The recent shift in Syria’s leadership, with Mohammed al-Bashir taking office as caretaker prime minister, will not resolve the ongoing crisis. While this political change signals a shift in Syria’s internal power dynamics, it overlooks the much larger geopolitical web that continues to entangle the region. A crucial factor is the power vacuum created by Russia and Iran’s withdrawal, which risks triggering new conflicts, particularly between Turkey and Israel, as well as within the broader US-backed rebel groups in Syria.
Turkey’s support for Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) and the US backing of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) and the Free Syrian Army (FSA) creates a combustible mix of competing factions. Both HTS and SDF, each heavily supported by their respective patrons, have territorial control in the north and northeast of Syria. As the conflict continues, these forces may clash over the regions they control, further destabilizing the situation. While HTS, with its Al-Qaeda links and jihadist orientation, is backed by Turkey, the US has historically supported the SDF—primarily composed of Kurdish fighters—alongside the more moderate Free Syrian Army rebels, creating a complex and volatile environment where these groups’ interests do not always align.
The US faces a delicate balancing act. While maintaining its longstanding NATO relationship with Turkey, it also must continue its support for the SDF and FSA, two groups that are diametrically opposed to Turkey’s interests. If Turkey-backed HTS and US-backed forces come into direct conflict, the US risks being drawn into an increasingly complex and unpredictable confrontation, with no easy resolution in sight.
Israel, sensing an opportunity in the growing chaos, will likely intensify its military activities in Syria, particularly occupy full of Golan Heights and establish a mighty strategic presence in Syrian battlefield. With Russia and Iran distracted or scaling back their involvement, Israel could press forward with its encroaching strategy, seeing the instability as a chance to further secure its borders and push against Iranian influence. While the US may align with Israel’s goals in curbing Iranian expansion, Israel’s unilateral actions could further complicate the broader regional balance.
In this highly charged environment, the US faces the challenge of managing its alliances with both Turkey and Israel, two crucial allies with often conflicting interests in Syria. The US has also been accused of arming and supporting the FSA, a group that has longstanding ties with moderate rebels in the region. This contradiction—supporting forces backed by NATO and other rebel groups—creates a complex web of relationships that could easily unravel if the situation devolves into all-out conflict between these factions.
In the long run, these tensions could lead to a weakening of NATO cohesion. As Turkey, a NATO member, engages more actively with HTS and faces off against US-supported groups, the alliance could experience significant strain. While the US may view Israeli military actions as beneficial to its broader regional strategy, particularly regarding the containment of Iran, the growing rift between NATO allies and their respective proxies in Syria will only bleed NATO’s collective power.
The retreat of Russia and Iran from the Syrian battlefield creates a strategic vacuum, offering China, Russia, and Iran an opportunity to maintain influence without being directly embroiled in the fighting. As they keep their distance from the active conflict, they could use diplomatic and economic leverage to expand their roles in the region, further altering the power dynamics and weakening the US-led order.
Ultimately, while the shift in Syria’s leadership marks a new chapter, it will not bring lasting peace. The interlocking geopolitical rivalries—between the US and Turkey, HTS and the SDF, Israel and Iran—are all set to intensify, leading to more conflict rather than a resolution. The continued fragmentation within the region risks further fracturing NATO, while enabling external powers like Russia, Iran, and China to increase their influence in the Middle East, all while Israel could exploit the situation to advance its own strategic goals.
——
Rajeev Ahmed
The Editor of Geopolits.com and the Author of the book titled Bengal Nexus