A year has passed since the overthrow of the Assad regime, which had ruled for 54 years. The joy in Syria on this anniversary was no less intense than at the very beginning. This time, however, the change was unlike that of the "Syrian Spring", which culminated in a complicated civil war. The end came with the entry of the opposition forces into Damascus, who successfully traversed city after city until they reached the Syrian capital.
It is still too early to judge what happened during the past 12 months, but the birth of a new Syria was favourable when the new leadership succeeded in proclaiming the conditions of the “national” state in the public discourse, which unites through citizenship and does not divide, in which weapons are separated from political power, and which consolidates the relationship between the parts and sects of Syria and does not divide them.
At such pivotal moments in history, rhetoric alone is insufficient. Despite the Arab world's welcoming embrace of the change in Damascus, which drew it into the Gulf and the Arabian Peninsula, and its rapprochement with the United States, Europe, and even Russia and China through shared interests, the path forward has been, and remains, laborious. Much work remains to be done between the central government in Damascus and the north-eastern regions, where the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) operate. While the Kurds theoretically accept the concept of a nation-state, they continue to demand a degree of autonomy for their forces, along with a measure of "decentralization" whose limits and extent remain undefined.
The relationship with the Mediterranean coast has been burdened with tension and bloodshed, prompting the formation of a commission of inquiry whose composition will acknowledge what happened and how it occurred. In southern Syria, specifically in Suwayda, the Druze minority quickly became unsettled, with some or all of them seeking refuge with the Israelis. This opened the door to sectarian frictions and, consequently, to Israeli interventions, placing Syrian sovereignty under severe scrutiny.
Despite the new Syrian leadership's declarations of its desire to build a path to Syrian-Israeli peace, Israel viewed the change in Syria as an opportunity to deepen the regional power imbalance. The major turning point came with the Israeli attacks on Damascus, when Israeli aircraft launched raids on sites believed to house remnants of the Syrian army. This was followed by an advance of Israeli forces beyond the borders established by the Syrian-Israeli Disengagement Agreement of May 1974.
Despite the friendly relations established by the "new Syria" with the United States, Europe, and Türkiye, which Damascus hoped would ease Israeli pressure, Israeli intransigence persisted. The situation in Damascus was not immune to the new events arising from Israel's conflicts with the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and with the Lebanese state.
The world's crises were no less complex than those in the Levant and the Middle East. Following the ceasefire agreement between Hamas and Israel, the United States quickly turned its attention to the Ukrainian crisis and its many complexities.
The agenda facing the "new Syria" will be considerably broader, with its priorities still being the preservation of internal cohesion while awaiting a more opportune time to satisfy the Syrian people. This includes restoring the functioning of state institutions, reviving the economy, restoring civil peace, and preventing the flames of neighboring wars from spreading into the heart of Syria. Peace and progress in Syria are crucial for a region tired of division and in dire need of a new Arab approach to achieving stability.