clarify the motivations of external powers, highlighting their attempts to fill the vacuum left behind while navigating a landscape that is perpetually fraught with complexity and uncertainty.

 

The Role of External Powers Post-Assad

The abrupt fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime in December 2024 has indelibly reshaped the geopolitical landscape of Syria, leading to an emerging power vacuum that external nations are eager to fill. The motivations, strategies, and implications of this power shift have sparked intense competition among key regional players, notably Israel, Turkey, and Iran, each seeking to secure their interests in post-Assad Syria.

 

Israel’s Perspective: A Strategic Victory

For Israel, the dissolution of Assad’s regime is viewed as a strategic victory that could redefine its security strategy in the region. Historically, Syria has served as a battleground where the Assad regime facilitated military operations aimed at undermining Israeli security through alliances with groups like Hezbollah. The fall of Assad is anticipated to weaken the Iranian foothold in Syria, thus mitigating the threat posed by Hezbollah and associated militant factions operating along Israel’s borders. This aligns with Israel’s long-term strategy of countering Iranian influence throughout the Levant, particularly in southern Syria, where Iranian forces and their proxies have gained a significant operational presence (Why Did Iran Allow Bashar Al-Assad’s Downfall?, 2024).

 

In the final stages of the Assad regime, Israeli military operations intensified, with airstrikes aimed at degrading purported Iranian military infrastructure and arms caches. Such strikes not only demonstrated Israel’s proactive defense measures but also signified a broader strategy to ensure that any power transition in Syria does not enable hostile entities to gain a foothold that could threaten Israeli national security. As external actors realign after Assad’s departure, Israel’s military and intelligence operations will likely adapt to target emergent threats, reinforcing its commitment to remaining a dominant military player in the region.

 

Turkey’s Strategy: Containing Kurdish Influence

In stark contrast to Israel’s objectives, Turkey’s motivations in Syria are closely linked to its long-standing apprehensions regarding Kurdish autonomy. The Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), predominantly made up of Kurdish fighters, pose a perceived threat to Turkey’s territorial integrity due to its connections with the PKK (Kurdistan Workers’ Party), an organization labeled as a terrorist entity by Ankara. Amidst the backdrop of Assad’s fall, Turkey views the ensuing chaos as a critical opportunity to bolster its influence in northern Syria.

Turkey’s engagement in the Syrian conflict has historically focused on supporting numerous rebel factions opposed to Assad while simultaneously attempting to suppress Kurdish militancy. Following Assad’s departure, Turkey aims to establish a stronger foothold in the region, consolidating its territorial gains while creating a buffer zone against Kurdish forces along its borders. Concurrently, Turkey is also strategizing the reintegration of Syrian refugees currently residing in Turkey, thus pursuing a dual objective of regional stability and domestic political legitimacy. This shift inevitably complicates the delicate ethnic and sectarian balances within Syria, as various armed groups vie for control amid the power vacuum left by Assad.

 

Iran’s Setbacks: Reassessing Influence

Amidst these changing dynamics, Iran faces considerable setbacks with the ousting of its key ally and strategic conduit, Bashar al-Assad. Historically, Iran’s influence in Syria has been rooted in its support for the Assad regime, utilized as an access point for extending its reach into Lebanon via Hezbollah and an operational base for force projection throughout the region. The collapse of the Assad regime signifies the unraveling of Iran’s strategic ambitions in Syria, undermining its ability to exploit the country as a conduit for military supplies and resources to its proxy forces.

As a result of Assad’s downfall, Tehran is now confronted with varying degrees of uncertainty regarding its future influence in Syria. The Iranian leadership must navigate a complex political landscape, potentially seeking alternative partnerships or reconfiguring its strategy in the face of a diminished presence (Assad’s Fall in Syria Weakens Iran but May Fuel Islamist Resurgence, 2024). This necessitates Tehran to reassess its military and ideological strategies and contemplate a more flexible positioning in Syria, aligning itself with emergent factions or adapting to maintain relevance without the protective umbrella of the Assad regime.

 

The Future of Syria: Challenges Ahead

Syria’s future remains precarious, laden with potential for prolonged instability. The aftermath of President Bashar al-Assad’s regime failure has unleashed a complex web of power dynamics that threaten to intensify existing sectarian rifts and exacerbate the challenges faced by a nation already ravaged by civil war. The varying interests of regional players—including Turkey, Israel, and Iran—could clash in a fragmented country, further complicating the already volatile situation. The emergence of new factions, notably Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), also positions this transitional period as a critical juncture for Syria, requiring a nuanced understanding of both domestic and international implications.

 

Fragmentation and Infighting Among Factions

The power vacuum created by the fall of Assad has led to an environment where multiple factions are vying for control, and reports of infighting among these various armed groups have already surfaced. These factions, driven by diverse ideologies and historical grievances, possess myriad motivations that could lead to violent confrontations. The intra-factional struggles not only jeopardize the establishment of a cohesive governance structure but also threaten to plunge the country back into chaos reminiscent of the darker days of the civil war.

 

The Syrian landscape is defined by ethnic and sectarian layers that complicate any attempts at unity. Sunni Arab majorities, Kurds, Alawites, and various Christian communities coexist, often clashing over regional control and political representation. As different factions forge temporary alliances while also competing for resources and territory, the potential for violence increases significantly with each passing day. The situation becomes even more complex when considering that external actors, such as Turkey and Iran, may seek to exploit these divisions to further their strategic goals, thereby intensifying internal discord.

 

The Rise of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS)

HTS, a group with historical roots in previous extremist factions, has emerged as a significant player in Syria’s post-Assad landscape. While HTS has publicly articulated its intention to govern inclusively, skepticism about its commitment to genuinely democratic governance remains high due to its historical actions and connections with extremist ideologies. Many analysts fear that HTS may revert to militant methods to assert its influence, risking re-escalation of the kind of violent repression that characterized the Assad regime’s rule.

The group’s rise brings with it humanitarian complexities as it operates in a territory marked by fragility and the urgent need for aid. Local communities that have suffered immensely during the war are at risk of further marginalization if HTS fails to cultivate a truly inclusive governance approach. The ghosts of the past still loom large; thus, the international community faces a delicate challenge in managing relations with HTS and ensuring that humanitarian efforts are effectively distributed without reinforcing extremist behavior.

 

The Role of the International Community

In light of such uncertainties, the international community must tread carefully. Effective diplomacy is essential to prevent a recurrence of violence akin to the worst years of the civil war. Both the United States and the European Union will play critical roles in shaping Syria’s future, focusing on stabilizing new leadership while ensuring that humanitarian efforts address the needs of those impacted by the prolonged conflict.

The U.S. approach must navigate the fine line between engaging with new authorities in Syria and not legitimizing groups with ties to past extremist activities. Coordinating with regional partners and leveraging diplomatic tools will be crucial to guide Syria away from a slide back into violence and chaos (U.S. Scrambles to Contain Syrian Chaos – The Washington Post, 2024). Furthermore, the emphasis must remain on facilitating comprehensive humanitarian relief and rebuilding efforts, as many regions are in dire conditions, suffering from lack of basic necessities and services due to years of conflict.

Aid distribution must be carefully monitored to ensure it reaches all segments of the population equitably, preventing any one group from monopolizing resources to further their own agendas. The international community should remain vigilant against the looming threat of sectarian violence, which could undermine stability at any moment, especially if groups pursue retribution for past grievances.

 

Conclusion

Syria occupies a crucial position in the geopolitical dynamics of the Middle East, particularly in the wake of President Bashar al-Assad’s removal. The historical tensions entrenched sectarian divides, and the complex relations among varying internal factions and external powers highlight the significant challenges the nation faces. ​The pressing question now is whether Syria can forge a path toward stability or if it will remain a fractured region caught in the struggle for influence among neighboring states.​

The fall of Assad has triggered a substantial shift in power dynamics within Syria, prompting countries like Israel, Turkey, and Iran to recalibrate their strategies to assert their influence. Israel aims to counter Iranian military presence, Turkey focuses on containing Kurdish separatism while solidifying territorial control, and Iran seeks to navigate the consequences of losing its primary ally in the region. These competing interests create a complex web of potential conflict and opportunity that will determine Syria’s future trajectory in the post-Assad era.

Moving forward, Syria faces numerous obstacles that necessitate urgent and thoughtful engagement from both its internal factions and the international community. It is essential to address the landscape of rivalry, emerging power structures, and deep-seated sectarian tensions to facilitate a stable future. The international community’s emphasis on inclusivity and effective governance will be vital for steering Syria towards a narrative shift—from enduring conflict to one of recovery and hope. Nevertheless, the multilayered realities on the ground demand continual engagement and flexible strategies. The insights drawn from Syria’s historic challenges must guide future efforts to ensure that emerging governance frameworks are resilient, inclusive, and capable of healing the wounds inflicted by years of division and violence.