In the Middle East, Syria has long been regarded as a focal point of geopolitical competition among many countries, particularly major powers. As a result, the rapid collapse of President Assad’s government has created a geopolitical upheaval with profound consequences for regional and global security. 

Amidst the ongoing Russia - Ukraine conflict and escalating tensions in the Middle East, on 27 November 2024, the Syrian opposition - led primarily by the Islamist group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham - launched a large-scale surprise offensive on areas under the control of the Syrian government. After more than ten days of fighting, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham’s leader, Muhammad al-Julani, declared the downfall of President Assad’s government. However, the opposition forces had not taken immediate control of government institutions yet, instead opting to wait until Prime Minister Muhammad Ghazi Al-Jalali officially handed over power peacefully to a transitional government. The collapse of President Assad’s government can be seen as a political earthquake, sending shockwaves throughout the region and the world. It marks the fall of a regime and ushers in a new phase of geopolitical competition among major powers.

Opposition forces take control of the capital city of Damascus (photo: Getty images)

Reasons for the collapse of President Assad’s government

President Bashar al-Assad’s government had previously withstood the pressures of political upheaval during the “Arab Spring” and successfully waged a fierce counterterrorism campaign from 2011 to 2017. However, it quickly fell under the offensive of the opposition force. According to analysts, this collapse was driven by both internal and external factors. 

Regarding internal factors, despite receiving support from Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah to defeat terrorist groups in 2017, Assad’s government only controlled about 65% of Syrian territory and refused to engage in dialogue with opposition forces, such as Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, the Syrian National Army, and the Syrian Democratic Forces. These groups controlled vast areas in the northeast of the country and sought to establish a national unity government in line with United Nations Security Council resolutions. Furthermore, President Assad was slow to conduct necessary reforms to integrate opposition factions into the state administration and to form a government representing all political and religious groups in Syria. Economic difficulties also hindered the development of the Syrian military, which received little attention from Damascus. Additionally, the army lacked the motivation to fight due to unclear political objectives. These factors contributed to the rapid surrender of Syrian forces under the pressure of opposition groups, led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham.

With reference to external factors, analysts believe that the fall of the Damascus government was also driven by several external factors as follows.

First, the long-standing strategy of the US for regime change in Syria. The objective of ousting President Assad has been a consistent strategic priority for the United States. In 2001, shortly after taking office, US President George W. Bush introduced the “Great Middle East Project”, with Syria as a focal point. The plan aimed to use military force to “promote democracy” and secure control over a geopolitical corridor stretching from Afghanistan to Central Asia, the Balkans, North Africa, and the Middle East - ultimately establishing dominance over the entire Eurasian continent. However, this strategy initially faltered when Bush initiated the invasions of Afghanistan (2001) and Iraq (2003). By 2009, President Barack Obama shifted US strategy away from direct military intervention to a priority for using “soft power” in the Middle East. In line with this approach, from 2011 onwards, the US played a key role in triggering political upheavals across the region through the “Arab Spring”. This wave of uprisings led to the rapid overthrow of governments across North Africa and the Middle East. In Libya, NATO’s military intervention resulted in the downfall of President Muammar Gaddafi. Following the Libyan conflict, US Senator John McCain declared that the same scenario would unfold in Syria. Analysts also agreed that the Arab Spring was a method used by the US to remove Assad’s government and install a regime in Damascus that would align with Washington’s interests in the region. As a result, from 2011 to 2024, the US and the collective West imposed severe economic sanctions aimed at crippling Syria’s economy. Additionally, Washington maintained a military presence in Syria under the pretext of “counterterrorism”.

Second, the declining influence of Russia and Iran in Syria. After assisting Syria in defeating terrorist forces in 2017, Russia and Iran played a crucial role in Damascus’s political process. However, their influence has recently diminished due to shifting geopolitical dynamics. Russia has been fully engaged in its “special military operation” in Ukraine, while groups allied with Iran, such as Hezbollah and Hamas, have been weakened by prolonged conflicts with Israel. Consequently, when opposition forces launched their offensive against Assad’s supporters, Russia was only able to provide limited assistance for the Syrian military with a relatively small air force contingent stationed at the Hmeimim Air Base.

Third, Syria as the “Second Front” in the Russia - Ukraine conflict. According to analysts, as the Russia - Ukraine conflict intensifies, Syria has become a “second front” where the US and Ukraine have sought to stretch Russia’s military resources. By forcing Moscow to divert attention and resources to Syria, they aimed to ease the pressure of Russian offensives on the Ukrainian battlefield. To this end, the US and Ukraine provided military and logistics support for Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, enabling the group to overthrow President Assad’s government.

Impacts on regional and global security

The rapid collapse of President Assad’s government has been likened to a political earthquake, with significant implications for regional and global security. First and foremost, this event may have major impacts on counterterrorism efforts. Since the inception of its counterterrorism campaign in Syria on 30 September 2015, Russia has carried out approximately 92,000 airstrikes, eliminating 96,000 terrorist targets. These include over 53,000 terrorist groups, 970 training camps, 6,769 arms and ammunition depots, and 184 oil extraction facilities. By 6 December 2017, Moscow declared that terrorist forces in Syria had been largely defeated. From that point onwards, the Syrian Army, with support from Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah, continued to eliminate remaining militant factions, forcing them to retreat to their last stronghold in Idlib, northwestern Syria. 

However, following this political upheaval, terrorist activities could become more complex due to Russia’s diminished influence in the Middle East. To adapt to the new geopolitical reality, Moscow has expressed readiness to engage in dialogue with opposition forces in Syria, including Hayat Tahrir al-Sham - the group it previously classified as a terrorist organisation. In a significant shift, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham has also altered its stance on Russia. According to its leader, Abu Mohammed al-Julani, Syria’s new government is open to establishing relations with Moscow if Russia demonstrates goodwill in fostering ties. In response, on 10 December 2024, the Russian State Duma passed a resolution removing Hayat Tahrir al-Sham from its list of terrorist organisations. Currently, Russia and Hayat Tahrir al-Sham are in discussions regarding security guarantees for Russian diplomatic mission, the safety of Russian citizens, and the continued operation of Russia’s two military bases in Syria.

In addition to maintaining regular contact with Hayat Tahrir al-Sham and other opposition forces, Washington continues to expand its military presence in Syria. According to Deputy National Security Advisor John Feiner, following the collapse of President Assad’s government, US troops will remain in Syria under the pretext of “counterterrorism”. Many analysts believe that the US’s true objective in maintaining a long-term military presence is to weaken the influence of Russia, Iran, and China in the Middle East. In other words, Washington seeks to dismantle the strategic triangle of Moscow, Beijing, and Tehran. This is particularly significant given that both Russia and China had previously signed 20-year strategic partnership agreements with Iran.

From another perspective, after the collapse of President Assad’s government, regional security is at risk of increasing instability as Turkey begins implementing its policy of eliminating Kurdish forces present in Syrian territory - forces that Ankara considers a “terrorist organisation.” Meanwhile, Israel - a close ally with its consistent assistance for the US in overthrowing President Assad’s government and implementing the “Great Middle East Project” - immediately deployed its troops to seize the Golan Heights, aiming for permanent control over the area as part of its broader objective to establish a greater Jewish state. As of 10 December 2024, the Israeli military had conducted approximately 350 airstrikes, destroying numerous Syrian defence industry facilities, air defence systems, and weaponry and equipment, citing the rationale of preventing these assets from falling into the hands of extremist Islamic groups linked to the terrorist organisation Al-Qaeda. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also declared that the Tel Aviv government seeks to establish stable relations with the new government in Syria, provided that it does not accept Iran’s influence and does not allow Iran to transport weapons to Hezbollah forces.

The international community holds that the collapse of President Assad’s government has “severed” a crucial link and represents a significant loss for the “Axis of Resistance” in general, for Iran in particular. Tehran now has to wait and withdraw both its armed forces and citizens from Syria, given that no organisation can guarantee their safety. In a speech to the public, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei affirmed that the US and Israel had planned to remove President Assad’s government while also implying that Turkey played a key role in the Syrian upheaval. At present, Iran is trying to reach an agreement with the new government in Damascus. Iranian officials have stated that they are willing to negotiate with opposition forces, provided they respect Tehran’s principles and do not allow Israel to expand its attacks. Previously, an Iranian television channel reported that Iran had renamed the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham organisation as a “paramilitary force” and no longer referred to Hayat Tahrir al-Sham as a “terrorist organisation”.

According to scholars, the Syrian state under President Assad was built on the foundation of Arab nationalist ideology, as reflected in the country’s official name - the Syrian Arab Republic. Syria is also home to Kurdish, Turkish, Armenian, and many other ethnic communities. After Hayat Tahrir al-Sham came to power, it is possible that the organisation will establish an Islamic Republic in Syria to accommodate the interests of various ethnic groups. At present, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham is maintaining the existing government structure from President Assad’s era as it gradually builds a new administration. However, due to the geopolitical competition among multiple political actors both within and outside the region, Syria will likely experience a prolonged period of instability before achieving sustainable development. The international community hopes that, regardless of the governing regime or the influence of political forces, Syria’s political crisis will soon come to an end, allowing its people to live in peace, stability, and comprehensive development.

THUY DUONG - VU TRANG