Syria’s Surge in Violence Does Not Signal a New Civil War—for Now

A recent surge in violence among Assad loyalists has sparked concerns of renewed civil conflict in Syria. However, experts indicate that a full-scale civil war is unlikely as the new government works to stabilize the situation while facing challenges related to political legitimacy and economic recovery.

Recent violence in Syria has raised concerns about a potential return to sectarian conflict, but experts argue that a full-scale civil war is unlikely at this stage. The violence, which has claimed hundreds of lives, has been attributed to loyalists of former President Bashar al-Assad, who are still present in the country despite his ousting in December 2024. These loyalists, many of whom belong to the Alawite minority, staged a rebellion against the new government led by Ahmed al-Sharaa and the Ha’yat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS).

Reports indicate that Iranian influence may have contributed to the unrest, as the Iranian regime seeks to regain its foothold in Syria. In response to the uprising, al-Sharaa mobilized his security forces to suppress the loyalists, leading to significant violence against them, including indiscriminate attacks that resulted in many civilian casualties. Conflicting reports have also surfaced regarding targeted violence against Alawites and Christians, clouded by a mix of misinformation and disinformation.

Although tensions remain high, the prevailing sentiment suggests that the Assad loyalists lack popular support due to the numerous abuses committed during his regime. Conversely, al-Sharaa and his administration recognize the necessity of improving the economy and respecting minority rights to maintain their grip on power. Should they fail to address these key issues, further unrest could arise.

Efforts by al-Sharaa to foster economic recovery and promote a vision of inclusivity in Syria indicate a potential pathway to stability. He has actively solicited sanctions relief and financial aid from neighboring countries, demonstrating an understanding of the pressing need for economic revival. However, questions linger regarding whether al-Sharaa’s calls for a united Syria stem from genuine commitment or tactical maneuvering to appease external stakeholders.

The influence of foreign powers remains a concern, particularly regarding Iranian involvement and the strategic interests of Russia and Turkey. While Iran appears to be involved, credible evidence is scarce. Major Arab states express discontent with rising Islamist influence but have shown little inclination toward engaging in another proxy war, focusing instead on their own regional concerns.

The role of the United States in stabilizing the situation appears limited, as officials have expressed reluctance to intervene deeply in Syria’s affairs. However, recent agreements between the Syrian government and the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces mark a significant step toward rebuilding the country’s armed forces. Meanwhile, Turkey maintains a vested interest in the outcome, hoping to foster a government in Damascus that aligns with its regional ambitions and addresses its security concerns.

In conclusion, while the recent escalation of violence in Syria has alarmed observers and raised fears of renewed sectarian conflict, the situation remains complex. Current dynamics suggest that a full-scale civil war is not imminent, provided that the new government navigates the challenges of economic recovery and minority rights thoughtfully. International involvement, particularly from regional powers, will continue to significantly impact the future stability of Syria.

Original Source: www.cfr.org