The Way Ahead for Syria: Regional Views on a Political Shift

The MED This Week newsletter provides informed insights on the most significant developments in the MENA region, bringing together unique opinions and reliable foresight on future scenarios. Today, we shed light on the impact of the al-Assad regime’s fall on Middle Eastern regional actors.

As newly appointed caretaker Prime Minister Mohammed al-Bashir and the interim ministers from the former Syrian Salvation Government guide Syria through the early stages of its political transition, the country’s neighbours and other regional actors are closely monitoring developments in Damascus. While a smooth transition is widely hoped for, given its potential to impact regional stability, each actor has its own set of priorities and concerns. For Türkiye, Jordan, and Lebanon, key concerns include managing the domestic challenges posed by Syrian refugees, whose potential return to Syria is now seen as an opportunity, as well as assessing the influence of the transition and new leadership on their internal politics. In Türkiye, the collapse has bolstered President Erdogan’s political standing domestically and strengthened Ankara’s influence over Syria’s future political trajectory. Particularly, it has enhanced the country’s ability to resist Kurdish autonomy or any federal structure in Syria that would grant the group significant self-governance. For Jordan, additional priorities include securing its northern borders and mitigating the impact of Syria’s emerging political actors on its domestic landscape. In Lebanon, the fall of the al-Assad regime presents an opportunity to reduce Hezbollah’s power and influence, while the potential return of Syrian refugees is seen as a step toward national stabilisation. Iraq, drawing from its own experience with de-Ba’athification, cautiously supports Syria’s transition, advocating for stability and democratic reform. Israel, meanwhile, sees the fall of al-Assad as an opportunity to reshape the regional balance of power in its favour, particularly with Iran’s diminished influence after losing its strategic ally and foothold in Syria. Across the Gulf, there is broad support for a stable and inclusive transition in Damascus, though some, particularly the UAE, remain cautious about the identity and direction of the new HTS leadership, hesitant to offer premature optimism.

Assad’s fall consolidated Erdogan’s standing both nationally and internationally
“The situation in Syria has domestic, regional, and international implications for Türkiye. Domestically, the fall of the al-Assad regime further consolidates President Erdogan’s position. Indeed, the regime change in Syria is a setback for the AKP opposition, which has long criticised the government’s policies and Erdogan’s refusal to negotiate with al-Assad. The 3,3 million refugees have been at the centre of domestic debate for many years. A small percentage of them may return to Syria in the coming months, easing some of the social pressure on the AKP government. From a regional point of view, Türkiye is consolidating its position in the Levant and, above all, ensuring that it will be able to influence the future shape of Syria. To avoid legitimising an autonomous Kurdish entity on its border, Türkiye would probably oppose a state settlement similar to the Iraqi one. Finally, from an international perspective, the fallout of the Syrian regime mainly concerns Türkiye’s relations with Russia. Over the past decade, Moscow has used Syria as a bargaining chip to influence Turkish decisions in other areas or on other issues. Now Russia is losing its leverage. Therefore, the collapse of al-Assad’s regime could lead Türkiye to adopt a different stance towards Russia in several scenarios, including Libya, the Black Sea, and, of course, Ukraine.”

The repatriation of Syrian refugees offers both benefits and challenges for Jordan
“During the early stages of the Syrian civil war, Jordan supported opposition forces in Syria but later sought to normalise relations with the al-Assad regime, though ties remained tense due to drug trafficking concerns. Following Assad’s fall, Jordan prioritises stability, border security, and preventing extremist resurgence while preparing for potential governance collapse and another refugee wave. Beyond immediate security concerns, Jordan has a strategic interest in a stable and functional post-conflict Syria. Stability in Syria could create opportunities for trade, investment, and Jordanian participation in reconstruction efforts. Additionally, a stable Syria might encourage the return of over 600,000 Syrian refugees currently registered with UNHCR in Jordan. While their repatriation would alleviate pressure on Jordan’s public services, it would also have economic implications, as Syrian refugees contribute significantly to Jordan’s workforce and consumption and attract international aid tied to the crisis. The future political orientation of Syria’s government will also have significant spillover effects on Jordan. The ideological makeup of the new Syrian government could shape Jordan’s domestic politics, particularly through long-standing ties between political actors in both countries. For instance, whether Syria’s future government adopts a democratic system, is influenced by political Islamist groups, or takes another ideological direction, its trajectory could have a profound impact on Jordan’s internal political landscape and stability.”

Jordan’s priorities in Syria’s transition: refugees, border security and opposition groups
“Jordan had cautiously engaged in normalising relations with the al-Assad regime while emphasising the importance of Syria’s stability for regional security. The Kingdom’s priorities in Syria’s political transition include addressing the challenges posed by hosting approximately 1,4 million Syrian refugees and securing its northern border against the trafficking of illicit weapons and drugs. Domestically, Jordan seeks to balance these external pressures with its internal stability, particularly managing Islamist and opposition groups amid growing popular frustration over Israeli violence against Palestinians. While reports indicate Jordan is coordinating with Israeli intelligence on the latest developments in Syria, it remains concerned about Israel’s recent escalations and territorial incursions in Syria. The Kingdom supports a transition that ensures Syria’s stability, aligning with its broader interest in a peaceful and secure northern neighbour.”

The regime’s fall in Syria is a chance for Lebanon to get rid of undue influence
“The collapse of the al-Assad regime will be consequential for Lebanon and its disparate political factions and actors. Today, Lebanon has a great opportunity to free itself of undue influence from al-Assad’s Syria and can start rebuilding its state institutions without interference. Hezbollah has lost a great reservoir of power and influence over Lebanese politics and thus is likely to be more ready to compromise on such issues as electing a new president or appointing a new cabinet. Opponents of Hezbollah also have an opportunity to advance their vision of a liberal and democratic state. The Lebanese government is happy to see that the more than a million Syrian refugees on its soil can return safely to their country. It has announced that it is reopening its embassy in Damascus, in order to conduct healthy bilateral relations with Syria under the new leadership.”

A successful democratic transition in Syria is beneficial also to Baghdad
“The Iraqi government watched anxiously as rebel forces made their way to Damascus. Some armed groups wanted to enter Syria and fight the rebels as they have done in the past when ISIS held a large swathe of territory in both Syria and Iraq. This time, however, no group got involved. Prime Minister Mohammed al-Sudani and other prominent leaders like Muqtada al-Sadr and former Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi believed that it was not worth fighting for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad when his closer allies Russia and Iran were not willing to fight either. As Syrians transition from Ba’athism, as Iraq once did, Iraqi leaders like al-Abadi have even proposed an initiative to support Syria both through relief efforts and politically, to back a successful democratic transition that would be in the interest of both states.”

Al-Assad’s fall is a strategic gain for Israel as it represents a major setback for Iran
“Like many other countries and stakeholders, Israel faces more questions than answers regarding the turn of events in Syria. From Israel’s perspective, al-Assad’s fall and Iran’s loss of a major proxy – along with an important component of its land bridge to the Mediterranean – are welcomed developments. However, several concerns weigh heavily on Israel: has al-Jawlani truly abandoned his Jihadi ideology? Will Syria stabilise as a unified state or fragment further? Could Jihadi groups entrench themselves along Israel’s border? And could such groups get access to chemical or other strategic weapons abandoned by al-Assad’s forces? With these concerns in mind, Israel decided to capture strategic terrain in the Syrian Golan Heights and destroy strategic weapon systems to prevent their fall into the wrong hands. Israel has stated, however, that this is a temporary measure. Once stability is restored in Syria and a regime with no hostile intentions against Israel is established in Damascus, Israel intends to withdraw from the newly captured terrain.”

It is in Israel’s interest to combine military actions with diplomatic initiatives in Syria
“After over a year of fighting on multiple fronts, Israel is concerned that the unrest in Syria could spill over into its territory. In response, it has taken preemptive measures, including intensifying aerial strikes to target strategic weapons and prevent them from falling into hostile hands. Additionally, Israel has seized control of a demilitarised buffer zone established under the 1974 ceasefire agreement. Israel emphasises that this move is temporary and solely aimed at securing its borders, maintaining stability, and ensuring the integrity of the buffer zone. Despite significant doubts regarding the genuine intentions and enforcement capabilities of HTS leadership, Israel must adopt a strategic approach that combines military actions with diplomatic initiatives. This includes fostering dialogue and contact with constructive regional and local elements on the ground to mitigate risks.”

Israel could further reshape the regional balance of power in its favour
“Israel views the current situation in Syria as an opportunity to further reshape the regional balance of power in its favour and continue to weaken the Iranian-backed Axis of Resistance. The primary objective in the near term in Syria is to maintain its military deterrent, moving to target emerging strategic threats – such as destroying the Syrian military’s arsenal and occupying the demilitarised zone in the Golan – to prevent extremists from acquiring strategic weapons or posing a threat to Israel on the border. At the same time, Israel will pursue a soft approach, providing humanitarian assistance and aid to local actors it has worked with in the past and to those it seeks to build relationships with in the future. There are inherent risks but while wary, Israel hopes for a positive outcome for Syria’s future.”

While the UAE is concerned with the new administration’s identity, overall, the GCC countries seek a stable and inclusive transition in Syria
“Before the collapse of the al-Assad regime, some GCC countries, notably the UAE, and Saudi Arabia, made efforts to reintegrate Damascus into the Arab fold, signalling a shift in their diplomatic stance. While Oman maintained its diplomatic ties with the regime throughout the conflict, Qatar consistently supported the Syrian people, emphasizing the importance of their legitimate aspirations for freedom and justice. Following the toppling of al-Assad, there seemed to be an uncoordinated yet almost unified stance from the GCC countries. They expressed support for the fall of the regime while highlighting concerns about Syria’s political transition. They acknowledged the positive steps taken by opposition forces – the new administration – and the legitimate aspirations of the Syrian people for freedom and justice. However, they emphasised the need to preserve Syria’s unity, sovereignty, and state institutions to avoid chaos. Humanitarian concerns are paramount, with calls to protect civilians. Additionally, Oman advocated for national reconciliation, urging dialogue among all parties, while some former UAE officials, such as Anwar Gargash, expressed concerns regarding the identity of the new administration in Syria, calling for cautious optimism. Overall, GCC countries seek a stable and inclusive transition that ensures security and supports the Syrian people’s aspirations.”