The Syrian Dilemma and Scenarios for Its Resolution

Introduction:

The Syrian reality is witnessing a state of extreme complexity due to multiple divisions on political, military, and international levels.
These divisions have led to the emergence of various governments and disparate foreign interventions, further complicating the crisis and pushing a peaceful resolution further away.

The Syrian civil war has resulted in the formation of several key political entities, including the Syrian regime, the Interim Government, the Autonomous Administration in Northeast Syria, and the Salvation Government in Idlib.
These entities compete for influence and control over geographical areas and resources, leading to ongoing armed conflicts. In addition, extremist factions such as ISIS and Jabhat al-Nusra have grown, further complicating the situation, hindering political solutions, and raising concerns within the international community.

Furthermore, the involvement of many countries in the Syrian conflict by supporting different factions has exacerbated tensions and divisions, as each country seeks to achieve its own goals in Syria, whether geopolitical, economic, or ideological.
These divergences in objectives and interests have made it challenging to reach an international consensus on resolving the Syrian crisis.

Causes of Complexity and Its Impacts:

The Syrian issue goes beyond the armed conflict to encompass complex sectarian, ethnic, economic, and social dimensions. Foreign interventions have exacerbated the conflict and prolonged its duration, making the resolution process challenging and intricate.
Moreover, there is still no shared vision among Syrian parties and influential international actors to resolve the crisis. The resulting impacts are as follows:

1. Deterioration of Humanitarian Conditions: The Syrian people are enduring a severe humanitarian crisis due to the conflict and destruction, displacing millions both within and outside the country.
2. Destruction of Infrastructure: Syria’s infrastructure has suffered extensive destruction, affecting civilians’ lives and hindering reconstruction efforts.
3. Rise of Extremism: The Syrian crisis has led to the growth of extremist organizations, posing a threat to security and stability in the region and globally.

Thus, the Syrian reality is extremely complex, requiring comprehensive solutions that consider all political, social, and economic dimensions of the crisis. It also necessitates the concerted efforts of the international community and Syrian parties to reach a political solution that ensures stability and peace in Syria, a challenge observed in the UN Security Council session on Syria on Tuesday, 2024-12-03.

The Internal Knot:

To clarify the picture further, it is essential to examine the disagreements among the active forces in Syria:

1. Politically:
   • The Syrian regime: Seeks to maintain power and regain control over all Syrian territory.
   • The Syrian opposition: Ranges from moderate factions aiming to overthrow the regime and establish a democratic system, to extremist factions with Islamic agendas.
   • The Kurdish forces: Seek to achieve autonomy in the areas they control.
2. Militarily:
   • The Syrian regime: Supported by Russia, Iran, and their militias.
   • The armed opposition: Receives support from Turkey, some Gulf countries, and the Western community.
   • Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF): Supported by the United States and the international coalition.
3. Ideologically:
   • The Syrian regime: Relies on Ba’athist ideology and Arab nationalism in an authoritarian, dictatorial manner.
   • The opposition: Varies between democratic liberal thought and Islamic ideology.
   • The Kurdish forces: Rely on Kurdish nationalist ideology.

In this context, we find the map of control over the regions and its impact on the fragmentation of Syria reflected as follows:

1. Areas controlled by the regime:
   • It includes Damascus and its countryside, Homs, Hama, the Syrian coast (Tartus and Latakia), and parts of Aleppo and Deir ez-Zor, with many of these areas, especially Aleppo, being lost during the ongoing Deterrence of Aggression battle.
   • The regime seeks to regain control over all Syrian territories, leading to continuous conflicts with other factions.
2. Areas controlled by the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF):
   • It controls most of northeastern Syria, including parts of Deir ez-Zor, Raqqa, and Hasakah.
   • SDF seeks to achieve autonomy, which creates tensions with the Syrian regime and Turkey, which considers it a threat to its national security.
3. Areas controlled by Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS):
   • It controls parts of Idlib and some areas in northwest Syria, with potential for expansion of its territories following the regime’s loss of Aleppo and Hama.
   • These areas face continuous attacks from the Syrian regime and its allies, further complicating the humanitarian situation.
4. Areas controlled by the Syrian opposition (National):
   • It includes parts of northwest Syria, supported by Turkey.
   • The opposition seeks to overthrow the regime, leading to ongoing conflicts with the regime’s forces and other groups.

The multiple powers controlling Syrian territories lead to the fragmentation of the country on several levels:

1. Politically: The absence of a strong central government leads to a weakened and fragmented state.
2. Economically: The economy deteriorates due to ongoing conflicts and the lack of stability.
3. Socially: Increasing sectarian and ethnic divisions deepen the gap between different components of Syrian society.

This complex situation makes it difficult to achieve a comprehensive political solution and exacerbates the suffering of the Syrian people, who live under the burden of ongoing war and continuous displacement.

External Knot:

The Syrian crisis is considered one of the most complex crises in the world due to the numerous active parties involved and the divergence of their interests. The main external powers include the United States, Russia, Iran, Turkey, and Israel, each with its own political, military, and ideological goals.

The differences between the external active powers are manifested as follows:

1. United States:
   • Politically: The United States seeks to undermine Iran’s influence in the region and support its local allies, such as the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF).
   • Militarily: It focuses on fighting ISIS and providing military support to the SDF.
   • Ideologically: It supports democracy and human rights but faces criticism due to its military interventions.
2. Russia:
   • Politically: Russia supports the Assad regime and seeks to maintain its influence in the Middle East.
   • Militarily: It provides air and logistical support to the Syrian regime forces.
   • Ideologically: It promotes the idea of national sovereignty and non-interference in the internal affairs of countries.
3. Iran:
   • Politically: Iran seeks to enhance its regional influence by supporting the Assad regime and Shiite groups.
   • Militarily: It provides financial and military support to its allied militias in Syria.
   • Ideologically: Iran promotes the ideology of the Islamic Revolution and supports Shiite movements.
4. Turkey:
   • سياسيًا: تسعى لمنع قيام كيان كردي مستقل على حدودها.
   • عسكريًا: تدعم الفصائل المعارضة وتنفذ عمليات عسكرية ضد القوات الكردية.
   • فكريًا: تروج لخفض التصعيد والديمقراطية وتعارض الحركات الكردية.
5. Israel:
   • Politically: Turkey aims to prevent the expansion of Iranian influence near its borders.
   • Militarily: It conducts airstrikes against Iranian targets and Hezbollah in Syria.
   • Ideologically: Turkey focuses on Israeli national security, the concept of gradual expansion, and preventing external threats.

According to all of this, in the northeastern part of Syria, where the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) backed by the United States are in control, they exhibit nearly complete autonomy both economically and security-wise, which further promotes the fragmentation of Syria. In central and western Syria, the Syrian regime forces, with Russian support, control areas including Damascus, Homs, the remaining parts of Hama, and Latakia.

The Russian presence somewhat stabilizes these areas, but it contributes to deepening the divisions between different regions. As for the eastern and western borders, they are controlled by Iranian-backed militias, strengthening Iran’s influence in Syria and adding complexity to the crisis. In the northwest, opposition factions backed by Turkey control the area, with Turkey’s intervention aiming to prevent the establishment of an independent Kurdish entity, further complicating the security and political situation in Syria.

Lastly, Idlib remains under the control of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (formerly al-Nusra Front), making it a continuous area of conflict between various factions and the Syrian regime.

The multiplicity of active forces and their varying interests leads to the fragmentation of Syria into different areas of influence, complicating the possibility of reaching a comprehensive political solution to the crisis.

Future Scenarios:

The future of Syria depends on many complex and intertwined factors, and there are several potential scenarios based on the current situation and future developments.

Some key scenarios that we see in the Political Office of the Syrian Future Movement:

1. The Optimistic Scenario:
   • In this scenario, a comprehensive political solution is reached through negotiations between the various Syrian parties, supported by international and regional powers. A transitional government is formed, including representatives from all factions, free and fair elections are held, the destroyed infrastructure is rebuilt, refugees and displaced persons return to their homes, and economic and social stability is achieved—all through the implementation of UN Resolution 2254.
2. The Pessimistic Scenario:
   • In this scenario, the armed conflict between various factions continues, with ongoing foreign interventions, exacerbating the humanitarian crisis. The number of refugees and displaced persons increases, while the geographic and political divisions persist, leading to further fragmentation and economic and social deterioration. This scenario results in more chaos and instability in the region.
3. The Middle Ground Scenario:
   • In this scenario, the current situation continues with some minor improvements. The areas of influence maintain control over parts of the country, with ongoing tensions and limited conflicts. Local ceasefire agreements are reached, and the humanitarian situation improves slightly, but without a comprehensive political solution. International and regional support for certain factions persists, maintaining the state of stalemate.
4. The Regional Scenario:
   • In this scenario, either regional powers play a larger role in determining Syria’s future, leading to agreements between regional powers such as Turkey, Iran, and Russia to divide influence in Syria, establishing autonomous zones under international supervision while maintaining some relative stability. This scenario may reduce the intensity of the conflict but could leave Syria divided into different spheres of influence.
   • Alternatively, international powers may intervene more significantly to achieve a political solution. International sanctions and pressure are applied on the warring parties to sit at the negotiation table. A multinational peacekeeping force would be established to monitor the implementation of agreements and ensure stability, accompanied by significant international aid for reconstruction and sustainable development.

Each of these scenarios depends on the interaction of various factors, including the political will of the conflicting parties, the role of regional and international powers, and the humanitarian and economic situation in the country. It is difficult to predict with certainty the future of Syria, but these scenarios provide a general overview of possible directions.

Conclusion:

Based on the available scenarios, the recommended option for Syria from our perspective is the optimistic scenario, which involves reaching a comprehensive political solution through negotiations between the different Syrian parties, supported by international and regional powers. This scenario holds significant importance on several levels:

1. Political Stability: Forming a transitional government that includes representatives from all factions and conducting free and fair elections can achieve political stability and put an end to the ongoing conflict.
2. Reconstruction: Starting the rebuilding of the destroyed infrastructure can boost the economy and create job opportunities for Syrians.
3. Return of Refugees: Providing a safe and stable environment could encourage refugees and displaced persons to return to their homes, easing the burdens on host countries.
4. Improving Humanitarian Conditions: Ending the conflict could contribute to improving humanitarian conditions and delivering aid more effectively.

All of this is of utmost importance and necessity for Syria. As for the importance of the scenario for regional countries, it lies in the following:

1. Regional Security: The stability of Syria can reduce regional tensions and limit the flow of refugees and fighters across borders.
2. Economic Cooperation: Syria’s stability could open the door for economic and trade cooperation between Syria and neighboring countries, fostering regional economic development.
3. Counterterrorism: Ending the conflict could weaken terrorist groups that have capitalized on the chaos, enhancing security in the region.

Importance of the Scenario for Major Powers:

1. Global Stability: The stability of Syria can contribute to the stability of the Middle East, reducing global tensions and enhancing international security.
2. International Cooperation: Reaching a political solution can enhance cooperation between major powers on other issues, such as combating terrorism and illegal immigration.
3. Humanitarian Aid: Ending the conflict can facilitate the delivery of humanitarian aid and support reconstruction efforts, presenting a positive image of major powers as contributors to peace and development.

Importance of the Scenario for the International Community:

1. Human Rights: Reaching a political solution can enhance human rights in Syria and put an end to ongoing violations.
2. Sustainable Development: The stability of Syria can contribute to achieving sustainable development goals by improving the economic and social situation.
3. International Cooperation: Reaching a political solution can strengthen international cooperation in various areas, such as security, development, and human rights.

However, it remains to be said that this scenario requires strong political will from all concerned parties, along with continuous support from the international community to achieve it. This is what we are striving for through the efforts of the Syrian Future Movement, which we support, and we call on all national forces, regardless of their orientations, to assist us in achieving this goal.

Political Office
Research Team
Research and Studies Department
Studies
Syrian Future Movement

References:

1. مشروع “آفاق الصراع في سوريا”.. سيناريوهات الحلّ والمصير.
2. قراءة في سيناريوهات المعركة السورية | اندبندنت عربية.
3. تأثير سيناريوهات الحلّ السياسي في إعادة بناء سورية.
4. ٤ تطورات رئيسية ترسم سيناريوهات مستقبل الأزمة السورية.
5. نظرة شاملة على خريطة السيطرة في سورية حتى نهاية 2024.
6. تراجع إيراني وتزايد روسي.. خارطة الوجود العسكري الأجنبي في سوريا.
7. دراسة حول الأزمة السورية:(2011-2022) والصراع الإقليمي والدولي في ….
8. دراسة: سوريا حدود بلا دولة والقوى الخارجية تُعزِّز حالة الفوضى.
9. المسألة السورية واستقطاباتها الإقليمية والدولية: دراسة في معادلات القوة ….
10. كيف تتوزع خارطة السيطرة العسكرية في سوريا؟ | أخبار | الجزيرة نت.
11. لماذا تبني “قسد” أبراج مراقبة بين مناطقها ومناطق النظام بسوريا؟.
12. الأمم المتحدة تشدد على أن الحل في سوريا سياسي في خضّم تحديات هائلة ….