![The fall of Assad regime marks a turning point in Syria, raising concerns about stability amid competing regional and global interests. [Image via AP]](https://southasiatimes.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/275a357e-2335-44fd-a708-cb64164b86e6_20472c74.webp)
On December 8, 2024, Syrian opposition forces announced the capture of Damascus, marking the end of Bashar al-Assad’s 13-year regime. Russia, Assad’s key ally, confirmed his resignation and departure. The Russian foreign ministry stated: “As a result of negotiations between Assad and various participants in the armed conflict in the Syrian Arab Republic, he decided to resign and left the country, giving instructions for a peaceful transfer of power.” The ministry clarified, “Russia did not participate in these negotiations.”
The Syrian civil war, which erupted during the Arab Spring in 2011 as a fight against autocracy, soon descended into one of the century’s deadliest conflicts.
Assad’s crackdown, bolstered by Iran and Russia, fostered extremism, the rise of the Islamic State, and a historic refugee crisis. Despite support from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), Iranian militias, Russian mercenaries, and Russian arms, the Syrian Arab Army struggled against groups like Jaish al-Fattah, losing territories such as Idlib, Aleppo, Raqqa, and Deir Az Zor and faced challenges in others like Hama and Damascus. In response, Syria sought direct Russian intervention for military support, diplomatic backing, and economic cooperation in 2015. Thus, the Assad regime has been heavily supported by Russia and Iran. Today, his fall symbolises the potential for change, but it also leaves a power vacuum that regional and global actors are rushing to fill.
A New Order or More Turmoil?
Will Syria experience a new order, or is the fall of Assad simply the prelude to even more turmoil?
Abu Mohammed al-Julani and his group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), are behind the fall of the Assad regime in Syria, however, both Julani and HTS have a controversial past with Julani, formerly an al-Qaida and ISIS-linked- jihadist and a wanted terrorist with a 10 million dollar bounty on his head. Similarly, HTS has a record of human rights abuses and authoritarian rule in Idlib and is listed as a terrorist organisation by the United Nations, European Union and other Western nations.
As Jolani’s HTS forces advanced south, many Syrians reportedly rallied to their banner. However, other factions with divergent goals and interests are also seizing the moment to assert influence. Among them are the Kurdish-led nationalist militias of the United States-backed Syrian Democratic Forces in the northeast, Turkish-supported rebel factions grouped under the Syrian National Army, and various opposition groups in the south. While these groups share a common enmity toward Assad, their unity often ends there, with differing agendas threatening to further fragment Syria’s already complex conflict.
Moreover, Syria’s challenges are monumental: The civil war has claimed over 300,000 lives, with some estimates suggesting twice that number. Around 100,000 people remain missing or forcibly disappeared since 2011, leaving families desperate for answers as a grim reckoning begins. Nearly half the population—approximately 12 million people—are displaced.
The return of tens of thousands who endured detention, torture, and abuse adds further strain. These individuals, many physically and psychologically scarred, now reenter a shattered, dysfunctional society. Meanwhile, millions of refugees in Turkey and Jordan may return en masse, compounding the pressures. With a controversial leadership and a host of internal and external challenges, Syria stands on the brink of intertwined humanitarian, political, economic, and security crises.
The Fall of Assad: The End of a 13-Year Regime
Syrian group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) began its push for the city of Aleppo on the same day that Israel and Hezbollah agreed on a ceasefire to end the fighting in Lebanon, suggesting a possible link between the two. Iran, which has long relied on Hezbollah’s presence in neighbouring Syria, saw the Lebanese group, along with Russian forces, play a pivotal role in propping up Assad’s regime during its near-collapse in 2015. However, burdened by the ongoing conflicts with Israel and Ukraine, both Iran and Russia were too exhausted to assist Assad this time around.
Seizing the opportunity, HTS, alongside the Turkish-backed Syrian National Army, moved on to Aleppo. Their goal was to preempt a regime offensive on their strongholds in northwest Syria. With Assad’s war-exhausted and demoralized army caught off guard, they met little resistance as they advanced.
Thus, lack of decisive support from Iran and Russia, exhausted by wars in Israel and Ukraine, Assad’s allies were unable to intervene effectively, paving the way for his downfall.
Also See: FM Dar Discusses Pakistani Nationals Stranded in Syria with Turkish Counterpart
The Geopolitical Implications of the Fall of Assad
The repercussions of Assad’s downfall reverberate beyond Syria. Turkey, Israel, Iran, and other regional players are recalibrating their strategies. Israel, for instance, is leveraging the situation to secure its borders, with Prime Minister Netanyahu calling to reinforce the Golan Heights buffer zone, linking Assad’s fall to Israel’s broader efforts against Iran and Hezbollah.
Netanyahu declared that the 1974 disengagement agreement with Syria “has collapsed,” instructing the military to secure strategic positions near the buffer zone.
Turkey, meanwhile, is positioning itself to shape Syria’s post-Assad future. Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan highlighted Ankara’s aim for a stable and cooperative Syria, assuring regional actors that the new Syrian administration would address existing threats. Through its influence over the Syrian National Army and its cautious engagement with HTS, Turkey is poised to play a pivotal role in the evolving landscape.
Iran, a key ally of Assad, faces a significant setback. Its diminished influence is underscored by the storming of its embassy in Damascus, the evacuation of its diplomats, and reports of an Iranian oil tanker reversing course after Assad’s fall. These events, coupled with economic struggles and challenges in its proxy wars, signal a waning role for Tehran in Syria. Russia, too, appears to be stepping back, marking a stark shift from its decisive intervention in 2015.
International reactions to Assad’s ouster underscore its geopolitical implications. U.S. President-elect Donald Trump claimed on social media that Russia’s waning interest in Assad’s survival reflects Moscow’s broader weaknesses. “Russia and Iran are in a weakened state right now, one because of Ukraine and a bad economy, the other because of Israel and its fighting success,” Trump posted on X. While French President Emmanuel Macron hailed Assad’s fall as the end of a “barbaric state.” Ukraine, drawing parallels with its struggle against Russian aggression, framed Assad’s collapse as a warning to other dictators reliant on Moscow. Foreign Minister Andriy Sybiga reaffirmed Kyiv’s support for the Syrian people, emphasizing that authoritarian regimes tied to Putin are destined to fail.
What Syria Can Expect with Jolani’s Rise
After assuming power in Damascus, Islamist rebel leader Jolani chose a highly symbolic location— the Umayyad Mosque in Damascus, a historic 1,300-year-old site— for his speech. By opting for this mosque over a media studio or the former presidential palace, he underscored the religious and cultural weight of his message. In his address, Jolani framed his victory as a triumph for the entire Islamic nation, honouring the sacrifices of martyrs, widows, orphans, and those who suffered under Assad’s regime.
Jolani’s rhetoric was designed to unite Syria’s Sunni majority while subtly critiquing the Alawite-led Assad regime and other religious groups. He also directed a pointed message at Iran, warning that its regional ambitions were at an end. This was intended for regional and global powers, including Iran, Israel, and the United States, all of whom have significant stakes in Syria’s future.
It was no accident that Jolani gave a key interview to Cable News Network (CNN), a major U.S. TV network, rather than an Arab outlet, just days before he ousted Assad. In the interview, he distanced himself from other jihadist factions, condemning their brutal tactics. U.S. President Joe Biden later commented, acknowledging that Jolani “said the right things,” but emphasized that his actions would be the true measure of his intentions.
In his speech, Jolani also made overtures to the regional powers he will need to keep onside, promising to “clean up” Syria. He spoke of “purifying” the country, particularly from its reputation as a narco-state. He criticized Assad’s regime, which had turned Syria into the world’s leading source of Captagon, an amphetamine-type drug, and a hub of regional criminality.
The Far-Right Surge: A Global Geopolitical Shift
The fall of the Assad regime in Syria reflects the broader geopolitical trend: the rise of the far right.
This trend, which began resurging in the mid-2010s, has gained significant momentum due to economic disparities, mass migrations, and political dissatisfaction with traditional governance models.
In Europe, far-right parties have made historic gains, with Marine Le Pen’s National Rally in France securing unprecedented support in recent elections, and Italy’s Giorgia Meloni becoming the first female Prime Minister with her Brothers of Italy party, rooted in neo-fascist ideology. Across Scandinavia, far-right influence has surged in Sweden and Finland, further signaling the trend.
South Asia’s Role in Global Shifting Power Dynamics
South Asia, however, brings its own unique perspective to this global shift in power dynamics.
India’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), under Narendra Modi, has strengthened its grip through populist rhetoric and majoritarian policies, reshaping the country’s democratic framework with a strong nationalist undertone. The narrative of “New India” parallels far-right ideals globally, reshaping the contours of democracy. With its focus on Hindutva nationalism reshaping the country’s socio-political fabric, Modi’s government has leveraged majoritarian sentiments, including controversial policies like the Citizenship Amendment Act and abrogation of Article 370 in Jammu & Kashmir, to consolidate right-wing power.
In Bangladesh, the recent ouster of Sheikh Hasina, amidst allegations of democratic erosion and authoritarian control, and the emergence of Nobel laureate Dr. Muhammad Yunus at the helm of the incumbent government represent a seismic political shift. Yunus, known for his pioneering work in microfinance, brings an intellectual and reformist agenda, though his political resilience will be tested in a deeply polarized landscape. Simultaneously, the return of Jamat-e-Islami in student politics alongside regime changes demonstrates how conservative and Islamist movements are gaining traction in parallel to global right-wing trends.
Pakistan: Political Unrest Amid Global Shifts
Pakistan, too, finds itself entangled in this global shift, though its challenges are unique.
The political instability following the events of November 26, 2024, marked a significant chapter in the country’s recent history. The protests spearheaded by supporters of Imran Khan and the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) have highlighted a polarizing narrative of accountability and governance. While protests are a democratic right, their implications have transcended national boundaries. Some individuals and groups with ‘self-proclaimed’ association with Khan and PTI, particularly those based abroad, have invoked the discourse of transnational repression and human rights abuses against the Pakistan Army, appealing to international actors for intervention.
This approach has led to complex ramifications. On the one hand, it brings global attention to Pakistan’s governance and human rights practices; on the other, it risks undermining the country’s sovereignty and inviting external influence in domestic affairs. Such actions echo historical patterns seen in nations where political movements leveraged international platforms to gain leverage, sometimes to the detriment of national unity.
The Intersection of Populism and Global Political Currents
Objectively, the political unrest in Pakistan reflects broader frustrations over economic instability, governance challenges, and perceptions of elite impunity. However, Pakistan’s democratic framework provides institutional mechanisms to address these grievances. It is critical for all stakeholders to prioritize national cohesion and dialogue, rather than resort to rhetoric or actions that could escalate tensions or invite international scrutiny that might undermine sovereignty.
In the context of the rise of the far right, Pakistan’s political dynamics demonstrate the intersection of populism and global political currents. Khan’s narrative of anti-elitism and his ability to galvanize a significant segment of the populace aligns with global populist leaders who leverage dissatisfaction with traditional politics. However, the invocation of international human rights discourse by his supporters outside Pakistan introduces a novel dimension of transnational advocacy, highlighting the global interconnectedness of modern political movements.
This interconnectedness underlines the necessity for Pakistan to manage its internal challenges while maintaining a balanced approach to safeguarding its national interests on the global stage. At the same time, it serves as a reminder that the rise of populist and far-right movements globally is not confined to a single ideology or region but spans diverse sociopolitical landscapes, influencing both governance and public discourse.
Global Shifts: Nationalism, Authoritarianism, and Populism
The rise of the far-right, marked by the embrace of nationalism, authoritarianism, and populism, has become a powerful force in reshaping the global political landscape. This shift, exemplified by the fall of Assad’s regime, illustrates a broader truth: the political dynamics of today’s world are increasingly shaped by rising nationalism, authoritarianism, and the fracturing of old alliances.
From European elections to regime changes in Bangladesh and Syria, the common thread is a growing dissatisfaction with the status quo and a preference for leaders who challenge conventional political norms.
Such developments are not merely geopolitical volatility but also a heightened risk of regional instability and conflict. The Syrian power vacuum, for instance, has emboldened groups like Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), further complicating rivalries among Turkey, Iran, and other key actors. In this context, power vacuums filled by forces whose goals often conflict with international norms—such as democracy and human rights—represent a significant challenge not just to Syria but to the global order.
Paradoxically, the rise of the far-right can also be seen as a push for a new form of liberal world order, albeit one grounded in sovereign identity politics and the defense of national borders.
Rather than undermining global norms, the far-right’s embrace of nationalism reflects a desire to redefine global governance by prioritizing national sovereignty over international cooperation. This ‘resurgent nationalism’ seeks to protect cultural and national identities from the destabilizing effects of globalization, advocating for a return to stronger state sovereignty and a shift away from the multiculturalism that has dominated liberal globalist agendas.
Far-right movements, in many cases, actively reject the post-Cold War liberal order, where the multilateral consensus of international organizations like the UN is perceived as weakening national autonomy. The push for Brexit and the rise of populist movements across Europe underscore a desire to reclaim national identity from what is seen as the overreach of supranational bodies like the EU. Similarly, in the U.S., the protectionist economic policies of Trumpism challenge the free-market ideals central to the liberal world order.
Thus, while the far-right’s policies seem to undermine democratic norms and stability, they also represent a reconfiguration of power—one that pushes for a more fragmented, nation-state-centric global order. These movements are reasserting the role of the state not in isolation, but in opposition to globalist structures that have long been blamed for undermining national cultures, economic stability, and security. This growing trend signals a shift towards sovereign-driven liberalism, where nationalism itself becomes the cornerstone of a new, self-preserving world order.
In the long run, this reconfiguration will not only impact global governance but also exacerbate the regional instability already unfolding in volatile regions like Syria. The power vacuum left in its wake, fueled by nationalist agendas, is a microcosm of the global challenges to come—where sovereignty, identity, and resistance to external control are key drivers of an emerging, fragmented world order.
Your go-to editorial hub for policy perspectives and informed analysis on pressing regional and global issues.
Add a Comment