You will shortly be re-directed to the publisher's website
Since the overthrow of the old regime, the new Damascus government has seen bloody sectarian violence and an economy in ruins
It has been one hundred days since Ahmed Ash-Sharaa came to power, yet the hopes of his supporters for a swift establishment of peace in Syria have not been realized. The country continues to face serious challenges: a significant portion of Western sanctions remain in place, while ethno-sectarian divisions still fracture society, sometimes escalating into open armed clashes.
The new leadership is attempting to pursue a policy of reconciliation, seeking to start anew and leave past grievances behind. However, the process of settlement is complex and ambiguous—the deep-rooted contradictions accumulated over years of conflict prevent an immediate restoration of trust and stability. Despite declared reforms and diplomatic initiatives, Syrian society remains polarized, and external players continue to influence the internal situation.
Nevertheless, the country’s leadership is not giving up on its efforts toward stabilization and recovery, even as it encounters numerous obstacles. Whether the new political course will lead to a long-awaited peace remains to be seen. For now, we will review what has transpired during these 100 days and how it might impact Syria’s future.
Unity is the key to a better future
One of the key points of the new government’s domestic policy is national reconciliation, which is essential for legitimizing Ash-Sharaa’s authority and that of his supporters among the broader population. Initially, it was believed that the greatest difficulties would arise with the pro-Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), due to their anti-Turkish stance.
Late in the evening on March 10, the new Syrian authorities and the Kurdish administration controlling the country’s northeastern territories reached an agreement on the gradual integration of all Kurdish civilian and military structures into Syria’s national institutions. The document was signed by interim Syrian President Ahmed Ash-Sharaa and the commander of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), Mazloum Abdi.
According to the terms of the agreement, published by Ash-Sharaa on X, by the end of the year, the SDF will transfer control of border crossings with Turkey and Iran, airports, oil fields, and prisons to the Syrian government. In return, the Kurds will receive constitutional guarantees, including the right to use their language in education and the possibility for displaced persons to return to their homes. The Kurds will also be granted full participation in Syria’s political life, independent of their sectarian affiliation. Additionally, the SDF has pledged to support Damascus in its fight against supporters of the former regime of Bashar Assad and other threats to the country’s security and territorial integrity.
Abdi stated that the signed document aims to create conditions for a better future for the Syrian people, protect their rights, and achieve peace. However, he later emphasized that the mechanisms and timeline for implementing all provisions of the agreement still need to be clarified. He also added that Syria will have a unified army, capital, and national flag, and promised to expel all foreign formations within the SDF from the country. This likely implies the exclusion of fighters from the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), whose presence Turkey cites as justification for its military operations in Syria.
A representative of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), Farhad Shami, emphasized the preliminary nature of the document, clarifying that the agreement was reached with US mediation and does not imply the immediate deployment of Syrian government forces into Kurdish areas or the transfer of oil facilities and prisons holding ISIS members.
Experts believe that the US aims to solidify Kurdish autonomy in Syria to use it as leverage over both Damascus and neighboring Turkey. Additionally, Washington is reportedly considering a complete withdrawal of its military forces from Syria in the near future, shifting responsibility for its regional interests to Kurdish forces.
The signing of the agreement coincided with the Syrian authorities’ announcement of the completion of a major military operation against Alawite insurgents in the country’s northwest. This event has become the bloodiest conflict since the overthrow of Bashar Assad in December 2024.
Analysts stress that the future of Kurdish integration depends on numerous external and internal factors. Damascus is seeking dialogue with the SDF due to threats from Israel and overall instability in the country, while the Kurds are compelled to negotiate with the Syrian government under pressure from Turkey and the shifting situation surrounding the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), particularly following PKK leader Abdullah Öcalan’s call to end armed struggle.
The situation in As-Suwayda province, predominantly inhabited by Druze, is also emerging as a major challenge for Damascus. Despite the formal loyalty of moderate forces to the central government, the increasing fragmentation of local armed groups and the growing involvement of external players is creating conditions for regional destabilization.
The internal dynamics in As-Suwayda remain complex. The so-called “moderate bloc” retains the greatest influence, consisting of religious leader Sheikh al-Aql Hikmat al-Hijri and several local armed factions, including the “Mountain Brigade,”“Men of Dignity,” and “Sheikh al-Karama Forces.” The primary goal of these groups is to preserve Syria’s territorial unity, support negotiations with Damascus, and implement UN Security Council Resolution 2254, which outlines political reforms and the potential federalization of the country.
However, despite the dominant position of the moderate wing, radical groups have recently gained strength. The greatest concern arises from the emergence of a new player in December 2024 – the “Military Council,” led by Tariq Ash-Shufi. This organization, backed by external actors, advocates for the autonomy of the province, posing a threat to its integration into a unified Syrian state.
The formation of the “Military Council” has been accompanied by increasing foreign interference. According to various reports, the group maintains ties with Israel and receives support from American instructors stationed at the Al-Tanf base. This backing suggests the implementation of a controlled crisis strategy aimed at weakening Damascus and redistributing control over Syria’s southern regions.
Israel, leveraging the ethno-religious factor, seeks to establish a security zone along the Syrian border by promoting the idea of Druze autonomy and corresponding narratives in the media. There is a theory that this plan aligns with a broader strategy known as the “David Corridor.” The first phase of this strategy involves the creation of a buffer zone in the Daraa and Quneitra provinces, where the Druze could serve as allies of Israel. The second phase envisions expanding this corridor toward Iraq, thereby creating a barrier between Syria and the region’s Shiite groups.
One of the key instruments of external influence has been a massive information campaign aimed at fueling conflicts within the Druze community and between the Druze and the central government. In particular, rumors are being spread about alleged widespread support for Israel among the Druze population, as well as the possible participation of Druze forces in an IDF military operation against Damascus. These narratives have a dual effect: on one hand, they undermine trust in the moderate bloc within the province, and on the other, they provoke hostility from Syrian radical groups.
The current dynamics in As-Suwayda indicate significant risks to Syria’s territorial integrity. If moderate Druze forces fail to maintain control over the situation and radical influence continues to grow, it could lead to the de facto establishment of an autonomous zone under external influence. In turn, this would weaken the central government’s position, increase foreign interference, and set a precedent for further fragmentation of the Syrian state.
Given the current situation, Damascus must not only strengthen cooperation with moderate forces but also intensify its informational and diplomatic efforts to counter external influence. Special attention must be given to countering destabilizing media campaigns aimed at deepening divisions within Syrian society. Otherwise, the Druze issue could become a trigger for another escalation of the conflict, with far-reaching geopolitical consequences.
In early March, Syria witnessed tragic events linked to an Alawite uprising in the coastal provinces of Latakia and Tartus. The Alawites, who make up about 12% of the country’s population, historically supported the regime of Bashar Assad, who was overthrown in December 2024. The rise to power of Islamist elements exacerbated sectarian tensions, leading to armed clashes.
On March 6, 2025, an Alawite uprising erupted against the new authorities. The revolt was triggered by repression and violence from armed groups supporting the new government. In response, the central government deployed additional forces to suppress the rebellion. In the days that followed, pro-government forces reportedly carried out mass executions and targeted killings, resulting in the deaths of over a thousand people.
The clashes resulted in mass civilian casualties. Reports indicate that hundreds of Alawites, including women and children, were killed in Latakia province. Many residents, fleeing the violence, sought refuge at the Russian airbase in Hmeimim.
Leaders of the Alawite community turned to the international community for help. On March 10, they sent a letter to Israeli officials, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, pleading to be “saved” from persecution by the new Syrian authorities.
These events have further exacerbated the already complex situation in Syria, highlighting the country’s deep religious and ethnic divisions. The international community has expressed concern over the potential for further conflict escalation and has called for a peaceful resolution.
Analyzing the situation, it is evident that the suppression of the Alawite uprising by the new Syrian authorities could lead to further radicalization and a deepening sectarian divide. The absence of dialogue and harsh repression against minorities may contribute to the rise of extremism and regional destabilization. The international community must intensify diplomatic efforts to prevent further violence and protect the rights of all ethnic and religious groups in Syria.
A functioning economy is essential
Amid a deep economic crisis and political instability, Syria is taking steps toward large-scale economic reforms. President Ahmed Sharaa and his team have developed a strategic 10-year plan aimed at moving away from a socialist model and transitioning toward a more open market economy. This plan includes an urgent recovery phase and long-term structural changes, focusing on modernizing infrastructure, the banking sector, communications, and road networks to create a favorable environment for investors.
The key objectives of the reforms include restructuring state institutions and attracting foreign capital, which may involve the partial privatization of state-owned enterprises. However, the country faces massive destruction caused by years of war and severe financial constraints. According to the World Bank and the United Nations, the cost of reconstruction could reach $300 billion – far exceeding the country’s pre-war GDP of $60 billion in 2010. By 2024, Syria’s GDP had shrunk to less than $6 billion, underscoring the scale of the economic decline.
In this context, easing or lifting international sanctions becomes a critically important factor for economic recovery. In recent months, progress has been observed in this direction. The European Union has suspended sanctions in the banking, energy, and transport sectors, aiming to support economic recovery and facilitate political reforms. The unfreezing of the Syrian Central Bank’s economic resources and the removal of certain banks from the sanctions list could help attract investment and improve the country’s financial stability.
The US has also taken steps to ease its sanctions regime. On January 6, 2025, the US Treasury Department announced a temporary six-month relaxation of certain sanctions against Syria. This includes allowing transactions with Syrian state institutions initiated after December 8, 2024, as well as operations related to the supply of oil, natural gas, and electricity within Syria. Additionally, personal money transfers have been permitted to help alleviate the humanitarian situation in the country.
These measures are aimed at supporting the Syrian people without fully lifting broader sanctions targeting the new government in Damascus. The US administration plans to proceed cautiously, refraining from a complete sanctions rollback until the policies of the new authorities become clearer. European countries share a similar stance, advocating for a careful approach before fully lifting sanctions.
The proposed reforms could bring significant changes to the structure of Syria’s economy. Transitioning to market mechanisms, privatizing unprofitable state enterprises, and creating a favorable investment climate open opportunities for capital inflows, which are crucial for the country’s recovery. However, the success of this approach will depend on political stability, investor confidence, and the government’s ability to implement reforms effectively. Otherwise, there is a risk of Syria’s economy turning into a chaotic, oligarchic system dominated by narrow elite groups, as has happened in some post-socialist countries.
The EU’s decision to suspend sanctions against Syria in key economic sectors indicates a gradual reassessment of EU policy toward the country. The primary motivation is to support economic recovery and facilitate political reforms. The easing of sanctions will also help simplify trade operations, which is particularly important amid Syria’s ongoing economic crisis.
The EU’s decision-making is linked to negotiations with the new Syrian authorities, as the West pressures them to reduce their level of engagement with Russia. This EU move coincides with a visit by a Russian delegation to Damascus and phone talks between the Russian and Syrian presidents, highlighting European efforts to weaken Moscow’s influence in the region. In practice, by easing sanctions, Brussels seeks to use economic incentives as a tool for political bargaining, attempting to prevent the full restoration of dialogue between Russia and Syria and to push Damascus toward concessions in favor of the West.
Despite these positive shifts, many experts and international organizations argue that Syria’s full recovery requires the complete lifting of sanctions. They point out that while partial easing is a step in the right direction, it is insufficient to ensure sustainable economic growth and improved living conditions. Sanctions continue to negatively impact key sectors of the economy, obstructing access to international financial markets and investment.
Syria’s future largely depends on the successful implementation of economic reforms and the level of support from the international community. Although the easing of sanctions is temporary, it provides an opportunity to begin the recovery process and attract investment. However, achieving long-term stability and prosperity will require coordinated efforts both domestically and internationally to support Syria’s political and economic transformation.
The new temporary constitution
Earlier this month, Ahmed al-Sharaa signed a temporary constitution designed for a five-year period. This document marks a significant step toward political transformation in the country following the overthrow of the Assad regime. The drafting of the temporary constitution took into account the new political realities emerging in Syria after the change of power. One of the key objectives of this document is to solidify political reform and create conditions for elections, which should facilitate the gradual democratization of the country. The new constitution, developed by an expert commission, consists of 44 articles and establishes Islamic law as the primary source of legislation while preserving provisions on freedom of opinion and expression.
A key element of the temporary constitution is the establishment of the People’s Committee, which will function as a temporary parliament. This body is intended to ensure a balance between the legislative, executive, and judicial branches, thereby contributing to the stability of the legal system and the orderly interaction of state institutions. The constitution emphasizes the need to develop an independent judiciary, guaranteeing its protection from interference by the executive branch. Furthermore, the document provides for elections within five years, demonstrating a commitment to democratic transformation and preventing the monopolization of power.
However, not all political forces in the country have supported the new constitution. The Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Council (SDC), the political wing of the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces, rejected the constitutional declaration. The SDC argues that the document does not adequately protect Syria’s diverse communities and could lead to the reproduction of authoritarianism. They insist on a fair, decentralized distribution of power and national consensus in the constitution’s development. These disagreements highlight the complexity of the political process in Syria and the need to consider the interests of various ethnic and religious groups.
The international community has reacted cautiously to the adoption of the temporary constitution. Despite calls from regional governments to reconsider sanctions due to economic instability, many countries remain skeptical about the new authorities’ ability to ensure inclusivity and protect the rights of all ethnic and religious groups. Against this backdrop, the West is considering the possibility of easing economic pressure on Syria but demands that Damascus adheres to democratic principles and human rights. In recent months, there has been an increase in diplomatic contacts between the Syrian leadership and EU countries, indicating attempts to find compromise solutions regarding sanctions policy.
The temporary constitution also addresses military reform, emphasizing the army’s role as a professional national institution operating within the framework of the law. The introduction of articles prohibiting the existence of armed groups outside military control aims to strengthen state oversight of the country’s security system. This is particularly important in the context of unifying various armed factions and preventing the fragmentation of security forces. Additionally, Syria’s interim authorities have announced plans to gradually demilitarize civilian areas, which should reduce violence and facilitate the return of refugees.
The economic situation in Syria remains extremely difficult. War and sanctions have severely damaged the Syrian economy, necessitating urgent measures to restore infrastructure, the banking sector, and industrial production. In this context, the temporary constitution allows for partial privatization of state enterprises and foreign investments. However, a lack of trust among potential international partners and financial constraints all create significant obstacles to implementing these initiatives. In recent weeks, negotiations have been underway with international financial institutions to secure credit lines for economic recovery, but progress has been slow due to the country’s instability.
The transitional period outlined in the temporary constitution represents a complex political process that will require tremendous efforts from the Syrian authorities. The main challenges – ensuring security, rebuilding the economy, and attracting foreign investments – will remain the focus in the coming years. Despite its controversial provisions, the temporary constitution represents an attempt to establish a legal framework for Syria’s future political system. However, its successful implementation will depend on the authorities’ ability to consider the interests of all parties and achieve national consensus.
The situation in Syria remains challenging. In the first 100 days, the new authorities have already seen bloodshed and are struggling to achieve national unity. The years-long internal conflict has not been resolved, and events could escalate into full-scale war if the new government fails to demonstrate pragmatism and a willingness to negotiate. Additionally, improving the economic well-being of the population and securing the support of international players – such as Russia, the US, China, and other countries interested in regional stabilization – are crucial. The response of the international community and internal political developments in the coming months will determine how effective these reforms will be in restoring peace and stability in the country.
