ISTANBUL — The dramatic fall of President Bashar Assad has left Middle Eastern powers scrambling to adapt to a shifting landscape. While Turkey and Israel have moved swiftly to secure their strategic interests, Gulf states and Egypt are cautiously recalibrating in the face of a newly realigned Syria.
Syrian opposition fighters have appointed Mohammed al-Bashir as the country’s caretaker prime minister. In a televised address, Mr. al-Bashir announced that he will oversee a transitional government until March 2025. He previously led the administration in Idlib province controlled by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, the Islamist group which took the lead role in the lightning campaign that drove Mr. Assad from power and into exile in Russia.
Mr. al-Bashir’s appointment comes as Syria embarks on the arduous task of rebuilding after decades of Baathist rule. His leadership marks a pivotal step in the country’s transition, though the challenges ahead remain daunting. Opposition groups will have to manage the delicate balance of reforming state institutions while avoiding the collapse that plagued post-Saddam Iraq.
Muhittin Ataman, a professor at Social Sciences University of Ankara, emphasized the significance of maintaining political unity. “Unlike Iraq, where sectarian divisions were exacerbated by foreign powers, Syria must focus on building a unified political front to avoid prolonged instability,” Mr. Ataman said.
In the power vacuum left by Mr. Assad’s abrupt departure after his family’s half-century rule, two countries have acted decisively to shore up their interests: Turkey and Israel. Turkey, which has been deeply involved in the Syrian conflict since 2011, sees the current moment as a strategic opportunity.
Istanbul has major issues involving its neighbor, including millions of Syrian refugees now living in Turkey and concerns about Syrian Kurdish forces that may now be free to link up with Kurdish separatist groups inside Turkey. Turkey also does not want to see the disintegration of the Syrian central authority, leading to instability and violence that could spill over the border.
“Russia’s weakened position due to the war in Ukraine has significantly reduced its ability to act in Syria,” said Dr. Hay Eytan Cohen Yanarocak of the Moshe Dayan Center at Tel Aviv University, who noted that Turkey has been quick to act on the shifting dynamics: “Turkey is taking full advantage of the current opportunities in Syria.”
President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has emphasized Ankara’s commitment to Syria’s territorial integrity. In a recent call with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, Mr. Erdogan reiterated that Turkey “has advocated for the preservation of Syria’s territorial integrity and stability since the very first day of the civil war.”
This aligns with Mr. Erdogan’s broader efforts to support Sunni-friendly governance in the region.
Mr. Erdogan has framed his intervention in Syria as both a strategic necessity and a restoration of historical ties. By supporting Sunni rebel groups and exerting control over northern border regions, Turkey has positioned itself as a dominant player in the new Syrian order.
“Erdogan sees Syria not just as a neighboring state but as a key piece in Turkey’s broader regional ambitions,” Mr. Yanarocak noted.
Turkey’s efforts have been bolstered by its years of investment in opposition-held areas, where governance structures have already been established.
“Turkey’s support for the Syrian opposition has helped prepare them for this moment,” Mr. Ataman said. “The safe zones in northern Syria served as training grounds for governance and administration.”
Israel acts
Israel, meanwhile, is seizing the moment of maximum uncertainty to bolster its security.
The trauma of the October 7 Hamas attacks has shaped Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s aggressive military posture. Israel has expanded operations in Syria, targeting Iranian-backed forces and Hezbollah to secure its northern border.
Hundreds of airstrikes have also hit weapons depots, military bases and naval assets — all a preemptive move by Israel to deprive whatever government emerges in Damascus from posing a security threat.
“Israel’s decisive actions reflect Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s determination to prevent future attacks like those of October 7,” Mr. Yanarocak observed. “Israel’s expanded operations in Syria aim to neutralize threats from Iranian-backed forces and Hezbollah, ensuring long-term security in the region.”
Israel has also gained significant ground in southern Syria, securing an expanded buffer zone that allows it to monitor Damascus closely.
“These moves are not just about immediate security,” Mr. Yanarocak said. “They are about ensuring that Israel retains a strategic upper hand in any future regional dynamics.”
Mr. Netanyahu’s government has also consolidated control over Gaza’s borders, taking steps to prevent arms smuggling and other threats. These moves have bolstered his standing among domestic supporters despite earlier criticism of his leadership.
Reversing the narrative
The events in Syria have provided both Mr. Erdogan and Mr. Netanyahu with opportunities to strengthen their domestic positions. For Mr. Erdogan, the Syrian conflict was long viewed as a liability due to the influx of Syrian refugees, which created economic and social tensions. Turkish citizens often blamed the refugees for rising unemployment and strained public services.
“Erdogan has reframed the Syrian intervention as a victory,” Mr. Yanarocak explained. “Many on social media are even referring to Syria as Turkey’s ’newest province.’”
This narrative has left Mr. Erdogan’s political opponents struggling to counter his claims of success. “Erdogan’s gamble has paid off, and history will remember him as the leader who intervened in Syria and emerged victorious,” Mr. Yanarocak said.
Mr. Netanyahu, meanwhile, faced significant public criticism following the October 7 Hamas attacks. His government’s perceived unpreparedness led to a sharp drop in approval ratings. However, his aggressive military actions in Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria have restored some of his standing among Israeli voters.
“Netanyahu’s recent moves have been compared to the Six-Day War in terms of their strategic impact,” Mr. Yanarocak noted. “This comparison has resonated with his base and given him a renewed sense of authority.”
Both leaders rely on charismatic leadership and a strongman image to maintain power. Mr. Erdogan has shown a willingness to amend Turkey’s constitution to extend his rule, while Mr. Netanyahu continues to navigate the complexities of Israel’s coalition politics to stay in office.
“All three leaders — Erdogan, Netanyahu, and [U.S. President-elect Donald] Trump — understand their countries’ political cultures and know how to push the right buttons at the right time,” Mr. Yanarocak said. “This skill has allowed them to outmaneuver their opponents repeatedly.”
Holding pattern
While Turkey and Israel have been busy, the Arab Gulf states and Egypt find themselves in a holding pattern, still trying to gauge the implications of Mr. Assad’s removal. The rise of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham as a dominant force in the new Syrian government has unsettled countries like Saudi Arabia and the UAE, which have long worked to suppress Islamist political movements.
Egypt, meanwhile, is grappling with the immediate security and geopolitical challenges stemming from Syria’s realignment.
President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi has placed Egyptian security forces on high alert, particularly in areas with large Syrian refugee populations.
Celebratory demonstrations by Syrian expatriates in Cairo and other cities have been met with crackdowns, reflecting fears of domestic unrest.
With an estimated two million Syrian refugees in the country, protests have been tightly controlled under Egypt’s 2016 law requiring prior approval for public gatherings.
The Interior Ministry has instructed Syrian community leaders to discourage unauthorized gatherings, highlighting the government’s anxiety over potential ripple effects from Assad’s removal.
Adding to Egypt’s concerns is Israel’s Sunday seizure of the demilitarized buffer zone in the Golan Heights, an area established under the 1974 disengagement agreement with Syria.
Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty, in a call with Secretary of State Antony Blinken, condemned the move as a “blatant violation of [Syria’s] sovereignty” and a “breach of international law.”
Mr. Abdelatty reiterated Cairo’s support for Syria’s territorial integrity while urging an inclusive political process to stabilize the region.
But despite its strong rhetorical stance, Egypt has struggled to assert direct influence in Syria. “Egypt lacks clear connections with Syrian opposition factions and has struggled to assert influence beyond its historical weight,” said Egyptian political analyst Ashraf Rady.
Cairo’s strategy has focused mainly on emphasizing sovereignty and stability in public statements, while privately grappling with the shifting regional dynamics. The rapid collapse of Mr. Assad’s regime has also exposed Egypt’s limited preparedness for such a seismic shift.
Saudi Arabia and the UAE have expressed unease over HTS’s swift repositioning as a key player in the Syrian transition, particularly as the group seeks to establish ties with the U.S. through Turkish intermediaries, according to recent diplomatic reports. The UAE, in particular, is adjusting to reports of U.S. backchannels to HTS through Turkey, which could undermine Emirati strategies in Syria.
Before HTS’s offensive to take Damascus, the UAE was brokering talks between Mr. Assad’s government and Washington. The plan, which sought to keep the Assad family in power in exchange for closing Iranian arms supply lines, has now collapsed.
The Gulf States’ unpreparedness for Mr. Assad’s sudden downfall highlights how they had effectively reconciled themselves to his indefinite rule. This was underscored by the Arab League’s decision in May 2023 to readmit Syria after a 12-year suspension.
While states like the UAE pressed for full normalization, its rival, Qatar, remained cautious.
Qatar opposed Syria’s return without a political resolution to the conflict, with a foreign ministry spokesperson emphasizing the need to address the crisis’s root causes. “This consensus should motivate the Syrian regime to address these issues,” the spokesperson told QNA at the time.
A diplomat involved in Egypt’s Syria policy noted that Cairo is wary of the ripple effects from Mr. Assad’s removal. “Publicly, Egypt emphasizes sovereignty and stability,” the diplomat said. “But behind closed doors, there’s significant unease about what this means for regional security.”
Rebuilding opportunities
As regional powers adjust, the task of rebuilding Syria looms large.
Mr. Ataman emphasized that Turkey’s long-term support for the Syrian opposition has positioned it to play a constructive role: “Unlike Iraq after Saddam, Syria’s opposition has been prepared for this moment. Years of Turkish support in safe zones have helped opposition groups build governance experience.”
Qatar also sees reconstruction as an opportunity, though Professor Mehran Kamrava of Georgetown University in Qatar warned of the complexities involved.
“Doha, like everyone else, is waiting to see what happens,” Mr. Kamrava said. “The risks of navigating Syria’s redevelopment are significant.”
The Syrian transitional government faces the challenge of unifying diverse opposition factions while maintaining essential state institutions. “The new administration must avoid the mistakes of post-Saddam Iraq,” Mr. Ataman said. “Transforming armed groups into a cohesive national military and reforming state institutions without dismantling them will be critical.”
Iran, which had been a critical backer of Assad, has effectively exited Syria following Israel’s decisive airstrikes and the U.S.-brokered ceasefire with Hezbollah in Lebanon. Observers suggest the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) decided to cut its losses rather than redirect resources to other priorities.
“The IRGC’s decision reflects an acknowledgment of sunk costs rather than a reallocation of resources,” Mr. Kamrava said.
This shift and Russia’s diminished role have opened the door for other actors, including Turkey and Gulf states, to assert themselves more prominently. However, the long-term implications of Iran’s retreat remain unclear.
Mr. Yanarocak summarized the region’s shifting dynamics: “The collapse of Assad’s regime has created opportunities for Israel and Turkey to take decisive actions, leaving other regional players struggling to adjust.”
• Mina Nader reported from Cairo.