On December 8, Syria witnessed a historic turning point as the regime of Bashar al-Assad collapsed following a series of decisive defeats by opposition forces. The sudden and well-coordinated offensive by a rebel coalition, led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), brought the conflict to a dramatic new phase. Aleppo, Syria’s second-largest city, fell first, marking a symbolic and strategic loss for the regime. Within days, the rebels advanced south to seize Hama and continued their push toward Homs, a critical logistical hub, and Damascus. Assad’s forces, weakened by years of attrition and dependent on external backers, crumbled in the face of the offensive. This collapse has left Syria in a precarious vacuum, with competing actors scrambling for power and raising urgent questions about the country’s future.
Unresolved roots of a war that never ended
In the past years, the international community’s apparent waning interest in Syria and the lack of international and Arab media coverage in recent years may have given the illusion of stability in a ‘frozen conflict’ and, in some quarters, even fostered the narrative of ‘Assad’s victory’. However, the regime’s collapse demonstrates the enduring power of the underlying issues that ignited the 2011 uprising — corruption, authoritarianism, and political exclusion.
Despite numerous opportunities for reform through normalization efforts with regional powers, Assad consistently refused to address these grievances. Initiatives like Syria’s readmission to the Arab League were squandered, with Assad using them to consolidate power rather than offer meaningful concessions. The regime’s continued role in destabilizing the region, including its involvement in the illicit Captagon drug trade, only deepened its isolation and alienated potential allies.
Inside the anti-Assad insurgency: Who are the rebels?
The factions leading this offensive are diverse and complex, defying simplistic labels of ‘freedom fighters’ or ‘jihadists’. HTS, the most prominent force in this coalition, is a former Al-Qaeda affiliate that severed ties in 2016. Despite its attempts to rebrand itself, HTS remains designated as a terrorist organization by the U.S. State Department, and its governance in northwest Syria is marked by authoritarian control, an ideologically driven legal system, and widespread human rights violations.
Alongside HTS are groups like Faylak al-Sham, Jaysh al-Izza, and the Turkistan Brigade. Turkey-backed Syrian National Army (SNA) factions have also participated in limited capacities, though their primary focus remains on Kurdish forces in northern Syria. It is noteworthy that while these groups have united against Assad, their long-term goals differ significantly, raising questions about their ability to govern cohesively should they gain more territory.
The aftermath of Assad’s fall and its regional implications
Assad’s collapse has left a fragmented Syria, and the immediate aftermath is fraught with uncertainty. While opposition groups celebrate their victory, the country faces the risk of descending into further chaos. HTS, the dominant force among the rebels, poses significant challenges due to its authoritarian governance and ideological rigidity. Other factions, including Turkey-backed Syrian National Army (SNA) groups, have differing objectives, raising concerns about infighting and the lack of a cohesive plan for governance.
For the regime’s traditional backers, Assad’s fall introduces both opportunities and risks. Iran loses a key ally and a vital corridor to Hezbollah, significantly weakening its regional influence. Russia, already overstretched by the war in Ukraine, faces the loss of its strategic foothold in the Middle East. Conversely, Turkey sees a chance to expand its influence in northern Syria and facilitate refugee returns, while Israel views the disruption of Iranian supply lines as a strategic gain.
For the US, Assad’s collapse aligns with its long-standing goal of reducing Iranian and Russian influence in the region. However, the rise of extremist factions presents new security threats, posing challenges to US efforts to stabilize Syria and prevent it from becoming a haven for terrorist organizations. Moreover, the US may find itself under pressure to play a larger role in shaping post-Assad governance, a task complicated by its limited presence on the ground, strained relations with key regional actors, and a leadership stance that has increasingly signaled a shift away from deep involvement in Syria’s conflict.
A window of opportunity for the UN-led peace mediation process
Syria’s shifting power dynamics make the role of international diplomacy, particularly the UN peace process, more critical than ever. The fragmentation of opposition groups, the rise of HTS as a dominant force, and the sidelining of the Geneva-based opposition, primarily the National Coalition of Syrian Revolution and Opposition Forces, have created new challenges for determining legitimate representatives in peace negotiations. Meanwhile, regional actors continue to pursue divergent goals, and the risk of extremist governance looms large. Yet, this moment also offers a rare opportunity to reshape the peace process and address Syria’s deep-rooted grievances.
The UN must adapt its approach to reflect the evolving realities on the ground. While UNSCR 2254 (2015) provides a foundational framework, it must be updated to include new actors and account for Syria’s fragmented political and military landscape. Success will depend on engaging relevant stakeholders — both internal and external — while maintaining principles of inclusivity, justice, and human rights.
This is also the time to focus on vertical inclusion, ensuring that the voices of all Syrians — not just elites and armed groups — are heard in shaping the country’s future. The UN must push for the opening of a truly inclusive national dialogue, meaningfully engaging civil society, marginalized communities, women, youth, and those who have borne the brunt of the conflict. Supporting the holding of free and fair elections and establishing a credible transitional process are critical steps toward rebuilding legitimacy and trust among the Syrian people.
To reclaim its central role in the peace process, the UN must overcome the limitations imposed by past setbacks, such as the Astana process, which marginalized its past mediation efforts. A more assertive approach is needed to align the interests of regional players, such as Turkey, Iran, and Arab states, who hold significant sway over the conflict’s outcome. Convening a regional summit under UN leadership to align their interests and establish common objectives — such as curbing extremism and fostering stability — could mitigate competing agendas and revitalize the broader support for the peace process.
At the same time, the UN must confront the challenge of integrating HTS into negotiations. While its battlefield dominance makes its exclusion difficult, its governance model — marked by authoritarian practices and strict Sharia law — raises serious concerns about legitimacy and the risks of legitimizing extremist actors. Any inclusion must be carefully conditioned to align with broader principles of the peace process.
Ultimately, any viable political solution must address the root causes of the conflict: corruption, political exclusion, and systemic abuses. Reframing the UN-led process toward conflict resolution rather than mere conflict management is essential to rebuilding trust and creating an inclusive dialogue that represents all Syrians. This effort must also prioritize governance reforms, human rights protections, and humanitarian needs, paving the way for refugee returns, reconstruction, and reconciliation.
The decisions made now will shape Syria’s future and the stability of the wider Middle East. A focused and unified international effort is imperative to break the cycle of violence and forge a sustainable path toward peace. Anything less risks perpetuating a conflict that has already exacted an unbearable toll on Syria and its people.
Jusaima Moaid-azm Peregrina is a Syrian-Spanish researcher and lecturer at the University of Granada, specializing in International Law, International Relations, and Middle Eastern studies. She holds a PhD in Social Sciences, with her dissertation focusing on UN mediation in the Syrian conflict. Her work explores peace mediation, conflict resolution, civil society inclusion, and women’s political participation with a focus on Syria, Libya, and Yemen. She is a project coordinator at the Euro-Arab Foundation for Higher Studies and has published extensively on the intersections of conflict, governance, and societal inclusion.
