Syria in the Post-Assad Era: Towards Ethnic Division or a Unified State?

The past decade has seen Syria engulfed in a brutal civil war, marked by foreign intervention, relentless repression, and the unraveling of its fragile social fabric. This turmoil has fueled a mass exodus of refugees, reshaping Europe’s demographics and political landscape.

Now, as the Assad regime has collapsed, Syria faces a pivotal question: Can it emerge as a unified sovereign state, or will ethnic divisions dictate its future?

Historical Roots of the Crisis: Artificial Borders and Failed Ethnic Harmony

Syria’s current plight is not solely the result of recent events. It stems from deep-seated issues rooted in the colonial legacy of the Middle East.

The 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement carved up the region with scant regard for its ethnic, religious, and sectarian complexities. The resulting state was a volatile mosaic of Sunni Arabs, Alawites, Druze, Christians, Turkmen, and others.

During the French Mandate, attempts were made to partition Syria into autonomous regions based on ethnic and sectarian lines. These included a Druze state in Jebel Druze, an Alawite state in Latakia, a Turkmen-dominated region of Alexandretta, and separate Arab Sunni states for Damascus and Aleppo. However, this experiment failed, and in 1946, Syria gained independence as a unified state.

A Unified Kingdom or Ethnic Partition?

After Assad’s abdication, the question of Syria’s future looms large. Could it return to being a unified state, or is ethnic partition a more viable path to stability?

Among the potential scenarios:

• Druze Autonomy in Jebel Druze: A concept supported in the past by figures like Israeli leader Yigal Alon, this option could appeal to local Druze communities. However, their willingness to align with a pro-Israel arrangement remains doubtful given their precarious geopolitical position.
• An Alawite State in Latakia: Syria’s coastal region, an Alawite stronghold, could serve as a natural refuge for the community. It’s even conceivable, in the region’s unpredictable dynamics, that Bashar al-Assad himself could return there.
• A Federal Syrian Model: Similar to Iraq, this approach would grant significant autonomy to various groups while maintaining the semblance of a unified state.

Key Challenges

• Foreign Interference: Major players like Russia, Turkey, and Iran have heavily invested in Syria, each pursuing its strategic interests. Any ethnic partition would likely face their strong opposition, especially if it diminishes their influence.
• Leadership and Israeli Policy: Should a figure like Abu Mohammad al-Julani, with roots in al-Qaeda, retain power, the prospects for stability dim further. Julani’s ties to the Golan Heights –his family fled the region after the 1967 war — underscore his likely antagonism toward Israel and territorial concessions.
• The Golan Heights Question: Once a contentious issue in peace negotiations, the strategic importance of the Golan was underscored during the Syrian civil war. The chaos reaffirmed Israel’s security imperative to retain the area, a sentiment bolstered by US recognition of Israeli sovereignty there.

Syria’s Future: A Litmus Test for Israeli Policy

Post-Assad Syria is a test of Israel’s strategic approach to regional instability. Israel must maintain its deterrence posture, as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu emphasized during his significant visit to the Golan Heights. Strengthening Israel’s hold on this strategic region is crucial to countering hostile actors.

While some in the international community hope for a unified Syria, the reality suggests otherwise. Ethnic partition appears to be one of the few pragmatic solutions to stabilize the country. Yet, aggressive opposition from global powers and internal factions renders this outcome unlikely in the near term.

Turkey, for instance, vehemently opposes a Kurdish autonomy that might embolden its own Kurdish minority. Iran seeks to consolidate its influence through Shiite alliances, including with the Alawites. Meanwhile, figures like Julani will resist any division that curtails their power or excludes major factions from influence.

Toward a Federal Solution?

The enduring conflict makes meaningful reconstruction a distant prospect. Ethnic partition offers a glimmer of hope for stability, but remains a long shot. Interim solutions, such as a federal system granting limited autonomy within a unified framework, may provide the only viable path forward.

Ultimately, the success of such models depends on creative and painstaking negotiations, both locally and internationally. Syria’s post-Assad reality is a complex battlefield of clashing interests, and achieving the elusive goal of stability will require unprecedented diplomatic ingenuity.

Itamar Tzur is an Israeli scholar and Middle East expert who holds a Bachelor’s degree with honors in Jewish History and a Master’s degree with honors in Middle Eastern Studies. As a senior member of the “Forum Kedem for Middle Eastern Studies and Public Diplomacy,” Tzur leverages his academic expertise to enhance understanding of regional dynamics and historical contexts within the Middle East.

The post Syria in the Post-Assad Era: Towards Ethnic Division or a Unified State? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.