Syria’s future: will democracy follow Assad’s fall?

Following the fall of the Assad government, the ambiguous stance of the new ruling Hayat Tahrir al-Sham government on democratic transition has raised serious doubts about Syria's future trajectory toward democracy.

It has been over two months since the brutal secular dictator Bashar al-Assad was ousted by the Sunni Islamist paramilitary organisation Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, or HTS. This group consists of several armed Islamist factions and is led by Ahmed al-Sharaa, the founder of Jabhat al-Nusra, which is the Syrian branch of Al-Qaeda.

Ironically, al-Sharaa’s father, Hussein Ali al-Sharaa, a University of Baghdad economics graduate, was a Nasserist Arab nationalist who published numerous books on regional economic development.

The recent takeover of power in Damascus by the extremist group HTS marks a significant shift in the dynamics of the region. This development is particularly noteworthy because HTS has not only gained control over key areas but has also successfully outmanoeuvred both Western-backed relatively moderate factions and other rebel groups supported by Turkey.

From Peaceful Democratic Protests to Armed Islamist Insurgency

In January 2011, what began as minor demonstrations in various cities transformed into massive nationwide protests by March, demanding the end of the Assad regime. Initially, these protests were peaceful; however, after a brutal crackdown by the regime, they escalated into violent resistance led by various rebel factions, most of which were influenced by Islamist ideology in their struggle.

The Arab and Western media, along with their respective governments, supported efforts to overthrow Asad, often labelling most of the opposition as moderate. This designation frequently obscured their true political affiliations and agendas. Such selective portrayal contributed to a complex and sometimes misleading understanding of the dynamics of the Syrian conflict. However, the situation has shifted dramatically since the HTS seized control of Damascus and a significant portion of its territory.

This shift raises an important question: Is it possible for the long-sought dream of democracy, for which the Syrian people have made immense sacrifices, to be realised under the leadership of HTS?

Sharaa announced in an interview with Saudi state broadcaster Al Arabiya that drafting a new constitution suitable for the current situation will likely take three years. An additional year will be needed to hold a new election. This provides a rough timeline for when the election might take place.

At this stage, it is still too early to provide a trajectory of the post-dictatorial regime. The situation is complicated by the absence of viable political parties that can effectively represent diverse interests, as well as a lack of a strong civil society that could contribute meaningfully to the democratic process. Additionally, it remains unclear on what basis participants will be allowed to engage in elections, which raises significant concerns about inclusivity and representation in the political landscape.

Democratic or Islamist Pathway

At present, there are two nations that are primarily governed by Islamists. In Afghanistan, the political landscape is characterised by an utter absence of popular representation, with the state firmly controlled by the Taliban. This control effectively stifles any semblance of democratic governance, leaving the citizens without a voice in their political future. In contrast, Iran's electoral process is severely restricted, as only those who are loyal to the regime are permitted to run for office, ensuring that dissenting views are systematically excluded from the political arena.

It is still too early to determine whether, under the current circumstances, HTS will choose to replicate the authoritarian structures seen in Afghanistan and Iran, or if they will respect the will of the people by pursuing a path of governance that aligns with the liberal democratic principles recognised in Western societies.

In the meantime, the new Syrian authority is gradually, though slowly, shifting towards the Islamisation of the country. This is evident in changes to the school curriculum, where critics argue that there is now an Islamist bias in the teaching materials. Additionally, Islamic teachings have been incorporated into police training programmes.

Furthermore, regarding women's rights, the HTS implements strict regulations in Idlib that severely restrict their dress, mobility, and public roles. Women who fail to comply with these regulations face fines, public shaming, or even detention by the HTS morality police.

Despite their claims of supporting women's rights and education, their ideological stance towards women and minorities is becoming increasingly evident. While they aim to push women back into traditional roles, they also seek to gradually suppress the equal rights of religious minorities, including the former ruling Alawites. This is becoming more apparent in both the proposed discussions for a new constitution and their day-to-day treatment of women and minorities.

The Western Dilemma

The dilemma for the West lies in its selective application of a value-based foreign policy. While it typically seeks good relations with countries that prioritise human rights, democracy, and freedom of speech, there is a longstanding pattern of forming alliances with nations that have poor records on these issues.

In Syria, the West supports opposition rebel factions with the aim of establishing democracy and protecting the rights of minorities and women. However, the ambiguous position of the ruling group, HTS, on these issues has placed the West in a challenging situation regarding its foreign policy.

The situation at the Russian air base in Khmeimim and the naval base in Tartus has further complicated the West's efforts to achieve its foreign policy objectives. In this context, the West has indicated that addressing these issues is closely tied to the possibility of receiving assistance.

Many in the West were surprised to find that the anti-Russian group HTS did not expel Russian personnel, nor did Russia refuse to cooperate with the HTS government. Contrary to expectations, both former adversaries agreed to collaborate, and there are currently no signs that Russian bases in Syria will be removed.

In contrast to Western foreign policy, which often prioritises values, Russian foreign policy is primarily driven by realpolitik, focusing on interest-based considerations. This approach allows Russia to build relationships with any regime, regardless of its ideological beliefs, human rights record, or level of democracy.

In modern history, there are no documented cases of armed groups in Asia, Africa, and Latin America successfully establishing democracy by organising free, fair, and inclusive elections after seizing state power. If the armed Islamist group HTS takes the initiative to create a Western-style liberal democracy in Syria, it will mark a significant new chapter in modern history. However, up to this point, they have not shown any indications of moving in that direction.

[Sayeed Iftekhar Ahmed, PhD, teaches international relations at the School of Security and Global Studies in the American Public University System]