Regimes that prioritize power over people will eventually crumble, no matter how long they hold on.

On December 8, 2024, millions of Syrians across cities and villages celebrated what many believed was an impossible dream—the end of Bashar al-Assad’s brutal regime. For over five decades, the Assad family ruled Syria with an iron fist. But to understand how this ruthless dynasty rose—and how it ultimately fell—we must rewind the clock to the early post-colonial years of Arab nationalism and military coups.

This analysis is based on the research of Nikolaos van Dam, former Dutch ambassador and Special Envoy for Syria, as outlined in his work for The Rights Forum. As a seasoned diplomat who served in Lebanon, Jordan, the Palestinian territories, Libya, Iraq, Egypt, Turkey, and beyond, van Dam’s insights provide a rare, first-hand account of Syria’s internal transformation over six decades.

The Birth of Ba’athist Idealism

In the late 1940s, a young Alawite military officer named Hafiz al-Assad joined the Arab Socialist Ba’th Party. The party’s platform—built on secular Arab nationalism and socialist ideals—promised equality among Arabs regardless of sect or religion. This secular vision, crafted in part by Michel ‘Aflaq, a Greek Orthodox Christian from Damascus, appealed strongly to religious minorities and economically disadvantaged rural populations.

For Alawites, Druze, Isma’ilis, and Christian Arabs—communities historically marginalized in Sunni-dominated political circles—Ba’thism offered both inclusion and upward mobility. But this idealism would soon be manipulated into a tool of power centralization and authoritarian control.

The 1963 Ba’thist Coup: From Ideals to Authoritarianism

Syria’s brief experiment with Arab unity reached its climax in 1958 when it merged with Egypt to form the United Arab Republic (UAR). But the union quickly disillusioned many Syrians. Under Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser, Syrian officials were reduced to subordinate roles, sparking resentment.

By 1961, the union collapsed following a coup staged by Syrian officers, leading to the brief “Separatist Period,” a return to parliamentary governance and conservative elites. However, in the background, socialist military factions, particularly from the Ba’th Party, were organizing for a comeback.

On March 8, 1963, Ba’thist officers seized power, marking the beginning of one-party rule. Political pluralism was dismantled, and only parties loyal to Ba’thist ideology were allowed under tight control. Syria’s multiparty democracy was officially dead.

The Rise of the Secret Military Committee

Ironically, many of the Ba’thist officers who masterminded the 1963 coup had been exiled to Egypt during the short-lived UAR period. There, they formed a clandestine “Military Committee” with one purpose: to take over Syria upon their return.

This committee was dominated by three Alawite officers—Muhammad ‘Umran, Salah Jadid, and Hafiz al-Assad. While other minorities such as the Druze, Isma’ilis, and Sunnis were represented, none held top leadership roles. What began as a coalition soon turned into a brutal contest for power.

Through successive purges, each rival was systematically removed until Hafiz al-Assad emerged as Syria’s uncontested ruler in 1970. The original Ba’thist vision of collective leadership was discarded in favor of personalized autocracy—ushering in what would become known as Asadism.

Asadism: The Cult of Personality

Under Hafiz al-Assad, a robust cult of personality developed. State media praised his every move, and over a hundred books were published in his honor. This phenomenon wasn’t unique to Syria; authoritarian regimes across the Arab world used leader-worship as a means to legitimize their rule.

What set Syria apart was the depth of sectarian entrenchment, particularly the favor shown to Assad’s Alawite sect. The military and civilian bureaucracy were filled with relatives and loyalists from his coastal hometown and surrounding villages.

Sectarian identity was not the regime’s stated ideology, but it became its operational strategy. Trust was reserved for those from Assad’s own background, feeding a system of clientelism, cronyism, and corruption.

A System Built on Loyalty, Not Merit

Following the 1963 coup, Assad and his allies purged the military of Sunni officers and replaced them with Alawites and other loyalists. This was not about ideology—it was about trust and control. The same pattern extended into civilian ministries, universities, and state-owned enterprises.

In his memoirs, prominent Ba’thist Sami al-Jundi described how rural villagers, many from Alawite and Druze regions, began flooding into Damascus. The linguistic marker “Qaf,” characteristic of mountain dialects, began dominating public discourse in government halls and tea shops alike.

Traditional Sunni elites, particularly urban merchants and landowners, were systematically replaced by newcomers from lower social strata. But while this shift appeared revolutionary, it merely exchanged one elite for another—this time bonded by kinship and loyalty rather than class or religious dominance.

Unequal Gains: Alawite Power, Rural Neglect

Despite Alawites’ dominance in government and military structures, the majority of Alawites in rural regions remained impoverished. This paradox highlighted the selective nature of regime patronage. Privilege was not granted on the basis of sect alone, but on one’s proximity to the power core—both geographically and personally.

This imbalance created growing resentment, not just among urban Sunnis but even among marginalized Alawite communities who felt betrayed by a system that bore their name but delivered no benefits.

The Final Years: Bashar’s Inheritance and Ruin

When Hafiz al-Assad died in 2000, his son Bashar—a British-educated ophthalmologist—was hastily installed as Syria’s president. Hopes for reform quickly evaporated. Bashar’s reign saw a doubling down on authoritarianism, culminating in a brutal crackdown on peaceful protests in 2011. What followed was a catastrophic civil war that fractured Syria into fiefdoms and killed over 500,000 people.

The war exposed the hollowness of the Ba’thist state. Military power was no longer sufficient to maintain legitimacy. Iran and Russia stepped in to preserve Assad’s grip, but at the cost of Syria’s sovereignty.

The End of the Asad Era

By late 2024, Assad’s isolation was complete. With dwindling Russian support, growing international sanctions, and internal dissent, the regime finally collapsed on December 8. What comes next remains uncertain, but Syrians have a rare opportunity to rebuild their nation from the ashes of dictatorship.

The fall of the Assad regime is more than a political event—it is the closing chapter of a failed 61-year experiment in authoritarian Arab nationalism, sectarian favoritism, and personal rule. The lesson is clear: regimes that prioritize power over people will eventually crumble, no matter how long they hold on.

Syria’s recovery is not just symbolic—it’s strategic. A stable, unified Syria is essential for regional security, refugee returns, and long-term economic integration.

The war in Syria may not be over on paper, but on the ground, the tide has clearly turned. Since the collapse of the Assad regime in December 2024, nearly 250,000 Syrian refugees in Turkey have returned home. This movement is not driven by propaganda or pressure, but by something far more powerful: the hope that Syria, at long last, is stabilizing.

That hope is grounded in real, visible change. The Damascus Stock Exchange has reopened, signaling a cautious but meaningful restart of the formal economy. Finance Minister Mohammed Yisr Barnieh called it a message to the world—that Syria is back in business.

The turning point came on May 13, when U.S. President Donald Trump, during a landmark visit to Riyadh, announced the lifting of sanctions on Syria. Ten days later, the U.S. Treasury issued General License 25, permitting transactions with Syria’s new transitional government, headed by President Ahmad Al-Sharaa. The EU swiftly followed with a coordinated suspension of its own sanctions regime. In less than two weeks, Syria went from pariah to partner in the eyes of global policymakers.

The momentum is not only diplomatic. Gulf states are stepping up. On Saturday, Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud, speaking from Damascus, announced a joint initiative with Qatar to help fund salaries for Syrian civil servants. These are the sorts of actions that turn ceasefires into recoveries.

And yet, despite these gains, Syria’s path forward still faces one last—and deeply entrenched—obstacle: the PKK-affiliated administration in northeast Syria, branded to the world as the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (AANES), and militarily represented by the PYD and SDF.

Let’s be candid. For years, Western governments, NGOs, and think tanks have celebrated the AANES as a “progressive” alternative in Syria. But the reality on the ground tells a much darker story. Despite controlling vast natural resources, receiving billions in foreign aid, and enjoying unprecedented U.S. military protection, the AANES has delivered little more than corruption, repression, and instability.

Entire Arab and Assyrian communities have been displaced under their watch. Basic services remain in disrepair. Youth conscription, political detentions, and even child recruitment are not allegations—they are documented practices. Many in Raqqa, Deir Ezzor, and Hasakah view the AANES not as a government but as an occupying structure—an extension of the PKK’s transnational project, not a legitimate representative of the Syrian people.

This is not just Syria’s internal issue. It’s a regional problem. The longer these entities maintain their grip, the harder it becomes to achieve a unified, sovereign Syrian state capable of rebuilding and reconciling.

To its credit, the transitional government in Damascus has not responded with vengeance. President Al-Sharaa has focused on restoring institutions, rebuilding national infrastructure, and pursuing a post-conflict political identity that moves beyond sectarianism. But these efforts will remain incomplete until all Syrian territories are returned to accountable, sovereign administration.

In this context, the reopening of the U.S. embassy in Damascus sends a powerful signal. Newly appointed American envoy Thomas Barrack—who also serves as the U.S. ambassador to Turkey—raised the American flag over the embassy for the first time since 2012. He praised Syria’s new leadership and openly discussed the prospect of peace between Syria and Israel—once a diplomatic impossibility. Barrack noted that the Caesar Act sanctions must now be repealed by Congress, describing President Trump as impatient with sanctions that obstruct reconstruction.

None of this should be mistaken for instant success. The Syrian state remains fragile. Public sector wages are still well below the cost of living. Corruption, while being addressed, is not yet defeated. And sectarian wounds—especially those left by clashes between pro-Assad remnants and local communities—will take time to heal.

But from my perspective as a European political analyst, this is the first time in years that Syria’s future feels negotiable rather than doomed.

To my Arab readers: Syria’s recovery is not just symbolic—it’s strategic. A stable, unified Syria is essential for regional security, refugee returns, and long-term economic integration.

To Western policymakers: the failed experiment of non-state actors ruling eastern Syria must end. It did not bring democracy. It brought dysfunction. The time has come to support a Syrian solution, not a Kurdish separatist detour funded by Western guilt and strategic confusion.

The Syrian war broke the country. But the outlines of recovery are finally emerging. The world has a choice: engage constructively—or prolong the suffering under the illusion of alternatives that have long since collapsed.

In a strong-worded speech, President Al-Shar’a reaffirmed his administration’s commitment to justice, national unity, and the rule of law, vowing to hold perpetrators accountable.

“We will not tolerate the remnants of the Assad regime who have attacked civilians, hospitals, security forces, and security centers”, President Al-Shar’a declared. “The only option left for those remnants is to surrender to the law immediately”.

The president’s remarks come at a crucial time as Syria seeks to rebuild from years of conflict and ensure accountability for past crimes. He stressed that justice will be served without leniency for individuals involved in civilian bloodshed, abuses of power, or corruption.

“No one will be above the law. Anyone whose hands are stained with the blood of Syrians will face justice”, he asserted.

President Al-Shar’a condemned any attempts to sow division or interfere in Syria’s internal affairs. He reiterated that Syria, with all its diverse communities, remains united and resilient against foreign intervention.

“We criminalize any call or appeal that seeks to interfere in the affairs of our country or incite discord or division”, he said. “Syria, with all its components, will remain united. We will not allow any party to undermine our national unity or disrupt civil peace”.

The president also pledged to engage with families from the Syrian coast to hear their concerns and testimonies regarding past violations, ensuring that justice is served for those affected by the conflict.

“Syria will remain resilient, and we will not allow foreign forces to divide our country”, he concluded.

In his post, Al-Amari stated, “The Syrian army is supplying food and aid to Alawite families. This reflects the strength of the Syrian army. Syria belongs to everyone, and there should be no distinction between Sunni and Alawite. What truly matters is being a Syrian who loves their country”.

The video has sparked conversations about inclusivity in aid distribution, with many advocating for a fair allocation of resources to all affected communities, regardless of sectarian identity. While some view the move as a step toward strengthening social cohesion, others stress the need for aid to reach all displaced and war-affected Syrians.

This development comes amid President Ahmad Al-Shar’a’s recent address, in which he reaffirmed his administration’s commitment to justice and national unity.

“We will not tolerate the remnants of the Assad regime who have attacked civilians, hospitals, security forces, and security centers. The only option left for those remnants is to surrender to the law immediately”, President Al-Shar’a declared.

He further emphasized that accountability will be enforced without leniency for those involved in harming civilians, abusing power, or exploiting authority for personal gain.

“No one will be above the law. Anyone whose hands are stained with the blood of Syrians will face justice”, he affirmed.

The president also reiterated his stance on national unity, condemning any attempts to incite division.

“We criminalize any call or appeal that seeks to interfere in the affairs of our country or incite discord or division. Syria, with all its components, will remain united. We will not allow any party to undermine our national unity or disrupt civil peace”.

With both the journalist’s report and the president’s statement, the discourse on Syria’s path forward remains central. Observers highlight that fostering reconciliation and ensuring aid reaches all communities without bias will be key factors in Syria’s long-term stability and recovery.

We Christians in Syria are with the new state, with the heroes who expelled the criminal Bashar al-Assad. We are fine and everything written on social media is a lie

Amid ongoing conflict in Syria, contradictory narratives have emerged regarding the fate of Christian communities and the broader geopolitical landscape. Recent statements from analysts and insiders challenge widely circulated claims of sectarian massacres and ethnic cleansing, instead pointing to a complex web of military operations, disinformation campaigns, and geopolitical realignments.

Syrian Christians and the New State

Syrian Christian Dr. Laila recently dispelled claims of Christian persecution in the ongoing conflict, writing, “We Christians in Syria are with the new state, with the heroes who expelled the criminal Bashar al-Assad. We are fine and everything written on social media is a lie.” This counters allegations that Christians are being systematically targeted in the conflict.

Similarly, Washington-based Capitol Institute analyst Michael Arizanti stated, “There has been no slaughter of Christians—in fact, most Christian communities stand with Damascus against Assad loyalists.” This contradicts widely shared social media reports suggesting mass atrocities against Christian minorities.

Ex-MI6 Spy Aimen Dean’s Detailed Analysis of Syria’s Geopolitical Shifts

Aimen Dean has written a detailed analysis of the ongoing conflict in Syria. This is what he believes:

1. The Role of Ahmad al-Shar’a (Abu Muhammad al-Jolani)
   • Dean argues that al-Shar’a, despite his past ties to Al-Qaeda in Iraq, has since shifted alliances, distancing himself from ISIS and collaborating with Western and Turkish intelligence in countering jihadist threats.
   • Since 2018, intelligence reports indicate that al-Shar’a provided crucial intelligence to Western agencies, including those of France and the United States, to combat ISIS.
   • Dean draws parallels between his own transformation and that of al-Shar’a, emphasizing the latter’s trajectory towards governance rather than ideological extremism.
2. The New Syrian Government vs. Assad’s Regime
   • Dean asserts that al-Shar’a’s administration offers a more viable future for Syria compared to Assad’s stagnant, socialist Arab nationalist rule.
   • Economically, regions under the new government—Idlib, Jisr al-Shughur, and Sarmada—demonstrate progress, in contrast to the economic decline of Damascus, Aleppo, Homs, and Hama.
   • He dismisses claims of an orchestrated ethnic cleansing campaign on the Syrian coast, instead describing military operations aimed at neutralizing remnants of Assad’s security forces.
3. Disinformation and Propaganda in the Syrian War
   • Dean warns that Iranian and Hezbollah-backed Assad loyalists are engaging in a coordinated disinformation campaign to frame the conflict as a sectarian genocide.
   • Many widely circulated atrocity videos are either fabrications or recycled footage from past conflicts, repurposed to manipulate international perceptions.
   • He stresses that while war crimes have occurred, the situation is far more complex than social media portrayals suggest.

A Call for Rational Analysis Over Emotional Reactions

Dean underscores that the Syrian conflict should be analyzed through a geopolitical lens rather than a sectarian one. He argues that Western audiences must avoid falling into the trap of propaganda designed to push Syria further into the Iranian-Russian-Chinese sphere of influence.

Rejecting accusations of jihadist sympathies, Dean states, “How could someone who opposed both Hamas and Hezbollah—a Sunni and a Shia militant group—be labeled as a jihadist sympathizer? My approach is based purely on geopolitical logic, not religious bias.” He urges the global community to support efforts aimed at stabilizing Syria and integrating it into Mediterranean and Gulf economic frameworks rather than allowing it to remain a battleground for foreign powers.

The narratives emerging from experts and insiders like Aimen Dean challenge the dominant portrayal of a sectarian war, instead highlighting the intricate geopolitical maneuvering at play. Moving forward, objective analysis and evidence-based reporting will be crucial in shaping an accurate understanding of Syria’s future.