The Future of Syria: Prospects for Peace and Recovery
- Zozan Alloush, Independent Development and Political Consultant
- Ammar Kahf, Executive Director of Omran Center for Strategic Studies
- Ahmad Mhidi, Advisor, Humanitarian Dialogue Centre, Syria
- Patrick Haenni, Advisor, Humanitarian Dialogue Centre (Moderator)
In this policy debate, three experts were engaged to brain-strom the dynamics in Syria: Ammar Kahf, Executive Director of the Omran Center for Strategic Studies; Ahmad Mhidi, Consultant at the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue; and Zouzan Alloush, an independent developmental and political consultant. The session, moderated by Patrick Haenni, Senior Advisor for Middle East Affairs at the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue, aimed to examine the realities of the country across different zones of influence, with a focus on governance challenges, economic conditions, the security landscape, and future scenarios, in addition to exploring the feasibility of cooperation.
The participants analyzed the situation in opposition-controlled areas, those still under the Syrian regime’s administration, and the Autonomous Administration region in north- eastern Syria, while highlighting the roles of local, regional, and international actors.
Opposition-Controlled Areas: Fragmentation and Internal Divisions
Ammar Kahf, Director of the Omran Center for Strategic Studies, began his remarks by deliberating on the opposition-controlled areas, emphasizing the significant security fragility, the multiplicity of governance systems, and an unregulated economy. He explained that while Syria is politically divided into four administrations—the Syrian government in Damascus, the opposition’s interim government, the Salvation Government in Idlib, and the Autonomous Administration in northeastern Syria—the reality on the ground is far more complex. Different governance models exist, with certain groups exerting control over specific areas based on their military power or ability to provide services, leading to an unstable environment.
Kahf asserted that the current situation is not merely administrative fragmentation but rather “unstructured disintegration,” where numerous local, regional, and international actors complicate the prospects for a comprehensive solution. He further noted that this condition has resulted in “a forcibly decentralized political and administrative environment, where services are delivered along the lines of local factional control,”
He highlighted that northwest Syria is particularly affected by these complexities, as Idlib is under the control of Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), which administers the Salvation Government, while Turkish-backed factions dominate northern Aleppo. This division has led to variations in administrative and judicial systems, with each area enforcing different laws and procedures regarding birth registration, marriage, and property ownership. Similarly, regions such as Suwayda and Daraa, while officially under regime control, are in practice influenced by local armed groups, further complicating the landscape.
Additionally, Kahf pointed to illicit economic activities as a major challenge in these areas, with many armed factions and militias relying on drug trafficking, extortion, and smuggling as primary revenue sources. These factors have heightened security instability, as dependence on illegal revenue streams fuels conflicts among these groups. He warned that the apparent stasis in Syria does not signify stability but rather “an illusion of stability,” as conditions remain volatile and could escalate at any moment due to internal tensions or regional conflicts, particularly with escalating hostilities in Lebanon and the growing rift between the Syrian regime and Iran.
“Many factions and armed groups have become reliant on war economy, where drug trafficking, extortion, and smuggling serve as primary income sources, exacerbating the state of disorder.”
Regime-Controlled Areas: Internal Erosion and the Continuation of the Resilience Strategy
Ahmad Mhidi discussed the situation in regime-controlled areas, noting that since 2011, the Syrian government has adhered to a strategy of resilience, prioritizing military control over all territories before engaging in negotiations on its own terms. However, this strategy was disrupted by the international coalition’s intervention against ISIS, the continued U.S. military presence in northeastern Syria, and Turkey’s territorial control in the northwest, culminating in a 2020 Russian-Turkish agreement that delineated new conflict boundaries within Syria.
Mhidi explained that economic sanctions on the regime have significantly weakened the state’s capacity to finance its institutions, including the military, forcing it to increasingly rely on local militias, known as auxiliary forces. These militias, while nominally aligned with the regime, operate semi-independently and seek alternative funding sources, often engaging in criminal enterprises such as drug trafficking, smuggling, and looting. He emphasized that the proliferation of these militias has further eroded centralized state authority, effectively transforming the regime into a coalition of competing power centers rather than a singular governing entity.
According to Mhidi, “the Syrian regime lacks sufficient resources to sustain its institutions, particularly the military, forcing it to depend on local militias that act in its favor but are not fully under its control……. Militias have become both economic and military forces in their own right, sustaining themselves through drug trade and the black market, effectively turning the regime into an umbrella for various competing factions.”
Mhidi cautioned that despite its dwindling resources, the regime continues to benefit from international legitimacy, allowing it greater diplomatic maneuverability compared to other actors in Syria. However, he warned that the ongoing decline in centralized authority in favor of militia groups could ultimately lead to internal fractures within the regime’s ranks, particularly if regional dynamics shift or if Russian and Iranian support diminishes. He posed a critical question: “How long can the regime maintain its resilience if regional conditions change or if Russian and Iranian backing wanes?”
The Autonomous Administration in Northeastern Syria: Achievements and Challenges
Zouzan Alloush examined the experience of the Autonomous Administration in northeastern Syria, affirming that while the region has made significant strides in institution-building and governance, it faces major challenges due to the lack of a clear post-ISIS strategy. She highlighted that one of the administration’s most pressing challenges is the absence of formal international recognition, leaving it in a politically precarious position. According to Alloush, “the international community supported the region in its fight against ISIS but abandoned it after the group’s defeat, creating a significant security and economic vacuum.”
She described the situation with an analogy: “They helped us climb halfway up the ladder and then cut the rope,” referencing the failure of international actors to establish a long-term plan for post-ISIS governance. While the military strategy against ISIS was well-defined, no equivalent roadmap was laid out for the region’s long-term stability, leading to governance and security vacuums. She also criticized the international community for its abrupt disengagement after the conclusion of military operations, which left the region grappling with major security and economic challenges without adequate support.
Alloush pointed out that northeastern Syria suffers from a severe shortage of qualified human resources to manage the institutions that have been established, as many individuals in administrative positions lack sufficient experience in governance and public policy. The primary challenge, she argued, is ensuring sustainable stability in the region without provoking direct confrontation with regional powers, particularly Turkey, which perceives the Kurdish project as a threat to its national security. “The Autonomous Administration currently employs 172,000 individuals, but there remains a shortage of adequately qualified personnel to manage these institutions”, said Alloush.
She also emphasized the continued economic ties between northeastern and northwestern Syria, despite political divisions, highlighting active trade between the two regions. She argued that these economic interactions could serve as a foundation for rebuilding political bridges and fostering dialogue between various Syrian factions. However, the future of the Autonomous Administration remains uncertain, with two primary scenarios: either it gains formal recognition within a new constitutional framework for Syria, or sustained external pressure forces its political and military dismantling. Alloush added that “despite political divisions, economic relations between northeastern and northwestern Syria remain active, with the latter relying on resources from the former. This economic interdependence could serve as a gateway for political dialogue among different actors.”
The session concluded with a consensus that Syria remains trapped in a state of “neither war nor peace,” making its political future highly uncertain. The speakers emphasized that any long-term resolution must acknowledge the realities of local governance, economic linkages, and security dynamics. They warned that continued political fragmentation and competition among different zones of influence will only exacerbate the crisis unless collective solutions are pursued that consider the interests of all Syrian factions.
MERI Forum 2024
The Future of Syria: Prospects for Peace and Recovery
Panel 7C