Khaled al-Jeratli | Ali Darwish

Syrians want to move to the next step after the overthrow of the Assad regime on December 8, and amid aspirations to quickly move beyond this phase and begin development and reconstruction, the features of the transitional phase remain unclear politically and administratively.

The armed movement led by Ahmed al-Sharaa (Abu Mohammad al-Jolani) has decided to form a caretaker government to manage this stage for three months. This is the same Salvation Government that was administering Idlib province in northwestern Syria, where the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), which has been at the forefront of military operations against the regime since November 27, has been in control.

International and regional parties are monitoring the scene and assessing the new government’s moves along with the military command, as Washington has outlined its conditions for recognizing the new government in Syria, while European countries have presented their vision for political transition, whereas most Arab countries have supported the change in Syria.

Enab Baladi discusses in this lengthy report the scenarios for the transitional phase that Syria is going through, both internally and externally, with experts and researchers presenting their expectations regarding what is anticipated in the foreseeable future.

Caretaker or transitional government?

Eyes on “2254”

No signs have emerged of the involvement of other local parties in the caretaker government, some of which were partners with Tahrir al-Sham during military operations, such as the Syrian National Army (the military wing of the Syrian Interim Government), while others remain independent but demand to be included in the future political process, such as the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (AANES). This may explain that the current government is only a management body and not a transitional government.

Dima Moussa, the deputy president of the opposition’s Syrian National Coalition, stated in an interview with Enab Baladi that the current phase is managed by the Salvation Government, while the Interim Government continues to manage parts of eastern and northern Aleppo, the same areas it had been governing in past years.

She added that there is no direct coordination between the Salvation and Interim government (the executive arm of the coalition) today, but there is cooperation through active individuals and members among the parties.

According to Moussa, the upcoming phase is the transitional government that should be participatory, which the Syrian local community, which recently freed itself from the dictatorship of Bashar al-Assad, is waiting for.

Moussa noted that the overthrow of the Syrian regime was not the goal, but rather an obstacle in building Syria, which is a crucial phase that the Syrians have now surpassed; they are, however, waiting for the next steps.

She pointed out that the political scene is moving toward starting the implementation of UN resolution “2254,” which stipulates the formation of a transitional government lasting 18 months, during which a Syrian-Syrian dialogue would take place.

Absent political parties

The Military Operations Administration assigned Mohammed al-Bashir (the head of the Salvation Government) on December 10 to form a caretaker government until March 1, 2025, without providing clarifications on the next steps.

Former Syrian diplomat Danny al-Baaj believes that the current government is not a transitional government but rather a government taking over authority from the ousted regime; it is now a “hybrid” government between the regime and the Salvation Government, even though its early days were referred to as a “transitional government” before the term was unified again to become a caretaker government.

A transitional government cannot be formed in this way, according to al-Baaj. He stated to Enab Baladi that a transitional government requires extensive consultations and political parties, and needs to represent all Syrian components militarily, politically, as well as civil society components.

He noted that the political transition has not yet started, and it cannot be considered that the transitional process has begun without broad participation and a participatory process in selecting transitional governance bodies widely, which also includes civil society.

 

The current government is not a transitional government; it is a government taking over authority from the regime. It is a hybrid government between the regime and the Salvation Government. A transitional government cannot be formed in this way. It needs broad consultations and political parties, and needs all components to be represented – militarily, politically, and at the level of civil society as well.

Danny al-Baaj, Former Syrian diplomat

 

What about UN resolution “2254”

The work of the caretaker government will conclude in March 2025, to move to arrangements to start the transitional phase and the political transition process, which is a lengthy process that will exceed 18 months, as the UN resolution “2254” stipulated that it would last for 18 months and extend to two years, until a new constitution is established and elections are held.

Al-Baaj noted that it is necessary to abandon the reconstitution of the UN’s Syrian Constitutional Committee as it is currently “inactive,” formed under the influence of various parties; thus, a new Syrian constitutional committee should be formed.

The old version of the constitutional committee includes 50 members chosen by the former regime, 50 chosen by the opposition, and 50 chosen by the UN from representatives of civil society and experts, aiming to reach a consensus constitution among all Syrian parties.

The committee did not find its way toward light as the regime and Russia continued to obstruct its work. Its last session was held in mid-2022, and calls to resume have continued until last November, without success.

Resolution “2254” oversees a peaceful transition of power as a general international decision, which has not yet been implemented. Some believe that negotiations under this decision ended with the fall of the regime, but this belief is incorrect, according to al-Baaj.

The former Syrian diplomat believes that international resolutions, including the Geneva statement, do not mention Bashar al-Assad by name but refer to the Syrian government. After the Military Operations Administration entered Damascus, it met with the government, thus representing the ousted regime concerning the provisions of “2254.” According to the current applicable Syrian constitution, in the absence of the head of state, the presidency of the government continues the work of the state.

The political responsibility ultimately rests on the two main recognized opposing bodies: the Syrian Negotiation Commission and the Syrian National Coalition, according to al-Baaj. If they do not move this week, they risk removing themselves from the equation.

Regarding the Negotiation Commission, al-Baaj thinks that it should broaden itself to include the Syrian government (the regime’s government) alongside it to become the nucleus of a national conference. As a second step, all members of the Negotiation Commission should meet in a general assembly to demand representation from the current Syrian government or, at least, create an expanded consultative mechanism that begins to outline the transitional phase.

Al-Baaj highlighted the importance of inviting other non-participating parties to engage, providing ample space and a significant share for civil society.

As for the National Coalition, it represents opposition parties, and opposition political parties, including the Coalition, should directly engage in the political process, or its president should announce his engagement and move to Damascus to start working from there to prepare for the national conference in coordination with the Negotiation Commission.

Al-Baaj criticized the National Coalition for remaining passive in the face of ongoing developments, asking, “Is the Coalition waiting for solutions from the UN envoy, Geir Pedersen?”

He considered the lack of effectiveness and a clear plan for the Coalition to be a “concerning and shameful” indicator after 14 years of continued opposition activity.

On the military side, al-Baaj believes that all factions can consult and hold meetings among themselves, which should continue this dialogue, leading to the correct rebuilding of the Syrian army, representing defected officers in this army, especially since military bodies are the most familiar with the regime and its structure.

Military coordination

Along with the formation of the upcoming government and its roles in the political transition, many military issues remain open, especially concerning military formations that had not previously joined Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, which is at the forefront in the battle of “Deterrence of Aggression.” Notable among these are factions in the south and rural Damascus, along with the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) in northeastern Syria.

Tahrir al-Sham has experience in ending many factions that do not align with it, but this was done within limited geographical areas, not at the level of Syria as a whole.

On December 11, leaders from the Southern Operations Room met with the Military Operations Administration to coordinate military and civilian efforts under the new government, aiming to put an end to disturbances and provide basic services to citizens, as announced in a statement from the Southern Operations Room.

The Southern Operations Room was established on December 6, and within 24 hours it took control of the provinces of Daraa, As-Suwayda, and Quneitra, subsequently moving towards Damascus, coinciding with the Military Operations Administration taking control of Homs and heading towards Damascus until the regime fell on December 8.

Sheikh Bilal al-Hariri, one of the attendees at the meeting with Ahmed al-Sharaa (al-Jolani) and the leaders from the south, including the commander of the Eighth Brigade, Ahmed al-Awda, told Enab Baladi that the results of this meeting would be apparent in the coming days.

He attributed the reasons for holding the meeting between the southern leaders and Ahmed al-Sharaa, head of the Military Operational Administration, to establishing controls for the factions’ activities and avoiding factional or individual actions, as well as organizing the work mechanism in the upcoming phase.

Discussions focused on unifying the factions under the name of the Ministry of Defense, a matter that “cannot be overlooked in order to establish security.” Regarding the formation of the government and the participation of the south in the political process, there was “discussion around these general matters,” according to Sheikh Bilal al-Hariri.

A leader in the Southern Operations Room, nicknamed “Abu Sharif al-Mahamid,” told Enab Baladi that discussions did not focus on the role of the south in managing the government but rather on the activities of the factions and ensuring security in the south, as there have been individual violations that have not escalated to clashes, but it is necessary to work on resolving factions and integrating them into a single military sector, the Syrian Ministry of Defense.

This coordination with military components could serve as a model for dealing with other military entities, such as factions that have spread in Damascus and its rural areas that did not directly follow Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, or the Syrian National Army in northern Aleppo countryside, and even the SDF in eastern Syria.

SDF: We are in contact with the Military Operations Administration

The battles of the Military Operations Administration focused against Syrian regime forces and allied militias, and there have been no threats issued against the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), which controls parts of northeastern Syria. However, the SDF announced the control of its fighters over the city of Deir Ezzor on December 10.

The Administration pushed the SDF out of a portion of Deir Ezzor province located west of the Euphrates River, while the other part located east of the Euphrates remains under SDF control.

SDF commander Mazloum Abdi stated, on December 12, that the SDF has agreements with Tahrir al-Sham regarding the provinces of Aleppo and Deir Ezzor, pointing out that there is an agreement on eastern and western Deir Ezzor.

Abdi mentioned that Tahrir al-Sham informed the SDF about its military operation and that the areas controlled by the SDF are not its target.

Tahrir al-Sham has not made statements or appeared officially as a military faction since the launch of the Military Operations Administration’s “Deterrence of Aggression” battle on November 27, and everything pertaining to it falls under the activities of the Military Operations Administration.

The SDF is working on “preparing the atmosphere to send a delegation to Damascus for dialogues,” meaning discussions with the transitional government, according to Abdi, who also indicated that the SDF does not pose a threat to Turkish security and is ready to engage in dialogue with Turkey.

Over the years, the SDF has attempted to find a common formula with Bashar al-Assad’s regime during its negotiations with it to maintain its gains, but it has not succeeded.

Based on Abdi’s statements, the SDF continues this approach, seeking to negotiate with the Military Operations Administration and trying to provide reassurances to Turkey, while the factions of the Syrian National Army supported by Turkey are engaged in battles against the SDF in the Aleppo countryside, having expelled the latter from several areas, most notably Manbij.

The latest update from northeastern Syria came in a statement from the Autonomous Administration, which is the political umbrella for the SDF, when it decided, on December 12, to adopt the flag of the Syrian revolution in its government and administrative institutions that it has built over the past nine years in the areas under its control.

Despite the talk of existing agreements and ongoing dialogues, and delegations coming and going between areas of control, military battles continue in eastern Aleppo countryside between the Syrian National Army and the SDF, interrupted by ceasefires and negotiations, only to be resumed at other times.

Western conditions

Forty-eight hours after al-Assad fled the Syrian capital, Damascus, just before opposition factions reached his presidential palace, statements began pouring in about the prevailing situation in Syria. Some countries supported the opposition’s advance toward Damascus, while others praised it, and some remained neutral.

The White House National Security Council Press Secretary, Shawn Savet stated that US President Joe Biden and his team “are closely monitoring the exceptional events” occurring in Syria and are in constant contact with regional partners.

For its part, Russia, which had been an ally of the regime for years, expressed concern over the “tragic events in Syria,” adding that al-Assad decided to leave the presidency and fled the country due to negotiations with several parties involved in the armed conflict on Syrian territory, instructing a peaceful transfer of power.

Iran, another ally of the regime, stated that determining Syria’s fate and making decisions about it and its future is solely the responsibility of the people of this country, without destructive interference or external imposition, while supporting Resolution 2254.

Germany expressed “great relief” at the fall of the Assad regime in Syria, along with warnings about the potential rise of what it termed “extremists” to power.

France welcomed the “fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime after more than 13 years of extremely violent repression against his people,” urging Syrians to reject “extremism,” according to a statement from the French Foreign Ministry.

China stated that it is following developments in the situation in Syria and expresses great interest, hoping that Syria will regain stability as soon as possible, according to a statement from the Chinese Foreign Ministry.

Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani said he is “following the developments in the situation in Syria with great interest,” and he is in constant contact with the Italian embassy in Damascus and the Prime Minister’s office, calling for an emergency meeting at the Foreign Ministry.

Other statements and positions came in, with Turkish and Qatari support, and a comment from Jordan stating that the kingdom is monitoring the developments, along with similar stances from Iraq, and calls from Egypt to preserve the state’s resources.

Resuming relations

Four days after al-Assad’s fall, the Political Affairs Administration of the Salvation Government announced that eight countries have resumed their diplomatic missions, while receiving promises from other countries intending to reopen their embassies in the country.

The Political Affairs Administration expressed its gratitude through its official channels to Egypt, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Jordan, Bahrain, Oman, and Italy for resuming their diplomatic missions in Damascus.

It added that it hopes to build good relations with all countries that respect the will of the people and the sovereignty of the Syrian state and its territorial integrity.

Most of these countries had reinstated their missions in Syria between 2018 and 2024.

The Political Affairs Administration was once part of the Salvation Government, but has now become a source of speeches directed to the outside by the caretaker government that recently moved to Damascus.

The Political Affairs Administration stated that it received direct promises from Qatar and Turkey to reopen their embassies in Syria, while Ankara announced the temporary appointment of a charge d’affaires for its embassy in Damascus.

Previously, a counselor for the Prime Minister and the spokesperson for the Qatari Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Majid bin Mohammed al-Ansari, stated that the opening of the Qatari embassy in Syria is forthcoming.

The Qatari Foreign Ministry published through its official account on “X” that Doha will reopen its embassy in Syria soon after completing the necessary arrangements.

US conditions

An official in the US State Department responded to questions posed by Enab Baladi regarding US requirements from the new authorities in Syria for recognition and support. He stated that the US will fully recognize and support any future Syrian government that emerges from a comprehensive and transparent process reflecting the will of the Syrian people.

He added, “We are prepared to provide all appropriate support for all communities and diverse electoral constituencies in Syria.”

The State Department official noted that this new government must take steps to gain US support, which include:

Firstly: The transitional process should lead to a reliable, inclusive, representative, and non-sectarian governance that meets international standards for transparency and accountability, in accordance with the principles of United Nations Security Council Resolution “2254”.

Secondly: Clear commitments must be provided by the new government regarding the following:

• Full respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms for the Syrian people, including minorities.
• Facilitating the flow of humanitarian aid to all those in need.
• Preventing the use of Syria as a base for terrorism or as a threat to its neighbors.
• Ensuring the secure storage and destruction of any chemical weapons stockpiles.

Regarding the sanctions imposed on Syria, the official stated that his country does not conduct a pre-review regarding sanctions, terrorism classifications, or delisting from lists.

He added that the ultimate goal of the sanctions is to bring about a positive change in behavior, pointing out that his country will continue to monitor the situation and assess the actions of Tahrir al-Sham to take a position, without specifying a timeframe for these steps.

 

“We do not conduct a pre-review regarding sanctions, terrorist designations, or delisting. The ultimate goal of the sanctions is to bring about positive behavioral change. We will continue to monitor the situation and evaluate the actions of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham to take our stance in the future.”

US State Department official to Enab Baladi

 

German vision

Germany, for its part, outlined its vision for a “Democratic Syria,” announcing its readiness to support “reconciliation and transitional justice” within an eight-point framework outlined by the German Special Envoy to Syria, Stefan Schneck. These points include:

• Peaceful and orderly power transfer through inclusive dialogue and a ceasefire, power sharing, and the integration of militias into a national army, conducting elections under UN supervision.
• Inviting the Friends of Syria group, along with key Arab countries and Western donors, to enhance support and “deter the corrupt,” as international consensus is deemed “vital” to protect Syria from foreign intervention.
• Establishing clear criteria for dealing with Hayat Tahrir al-Sham and its political arm (the Salvation Government) not subject to sanctions, ensuring protection for minorities and the release of prisoners.
• Germany supports lifting economic sanctions on Syria to enable the entry of humanitarian aid and early recovery programs, and to reduce the presence of refugee camps in neighboring countries.
• Assisting Syria through German expertise to prevent future conflicts, paving the way for reconciliation and supporting transitional justice.
• Pushing towards investigations led by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) regarding chemical weapons in Syria and ensuring their safe destruction to prevent them from falling into the “wrong hands.”
• Preparing for the re-establishment of the German diplomatic presence in Syria to commence fact-finding missions and engage with the new authorities, ensuring dialogue with religious and ethnic minorities.
• Preventing the flow of new waves of refugees by supporting humanitarian, political, social, and economic stability, and working towards the “voluntary, safe, and dignified” return of refugees.

Germany is the top destination for Syrian refugees in Europe, having received about one-third of the applications out of 334,000 requests in the European Union.

Getting rid of the terrorism label

The sudden change in the behavior of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham from a radical armed faction to an organized faction that strives to avoid violating the rights of civilians, has not spared the group, which is the largest military faction that emerged in northern Syria, from criticisms and accusations carrying fears of the ideological nature of governance in Syria, coloring it with a strict Islamic nature.

Some accusations went further than Tahrir al-Sham’s own direction, as some viewed in the early days of the infiltration of factions into the Syrian cities, which are characterized by religious, sectarian, and ethnic diversity, that a new Taliban was coming to Syria, which Tahrir al-Sham itself has not been able to counter through its efforts to show moderation.

Political expert specializing in Middle Eastern affairs, Eva Kolouriotis, believes that comparing the control of the armed Syrian opposition over Syria, which includes a wide array of factions, including Tahrir al-Sham, to the control of the Taliban over Afghanistan is unjust, especially from the American-European perspective.

The expert added, in an interview with Enab Baladi, that the Syrian scene from the American and European viewpoint is entirely different, as evidenced by US media’s reporting on the Biden administration starting to consider removing Tahrir al-Sham from the list of designated terrorist organizations, in addition to the EU adopting a decision to freeze asylum requests for Syrians, a move that has not yet been taken for Afghan citizens, despite the fact that more than two years have passed since the Taliban took over.

The researcher believes that the West’s general desire focuses on imposing a state of stability in Syria for many reasons, and the Americans realize that chaos in Syria will be a “fertile ground for the emergence of extremist organizations and the return of the Islamic State group on one hand, and it will negatively affect the tranquility of the Golan front on the other.”

Europe supports

Europeans have not shown a unified position regarding what is happening in Syria, with the exception of scattered public positions from various European countries, including Germany, France, and Italy; however, even countries that have not commented on the developments in Syria have felt a breathing space that they can deal with to get rid of Syrian refugees, who are seen as a burden on the authorities in some of these countries.

Researcher Eva Kolouriotis believes that the refugee issue in Europe has become a priority for many countries, which began to build relationships with the Assad regime even before its fall to facilitate the return of Syrian refugees.

Based on the indicators currently on the table of these countries, the West is unlikely to make any hostile decisions against the current government led by Mohammed al-Bashir, despite its affiliation with Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, but recognizing this government requires it to prove its practical commitment to international law, restoring security and stability to the country, and respecting the rights of minorities, according to Kolouriotis.

The researcher pointed out the existence of Western fears regarding Tahrir al-Sham’s control of the scene in Syria, based on the history of this group; however, these fears may gradually dissipate depending on their internal and external policies. Here, it is noteworthy that Washington and the European Union were aware of the work of the Salvation Government in Idlib, and there were objections to some of the policies that this government adopts regarding religious and political freedoms, according to the researcher.

Kolouriotis thinks that if the Syrian political opposition, such as the Syrian National Coalition, took the initiative, the West’s recognition of the ruling body in Damascus would have been “faster and more positive in terms of political and economic support than what these parties might have adopted with the government of Mohammed al-Bashi in Damascus.”

The European Union did not respond to Enab Baladi‘s inquiries regarding its position on the recent events in Syria.

 

If a recognized political opposition like the (Syrian National Coalition) took the initiative, recognition of the recently formed government would have come more swiftly, and this government would have received economic support sooner than is the case now when dealing with Mohammed al-Bashir’s government in Damascus.

Eva Kolouriotis, Political expert specializing in Middle Eastern affairs

 

Prior coordination

The armed factions attempted to portray their military action against the Syrian regime, which succeeded in overthrowing the latter in 11 days, as a national movement that received no external support. However, some observers believe that there was prior coordination between Hayat Tahrir al-Sham and international parties.

Samir al-Abdullah, the director of policy analysis at the Harmoon Center for Contemporary Studies, believes that what happened in Syria was largely in agreement with the US, while other European countries accepted this scenario. He suggested that Ahmed al-Sharaa was given an opportunity to prove his good behavior, and he was presented with two main conditions:

• Improve the treatment of minorities and different components in Syria, especially the Alawites and Christians.
• Open a dialogue with the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF).

The researcher linked the achievement of these two conditions for al-Sharaa with the removal of his name from terrorist lists and sanctions lists, and thus recognition of him and his government.

Al-Abdullah added to Enab Baladi that, as of the preparation of this report, al-Sharaa has succeeded in managing the battle, and the steps he has taken have been well accepted; therefore, it is likely that his name and that of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham will be removed from terrorism lists, with recognition of them especially since it has become a fact on the ground in Syria.

He also pointed out that it is still early to judge Ahmed al-Sharaa’s ability to establish a trustworthy and comprehensive government, as the current government is a caretaker government, and what Syria really needs is a transitional government that includes competencies, with a constitutional declaration and the formation of a committee to draft a new constitution for the country, followed by elections, noting that these steps are the only way to rescue Syria.