As Syrians face the aftermath of the fall of Bashar Al-Assad’s regime following the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS)-led rebel offensive, international powers are under pressure to urgently support a stable and inclusive transition.
This is essential to help Syria move forward, and provide regional stability, after thirteen years of a brutal civil war that claimed more than 500,000 lives.
For European actors - often divided by bilateralism and competing objectives in foreign policy matters - this moment will test whether European Union (EU) member states can overcome decades of geopolitical fragmentation regarding the Middle East, which has often diminished their influence in the region.
In the past, European nations have tended to act based on their national interest in dealing with individual countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Egypt, as well as in confronting challenges like the 2011 Arab Spring uprisings.
Yet, now more than ever, a cohesive strategy may be needed to help influence a positive and stable transition for post-Assad Syria.
A tradition of bilateralism
In the final years of Assad’s rule, as the intensity of the civil war diminished, European states largely retreated to the sidelines. Their engagement remained minimal, as Assad's grip on power weakened and rebel forces were confined to Idlib in the northwest.
That’s with the notable exception of Italy under Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, which appointed an ambassador to Syria in July 2024, aligning with broader Arab efforts to normalise ties with Assad.
Before that, European states - particularly the United Kingdom (UK) and France, with Germany taking a more cautious stance - called for Assad’s removal and supported rebel factions to varying degrees.
They also backed sanctions on the Damascus regime, aligning with the United States' position of opposing Assad’s brutal suppression of peaceful protests and his atrocities - including the use of chemical weapons - during the war.
However, European states largely operated bilaterally, with soft power and humanitarian initiatives remaining a key focus. The EU has mobilised over €35 billion in aid since 2011, demonstrating this focus on humanitarian initiatives.
“For years, the EU tried to exercise soft power through humanitarian and development projects. Yet these efforts were often politicised, selectively backing groups and regions in anticipation of a political transition that never quite materialised,” Lorenzo Trombetta, a Beirut-based analyst at Badil - The Alternative Policy Institute and Italian news agency ANSA, told The New Arab.
“As the situation on the ground evolved, Brussels found itself continually reacting rather than shaping events,” he added.
|
|
The swift toppling of Assad’s regime by rebel forces in less than two weeks caught European policymakers off guard, highlighting a lack of strategic foresight and preparedness. Yet given the urgency of enabling a stable transition, pressure has increased on European actors to take robust action to support post-Assad Syria.
“Europeans should be looking at the future of Syria as a key strategic interest. The country sits at the heart of the Mediterranean and has been a source of such destabilising forces over recent years that the current opening represents a real opportunity for Europe,” Julien Barnes-Dacey, Middle East and North Africa Programme Director at the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR), told The New Arab.
“There is a clear alignment now between helping stabilise Syria and meeting the needs of Syrians on the ground and Europe’s wider strategic interest.”
Navigating post-Assad challenges
The EU has broadly expressed the bloc’s objectives and aspirations for a post-Assad future, while European nations have reacted with cautious optimism.
French President Emmanuel Macron declared "the barbaric state has fallen," German Chancellor Olaf Scholz labelled the situation as "good news," while British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said “we welcome [Assad’s] departure,” adding that Syrians had suffered too long under his rule.
There has also been an uptick in Europe’s diplomatic engagement with Syria.
“Everyone, the EU included, is pivoting to adapt to new realities in Syria and the appointment of Michael Ohnmacht to head up the EU’s engagement in Damascus speaks to Brussels’ determination to join the flood of diplomats seeking to engage with Syria’s new power players,” Charles Lister, a senior fellow and the Director of the Syria and Countering Terrorism & Extremism programs at the Middle East Institute, told The New Arab.
“While the EU itself maintained its anti-Assad position in recent months, the peeling away of some European member states towards Assad complicates the picture somewhat. Italy, which led the normalisation approach this year was ironically the first European state to meet with the HTS-led transition in Damascus,” he added.
Since Assad’s fall, concerns over protecting minority rights in Syria have shaped European engagement with the country’s transitional government.
France and Germany initially promised aid on the condition that protections for minorities and women are guaranteed. However, Kaja Kallas, the EU's foreign policy chief, stressed that lifting sanctions would be premature until the new Syrian leadership ensures these protections and establishes a unified government that rejects religious extremism.
In terms of concrete measures, European states have focused on limited bilateral actions. The UK has pledged around £50 million in humanitarian aid to HTS-controlled areas, while French diplomats have met with Syria's transitional government officials to express support for a peaceful political transition that includes all segments of society.
|
|
These efforts may help incentivise Syria’s new rulers to adopt more moderate policies, something that HTS has expressed desires to do.
However, some observers are concerned that Europe’s often single-minded focus on the Syrian refugee issue - long a key driver of its engagement with Syria - could undermine its broader involvement with the country.
Soon after Syria’s new leaders took over, most of the 27 EU member states, as well as the UK and Switzerland, suspended asylum applications for Syrian refugees.
Rights groups like Amnesty International have warned of the risks of Syrians being returned prematurely, before the country’s stability is assured, or having their asylum applications left in limbo.
Lorenzo Trombetta said this prioritisation of the refugee issue largely overlooks Syria’s lingering humanitarian and political instability.
“Such actions do little to enhance Europe’s credibility as a constructive partner in shaping Syria’s future,” he added.
Coupled with concerns over terrorism, prejudiced attitudes have, at times, hindered European policymakers from taking impactful action on Syria.
For instance, European actors were hesitant to cut ties with Assad, even after the brutal crackdown on peaceful protestors was evident by March 2011, due to Assad’s exploitation of Western fears of terrorism.
Many European policymakers also brought into Assad’s narratives that Syria would burn without his crushing authoritarianism.
How Europe may adjust to regional dynamics
While European countries may not possess substantial leverage on the ground, there may be pragmatic efforts to boost the efforts of regional actors.
Regional actors - including Turkey and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states - hold more of the cards in determining Syria’s political future, which means that European states will need to work with them.
“Europeans are clearly not going to be the decisive actors on the ground given the powerful internal and regional players but can still seek to help shape a positive trajectory through political and economic engagement,” said Julien Barnes-Dacey.
He added that this could involve “working to incentivise a positive and inclusive transition and deploying tools like sanctions relief and possible reconstruction assistance to help the country move out of its longstanding crisis”.
European Commission chief Ursula von Der Leyen met with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on 17 December, where the latter voiced the need for the EU to support an inclusive and stable Syria.
He additionally stressed that a cohesive EU, as opposed to bilateralism, would be more helpful in supporting Syria’s transition.
Turkey's military presence in northern Syria and its backing of the Syrian National Army (SNA), which played a role in toppling Assad, have positioned Ankara as a necessary partner for European actors to work with.
Meanwhile, Arab states like Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and Egypt have expressed a willingness to collaborate with Turkey, setting aside concerns about Assad’s fall and the rise of an Islamist-led government.
This suggests that these actors could play a significant role in shaping Syria's transition, despite the prospect of potential future disagreements over the composition of a Syrian government.
Finally, European actors have also been largely silent on Israel’s heavy bombardment of Syria and the military assets of the Assad regime since HTS’ takeover, and its creation of a buffer zone beyond the occupied Golan Heights, despite Arab states and Turkey warning that this threatens Syria’s stability.
At a time when there are fears Syria may later become entangled in competing regional geopolitical interests, a cohesive European strategy, with Syria’s best interests in mind, may help avert future instability.
“Now more than ever, the EU needs to re-unite its position on Syria and ensure that whatever engagement takes place inside Damascus, it must be oriented towards shaping the transition into something genuinely inclusive and representative of Syria’s diversity,” said Charles Lister.
“That’s Syria’s only chance of avoiding a slow slide back into conflict.”
Jonathan Fenton-Harvey is a journalist and researcher who focuses on conflict, geopolitics, and humanitarian issues in the Middle East and North Africa.
Follow him on Twitter: @jfentonharvey