A year after the ousting of Bashar al-assad ended 13 years of civil war, syria is undergoing a dramatic shift in its geopolitical standing.Now led by interim president Ahmed al-Shara – a former jihadist leader – the nation has re-emerged on the international stage, culminating in a landmark meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump. this report examines the factors driving this change, from reconstruction efforts and shifting alliances to the complex regional dynamics impacting Syria’s fragile path toward stability.
A year after the fall of the Assad regime in Syria and the departure of Bashar al-Assad following 13 years of civil war, both the country and its interim president, Ahmed al-Shara, have undergone a significant transformation. Syria has re-emerged on the international stage, while al-Shara has transitioned from a jihadist leader to being internationally recognized as interim president and, in a historic meeting, welcomed by Donald Trump at the White House.
The shift marks a notable change in Syria’s geopolitical standing, as the nation attempts to rebuild after years of conflict. Experts suggest al-Shara has prioritized domestic reconstruction and stability, alongside the external goal of normalizing relations with other nations. “Al-Shara has three great priorities: domestic priorities of reconstruction and stability, and the external priority of normalizing relations,” explained Jordi Quero, Professor of International Relations at the Universitat Pompeu Fabra, to RTVE.es. There appears to be a growing international consensus that stability in Syria is desirable, and that the year-old transition should not falter.
“Syria cannot rebuild itself alone; it must find a balance in terms of resources,” agreed Samuele Carlos Abrami, a principal researcher at CIDOB. He added that Syria’s strategic position will ultimately determine its geopolitical future.
The Assad Legacy and Shifting Alliances
Table of Contents
Syria’s central location in the Middle East has long dictated its political landscape, with powerful neighbors influencing its policies and events within the country having the potential to impact the wider region – as evidenced by the 2015 refugee crisis that reached Europe.
Hafez al-Assad, who ruled Syria with an iron fist from 1971 to 2000, understood the delicate internal and external balance required to maintain power. He aligned with the Soviet Union, granting them access to the Tartus naval base, and positioned himself as a pan-Arab and secular leader, hosting Palestinian organizations while maintaining a tense armistice with Israel and intervening in Lebanon.
His son inherited power in a vastly different international context. The end of the Cold War and the dissolution of the Soviet Union initially pushed him towards Europe, where he was treated as a pro-Western leader. Early in the Arab Spring, he appeared capable of implementing an “authoritarian modernization,” at least economically, but the ensuing civil war isolated him internationally, branding him as a brutal dictator. Assad then re-established ties with Russia and forged an alliance with Iran. Ironically, before his removal, Arab nations had begun to rehabilitate his image, restoring Syria’s seat in the Arab League and resuming diplomatic relations. On December 8, Assad left Syria, marking the end of an era.
This paved the way for Ahmed al-Shara. Formerly affiliated with Al Qaeda and one of the founders of the Al Nusra Front, later becoming Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, al-Shara was once a target of U.S. bounties. However, his leadership of the rebel administration in Idlib province reportedly led to a moderation of his views. This is the narrative now accepted by ambassadors, and ultimately, by Donald Trump.
Samuele Abrami highlighted the dramatically different international environment al-Shara now navigates. “There is a growing level of uncertainty, due to the war in Gaza, how the U.S. is positioning itself, and a complicated neighbor like Turkey, which was previously closer to Western positions but now pursues its own policy. The same applies to Gulf countries, which previously had a less assertive foreign policy and fewer resources, but now pursue their own objectives.”
Reconstruction as a Catalyst for Pragmatism
Al-Shara’s objectives, according to Marta Tawil, a researcher at the Center for International Studies at the Colegio de México and a member of the Center for Contemporary Arab Studies (CEARC), can be summarized in three key areas. “A primary goal is to clearly distinguish itself from the authoritarian government of the Assad era. This even involves proposing a new national identity and a new orientation for Syria’s foreign relations, based on new principles. Syria is no longer presented as the heart of Arabism in the region, but as a pole of equilibrium, open to the world, and without problems with its neighbors.”
“Secondly,” Tawil continued, “his background as a member of a younger generation, one that did not experience many of the events their parents did both domestically and internationally, shapes his approach.”
The third key objective is economic reconstruction. “He knows that to consolidate his power and legitimacy, and to prevent the transition from derailing, the country must begin to rebuild and receive foreign investment, which requires presenting the best possible image and a more flexible discourse than that of the previous regime,” Tawil concluded.
Al-Shara presides over a Syria devastated by 13 years of civil war, with a divided society and economic needs exceeding the country’s capacity. The World Bank has estimated the cost of reconstruction at over $215 billion (approximately €185 billion), ten times Syria’s 2024 GDP.
“The absolute priority for him is to rebuild the country,” Jordi Quero affirmed. “If foreign policy helps with that, so much the better. He is fully aware that he needs full cooperation with many other countries, especially those in the Gulf, Europe, and the United States, to pay that bill. It’s an exercise in pragmatism.”
The Trump Meeting: A Landmark Achievement
Al-Shara’s efforts to present himself as a moderate and the strongman of the new Syria were rewarded on November 10 with a historic meeting with Donald Trump in Washington. It marked the first time a Syrian head of state had visited the White House.
Following the visit, the Treasury Department partially suspended some of the most severe sanctions imposed on Syria. It is likely that the two leaders also discussed other issues, such as relations with Israel and U.S. interest in establishing a military base in the Al Mazzeh district outside Damascus.
“It is not an exaggeration to see this as a turning point, just as Al-Shara’s participation in the UN General Assembly was,” Marta Tawil stated. “This change in U.S. policy is fundamental. Al-Shara contributed his experience governing in Idlib, where he showed flexibility towards the U.S. and began to support the fight against ISIS. This has allowed him to transform his image.”
Samuele Abrami also considered it “a turning point,” reflecting Trump’s approach to international relations, which is personal and “bilateral,” prioritizing transactions.
The potential losers in this rapprochement with Washington are Russia and, above all, Iran, Assad’s former allies.
“Al-Shara has not broken with Russia or Iran,” Tawil clarified. “Russia could maintain its base, the U.S. could have another, Turkey could maintain its presence in the north… Damascus could accept all of this. It’s a game of balance between everyone, observing each other to ensure no one advances too far.”
The CIDOB researcher believes the Syrian president has not completely closed the door on the Islamic Republic. “There will be a way to shape relations on a different terrain, but I don’t think he wants to antagonize Tehran, or Moscow either.”
Turkey and the Gulf: Seeking Equilibrium
Amidst this complex regional landscape, Al-Shara currently enjoys the support of Turkey. Turkish military support is believed to have been instrumental in his swift rise to power a year ago. However, experts say the Syrian president is seeking a counterweight in Arab nations, some of whom, like the United Arab Emirates, view him with suspicion.
“The skepticism of some Gulf countries stems from the idea that the Syrian interim government is heavily influenced by Turkey,” Abrami explained. “It is true that Turkey has always supported the rebels, but when it comes to reconstruction, it does not have the same economic resources as the Gulf countries. Al-Shara likes to maintain Turkey’s political support, but he needs the resources of the Gulf countries.”
Ankara has its own interests, primarily preventing a failed state on its southern border, through which 3.6 million refugees entered during the war. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan also desires a recentralization of political power in Damascus. “Erdogan likes the idea of undermining the regional power base of the Kurds in the north with a strong Syrian government,” Jordi Quero summarized.
Marta Tawil believes Al-Shara is seeking economic and political support from Arab nations as a counterweight. “That’s why he is trying to resume agreements with Jordan and rehabilitate oil pipelines with Iraq. Syria understands that its central position depends on and is enriched by restoring these ties.”
Migration: A Key Concern for the EU
The European Union has also welcomed Al-Shara, overlooking his past. Syria is a significant transit country for migration from the Middle East and Asia to the EU. The Twenty-Seven, particularly Germany, hope that pacification and stabilization will lead some of the million refugees it received in 2015 to return.
“One of the EU’s main concerns is the risk of a migratory wave if Syria does not achieve stability,” Abrami stated, adding that the EU may also have interests in reconstruction.
“The EU does not want this year-long peace to collapse, and therefore they support stability and reconstruction,” Jordi Quero said.
Israel: An External Threat to the Transition
Israel took advantage of the chaos following Bashar al-Assad’s fall to occupy Syrian territory beyond the Golan Heights and to bomb critical infrastructure and military and civilian targets (in June, it attacked the presidential palace in Damascus), citing reasons such as preventing a hypothetical aggression or protecting minorities like the Druze.
The latest Israeli incursion occurred on November 28, costing the lives of at least 13 people, including two children. Trump warned Tel Aviv against any interference in Syria that could jeopardize the transition.
Jordi Quero interprets Tel Aviv’s actions as a warning to deter the new Syrian rulers from any disruptive scenarios. “Israel is sending a message, telling the Syrian president ‘be careful, because we are prepared to raise the volume of the conversation if necessary,’” said the UPF professor.
Tawil, however, believes that “Israel’s hegemonic and expansionist project” is the most worrying factor for the Syrian government. “Israel is trying to foster sectarian division and exacerbate it, which creates fractures in Syria. Al-Shara is trying to appease Israel: Damascus was the only regional capital that did not condemn the Israeli attacks against Iran, even though the Israeli air force used Syrian airspace,” she explained.
Israeli actions, the CEARC expert warned, have a destabilizing and radicalizing effect throughout the region. “One thing is what the Syrian government does, and another is what Syrian society does. The government knows that it cannot push for a radical change regarding Israel without getting anything in return.”
According to Samuele Carlo Abrami, Washington has a significant role to play here. “The U.S. wants to avoid a direct confrontation and will likely freeze the conflict situation through a status quo it can control. One of Trump’s proposals is the normalization of relations between the two countries. He has even talked about including Syria in the Abraham Accords, which is as fascinating as it is implausible.”
