This article examines the future of Syria following the ousting of Bashar Assad, comparing it to historical events in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Lebanon. The potential for a unified government that promotes equal citizenship and avoids sectarian divisions is discussed, highlighting optimism for a stable political structure based on peaceful coexistence among diverse ethnic and religious groups in Syria.
The end of the 61-year rule of the Baath regime has opened the door for significant political change in Syria following the recent overthrow of Bashar Assad’s regime by the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) opposition forces on December 8, resulting in their control over Damascus. This transition has ignited fervent debates regarding Syria’s future direction, with some believing that a brighter era lies ahead for its citizens. In contrast, skepticism persists amongst experts who draw upon parallels with past conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Lebanon to assess potential hurdles Syria might face as it pursues reconstruction and governance.
In contemplating Syria’s future, we must look towards historical examples, notably Afghanistan. After the Soviet withdrawal, various factions in Afghanistan battled for power with disastrous consequences, eventually leading to the Taliban’s resurgence after two decades of foreign intervention. Unlike that scenario, recent developments in Syria suggest the formation of a unified government is prioritized, as evidenced by the new administration’s commitment to integrating opposition forces under a consolidated Defense Ministry. This preparatory measure aims to prevent historical missteps evidenced in Afghanistan, including a repeated cycle of factionalism and violence.
Another illustration to bear in mind is Iraq’s tumultuous path post-Saddam Hussein, where political fragmentation rooted deeply in sectarian divisions created instability and foreign dependencies. The experience of Iraq underscores the gravity of establishing a cohesive government, yet Syria’s circumstances provide a contrasting backdrop—namely, the opposition’s rise was predominantly internally driven rather than by external powers, as seen in Iraq. Furthermore, Turkey’s support for Syria advocates for territorial integrity without imposing sectarian policies, facilitating an inclusive governance structure.
The Lebanese model, entrenched in sectarian quotas and political fragmentation, presents additional cautionary lessons. Lebanon’s constitutional design has been increasingly dysfunctional due to changing demographics that violate the political framework, leading to ongoing instability. This model appears incompatible with Syria’s rich history of communal coexistence that fosters unity over division. Evidence shows that the Syrian populace, particularly in historical hubs like Aleppo, has thrived on harmonious relations across diverse ethnic and religious identities.
The ideal scenario for Syria involves the establishment of a centralized government promoting equal citizenship devoid of ethnic or religious quotas. This framework not only aligns with the Syrian tradition of coexistence but also addresses historic injustices—most notably the systematic denial of citizenship to many Kurds under the previous regime. In the absence of external interference, there is optimism that the Syrian people will forge a unified approach to governance that asserts their national sovereignty. Ultimately, establishing an inclusive constitution integrating fundamental principles of citizenship and civil rights holds the key to Syria’s enduring peace and stability.
The article discusses the potential future of Syria after the recent overthrow of the Bashar Assad regime by opposition forces, led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham. It evaluates possible outcomes by drawing comparisons with the past experiences of Afghanistan, Iraq, and Lebanon, emphasizing the importance of learning from historical precedents to avoid similar pitfalls.
In conclusion, the future of Syria is contingent upon the formation of a unified government that embraces equal citizenship and eschews sectarian divisions. Historical parallels drawn from Afghanistan, Iraq, and Lebanon illustrate the potential pitfalls of fragmented governance and external influences. By prioritizing inclusivity and harmonious coexistence, Syria can establish a resilient state structure, provided that foreign intervention remains minimal. This approach could facilitate a newfound stability and national sovereignty for the Syrian people.
Original Source: www.dailysabah.com
