The Post-Victory Phase of the Syrian Revolution: A Historical and Practical Analysis

Introduction:

Popular revolutions have historically been a driving force for overthrowing oppressive regimes, from the Maccabean revolt against the Seleucids in the 2nd century BCE to the Peasants’ Revolt in England, as well as the revolts of Ibn al-Ash’ath, Ibn al-Zubayr, and Al-Husayn in Islamic history. This extends to modern revolutions such as the French Revolution (1789), the Russian Revolution (1917), and the Arab Spring uprisings (2010–2011).

Despite differing contexts, these revolutions share the goal of toppling repressive regimes. However, their outcomes after victory vary significantly—some succeeded in establishing democratic states (like the American Revolution of 1776), while others resulted in chaos or new dictatorships (such as the Iranian Revolution of 1979).

Revolutionary Experiences:

Let’s take four examples of victorious revolutions:

1. The French Revolution (1789–1799)
2. Successes: Overthrowing the feudal system, Declaration of Human Rights.
3. Failures: Excessive violence (Reign of Terror), followed by Napoleon’s rise as a dictator.
4. Causes: Lack of a unified political vision, collapse of revolutionary alliances, and foreign interventions.
5. The Russian Revolution (1917)
6. Successes: End of Tsarist rule, land redistribution.
7. Failures: Transformation into Stalinist authoritarianism.
8. Causes: Concentration of power in a single party and suppression of opposition.
9. The Tunisian Revolution (2010–2011)
10. Relative successes: Peaceful democratic transition through national dialogue.
11. Challenges: Economic crises and persistence of old elites.
12. Factors: Neutral military institutions and flexible political elites.
13. The American Revolution (1776–1783)
14. Successes: Establishment of a constitutional republic.
15. Factors: Unified leadership (George Washington) and a clear institutional framework (Constitution of 1787).

A deeper analysis of the previous revolutionary experiences reveals that the success or failure of revolutions after victory can be attributed to the following factors:

1. Factors of Success:
2. Unified and institutional leadership, as seen in the American Revolution.
3. Urgent economic reforms and avoiding chaos, like Egypt post-2011.
4. National reconciliation, exemplified by South Africa after apartheid (Nelson Mandela, 1994).
5. Security neutrality, such as the Tunisian army’s role in protecting the transition.
6. Factors of Failure:
7. Political vacuum, leading to internal conflicts, as in Libya.
8. Foreign intervention, which undermines national sovereignty, like Syria since 2011.
9. Chaotic revenge against the former regime instead of transitional justice, deepening divisions, as in the French Revolution.
10. Lack of an economic vision, worsening living crises and fueling public discontent.

The Syrian Case: Post-Assad Era:

The Assad regime has fallen, and we are all experiencing the consequences of immense challenges similar to those faced by revolutions that failed to achieve stability. Since identifying the problem is half the solution, we must define these challenges to explore ways to overcome them.

1. Key Challenges:
2. Sectarian and ethnic divisions, requiring national reconciliation and transitional justice, similar to South Africa’s experience.
3. Destroyed infrastructure, necessitating a reconstruction plan with international support while avoiding economic dependency.
4. Regional and international interventions, including Israel, Iran, and Russia, which may hinder the establishment of an independent state.
5. Parallel armies, as armed factions might refuse disarmament or resume armed conflict.
6. Potential Success Factors:
7. Inclusive governance, through a constitution that fosters national consensus (as proposed by Burhan Ghalioun in The Future of Syria).
8. Economic support with transparency, to prevent corruption that devastated Iraq’s post-2003 experience.
9. Accountability without vengeance, following the model of South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission.
10. Failure Scenarios:
11. Syria’s division due to external interventions and internal conflicts.
12. Return of authoritarianism if military or sectarian elites seize power.
13. Continued violence if disarmament efforts fail.

The Syrian Context and Transitional Phase Complexities – Our Recommendations:

Syria stands as one of the most complex cases in modern revolutionary history. The war between us and the Assad regime (2011–2023) has left behind a fragmented society, a devastated economy, and weakened state institutions.

In any hypothetical post-regime scenario, the greatest challenge would be transitioning from war to a unified democratic state while avoiding the risks of division or the return of authoritarianism.

Accordingly, we, in the Political Bureau of the Syrian Future Movement, present our recommendations based on our vision and approach, which we see as the most effective way to overcome challenges and learn from past revolutions. We recommend the following:

Accordingly, We in the Political Office of the Syrian Future Movement Recommend the Following:

1. National Reconciliation as a Basis for Unity, Through:

• Establishing a “Truth and Reconciliation Committee”, modeled after South Africa (1995), to address war crimes without provoking random retaliations.
• Integrating sectarian and ethnic components into governance through an agreed-upon system ensuring fair representation for Kurds, Arabs, and various so-called minorities.
• Banning sectarian rhetoric in media and education to build a unified national identity.

2. Rebuilding Institutions and Dismantling the Corrupt State, Through:

• Judicial reform and the establishment of an independent constitutional court to uphold the rule of law.
• Dismantling economic corruption networks by reforming the banking system and ensuring budget transparency.
• Restructuring the bureaucratic system by removing figures linked to the previous regime’s oppression and training new cadres.

3. Security Sector Reform and Disarmament, Through:

• Integrating militias into a unified national army while ensuring fair representation of all components.
• Placing all security agencies under the civilian Ministry of Interior.
• Training neutral security forces with international support to protect civilians without bias.

4. Economic Recovery as a Condition for Stability, Through:

• Launching a “Syrian Marshall Plan” funded internationally to rebuild infrastructure, with aid tied to political reform.
• Tax system reform to ensure social justice and finance public services.
• Supporting small and medium enterprises to absorb unemployment, particularly among the youth.

5. Preserving Sovereignty and Countering Foreign Interference, Through:

• Declaring Syria’s neutrality in regional conflicts to prevent it from becoming a battleground for external disputes.
• Activating public diplomacy to build international alliances that support the transition without humiliating conditions.
• Imposing restrictions on foreign investments to protect resources from exploitation (e.g., Iraq’s post-2003 experience).

6. Enhancing Political Participation Through Electoral Reform, By:

• Adopting a proportional electoral system to ensure minority representation.
• Establishing a transitional legislative council representing all provinces until free elections are held.
• Protecting party and union freedoms through laws preventing power monopolization.

Conclusion:

The history of revolutions shows that military or political victory is only the beginning of the toughest battle. The rebuilding battle in Syria, as a complex case, requires a transitional model that combines reconciliation and institutional reform, learning from the mistakes of previous revolutions.

Success will not be possible without genuine national will, unconditional international support, and a participatory vision that prevents the country from falling into the trap of a “new dictatorship.”

Accordingly, we in the Syrian Future Movement believe that Syria cannot transition to democracy without a social contract that redefines the relationship between the state and the citizen, and between the state and society, based on:

1. Transitional justice (holding corrupt figures accountable without collective exclusion).
2. Balance between the center and peripheries (e.g., non-sectarian administrative decentralization, or what we proposed in a previous study published on our official website titled: “Centralization, Decentralization, and the Third Option Between Them”).
3. Responsible international partnership (support without tutelage).

Historical experiences show that a successful transition requires a time span (10–15 years), political will, and popular sacrifices.

Thus, after ten years of war, we, as Syrians, deserve the chance to write a new history, and a glorious era befitting both our present and the future of our children.

Political Office

Research Team

Research and Studies Department

Studies

Syrian Future Movement

References:

1. غليون، برهان. 
2. (2012). سوريا المستقبل: من الثورة إلى الدولة. مركز الدراسات العربي.  
3. بشارة، عزمي. (2013). الانتقال الديمقراطي: الإشكاليات والتجارب. مركز دراسات الوحدة العربية.  
4. مناع، هيثم. (2014). الأمن والإرهاب في سوريا: من الدولة البعثية إلى الثورة. دار التنوير.  
5. فرزات، علي. (2016). الهوية السورية في ظل الثورة: التحديات والآفاق. المعهد الفرنسي للشرق الأدنى.
6. Brinton, C. (1938). The Anatomy of Revolution. Vintage Books.  
7. Skocpol, T. (1979).
8. States and Social Revolutions. Cambridge University Press. 
9. Goldstone, J. (2014). Revolutions: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press.  
10. Arendt, H. (1963). On Revolution. Penguin Classics.  
11. Jebnoun, N. (2017). Modern Middle East Authoritarianism: Roots, Ramifications, and Crisis Routledge.