The Fall Of Assad Could Reshape Syria And The Middle East

The fall of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad marks a dramatic shift in the region, but what comes next for Syria and the Middle East is deeply uncertain. While Assad’s brutal dictatorship may be gone, the potential outcomes range from instability to outright disaster.

For over a decade, Assad clung to power during a bloody civil war, leaving his nation fractured and vulnerable. Now, with terror groups such as Ha’yat Tehrir al-Sham (HTS) vying for control, Syria’s future remains dire. HTS, a U.S.-designated terror organization, led the coalition responsible for Assad’s ouster, raising concerns about the country’s direction under its leader, Ahmed al-Sharaa, a man with ties to al-Qaeda and a $10 million bounty on his head.

Syria’s instability isn’t new. Its creation as a nation traces back to the division of imperial territories by Britain and France after World War I. According to Dr. Paul Rahe, a history professor at Hillsdale College, this artificial construction left Syria prone to coups and authoritarian rule, with Assad’s family maintaining control for over 50 years through violent and dictatorial means.

Even with Assad gone, Rahe suggests that the chaos will likely persist. “The difficulties in bringing order to Syria other than the kind of order that Assad imposed...are very, very great,” he said.

Assad’s fall strikes a blow to two of his key backers, Russia and Iran, who have relied on Syria to extend their regional influence. Russia risks losing its Tartus naval base and Khmeimim airbase, while Iran’s decades-long investment in Syrian infrastructure to support its terror proxies such as Hezbollah may be dismantled. Both nations have already begun scaling back their presence, signaling a shift in the balance of power.

This development benefits U.S. interests. Assad’s regime was a pawn of Tehran, and his downfall weakens Iran’s grip on the region. However, if Syria transitions into a radical Islamist state, new challenges could arise for Israel and the West.

Turkey, under the autocratic leadership of President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, stands to wield significant influence over Syria’s future. HTS leader Ahmed al-Sharaa has close ties to Erdoğan, making Turkey a key player in determining Syria’s next steps. However, Turkey’s volatile relationship with Israel complicates matters.

“At times, the Erdogan government has cooperated very closely with the Israelis. At other times, it has been strongly hostile,” Rahe noted, highlighting the uncertainty surrounding Turkey’s role in the region.

With roughly 1,000 American troops still in Syria, the Biden administration has resumed limited interventions, including airstrikes against Islamic State targets. Yet, this approach starkly contrasts with President-elect Donald Trump’s stance. Trump recently called for the U.S. to disengage from Syria entirely, labeling the situation “not our fight.”

The debate over U.S. involvement raises critical questions. Should America assert its influence in Syria’s transition, or should it adopt a wait-and-see approach? According to Rahe, intervention would be a mistake.

“It’s too easy for Americans to exaggerate American agency, our capacity to fix things,” he said. “The prudent thing to do is to watch and wait.”

For now, Syria’s future remains in flux, with regional powers jockeying for influence and the West facing tough decisions. Assad’s fall may weaken hostile regimes, but it also opens the door to new uncertainties in a region already rife with instability.

Share this article or subscribe to our newsletter for the latest updates on global events.