Syria’s new leader under pressure to rein in jihadists amid rising violence

Syria’s new leader under pressure to rein in jihadists amid rising violence

The West is urging Syria’s authorities to end sectarian violence, create an inclusive government, and prevent a resurgence of ISIS or al-Qaeda; besides tackling the security situation, Sharaa must navigate a complex geopolitical landscape, involving powers like the U.S., Russia, Israel, Turkiye and Iran.

Syria’s interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa (Abu Mohammed al-Jolani) has a lot to prove to win over Western powers. If the first few weeks of his rule are anything to go by, he may be heading in the wrong direction.

The West is watching Syria’s leaders closely to ensure they rein in the Islamist jihadists who killed hundreds of Alawites, create an inclusive government with effective institutions, maintain order in a country fractured by years of civil war and prevent a resurgence of Islamic State or al-Qaeda.

To hammer home the message, three European envoys made clear in a March 11 meeting with Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shibani in Damascus that cracking down on the jihadist fighters was their top priority and that international support for the nascent administration could evaporate unless it took decisive actions.

“The abuses that have taken place in recent days are truly intolerable, and those responsible must be identified and condemned,” said French Foreign Ministry spokesman Christophe Lemoine, when asked about the message delivered in Damascus. “There is no blank check for the new authorities.”

Three European envoys as well as four regional officials during a trip stressed that the authorities must get a grip on security across the country and prevent any repeat killings.

“We asked for accountability. The punishment should go on those who committed the massacres. The security forces need to be cleaned up,” said one European envoy.

Washington has also called on Syria’s leaders to hold the perpetrators of the attacks to account.

U.S. State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said they were monitoring the interim authority’s actions to determine U.S. policy for Syria.

The problem for Sharaa, however, is that his Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) group only comprises around 20,000 fighters, according to two assessments by Western governments. That makes him reliant on the tens of thousands of fighters from other groups — including the very hardline jihadist factions he is being asked to combat – and moving against them could plunge Syria back into war, five diplomats and three analysts said.

Sectarian overtone

Thousands of Sunni Muslim foreigners, from countries including China, Albania, Russia and Pakistan, joined Syria’s rebels early in the civil war to fight against the rule of Bashar al-Assad and the Iran-backed Shia militias who supported him, giving the conflict a sectarian overtone.

One of the reasons Sharaa now depends on a relatively small force of some 20,000 fighters from several disparate groups is because he dissolved the national army soon after taking power.

While the step was meant to draw a line under five decades of autocratic Assad family rule, diplomats and analysts said it echoed Washington’s decision to disband the Iraqi army after the fall of Saddam Hussein - and could lead to similar chaos.

Sharaa’s move, along with mass dismissals of public sector workers, has deepened divisions in Syria and left hundreds of thousands without income, potentially pushing trained soldiers into insurgent groups or unemployment, worsening Syria’s instability, according to five European and Arab officials.

In addition to the challenge of quelling sectarian violence, Sharaa must also contend with a host of foreign powers from the U.S. to Russia, Israel, Turkiye and Iran — all turning Syria’s territory into a geopolitical chessboard.

Stuck in a paradox

Turkiye holds the north, backing opposition forces while suppressing Kurdish ambitions. U.S.-backed Kurdish-led forces control the east with its vital oil fields, while Israel capitalised on Mr. Assad’s fall to bolster its military foothold. It now controls a 400-square-km demilitarised buffer zone, supports the Druze minority and is opposed to the Syrian leadership.

In response to the massacres of civilians, Sharaa has established an investigation committee and promised to punish those responsible. But any action against the jihadists who carried out the killings could ignite factional infighting, purges and power struggles — leaving the new government stuck in a paradox, analysts and diplomats said.

While diplomats recognise that the inquiry is a step in the right direction, they said its credibility would have been far stronger with UN and international observers.

Ultimately, they said, the true test of Sharaa’s leadership lies not just in the commission’s findings but in how he deals with the fighters responsible for the atrocities.

The massacres were, however, a stark reminder of the forces at play in post-Assad Syria, signalling a brutal reality that toppling a dictator is the beginning of a larger, more perilous battle to shape the country’s future.

Washington and European states have tied the lifting of sanctions, imposed under Mr. Assad, to the new authorities proving their commitment to inclusive governance and the protection of minorities. Removing these sanctions is crucial to reviving Syria’s shattered economy, Sharaa’s most pressing challenge.

But despite promises of reform, the five-year constitution Sharaa unveiled this month gave him absolute power as President, Prime Minister, head of the armed forces and chief of national security, as well as granting him the authority to appoint judges, ministers and a third of Parliament — dashing hopes for democratic reforms.

The constitution also enshrines Islamic law as “the main source” of legislation.

Critics argue that the constitution swaps autocracy for Islamist theocracy, deepening fears over Sharaa’s roots as the leader of a hardline Islamist faction once allied with al-Qaeda.

Kurds, who control northeastern Syria and recently agreed to integrate with the new government, criticised the temporary constitution for “reproducing authoritarianism in a new form”.