From the end of Ba’ath power to the Lebanization of Syria: the new dynamics of the Middle East

By Jad Kabbanji  

On December 8, Syrian president Bashar al-Assad fled the country and brought to an end the Ba’athist regime, inherited from his father, which had ruled Syria for almost 54 years.

It is important to note that, for thirteen years, the imperialist powers had been trying to destabilize Syria, with the al-Assad regime only able to hold on thanks to its external supporters, primarily Iran and Russia.

At the same though, the Ba’ath Party had long since lost the popular support gained through the progressive social reforms introduced by Hafez al-Assad in the 1970s and 1980s. These same years were also marked by the regime’s actions in support of imperialist interests in the region. These include the Black September episode in 1970 (an armed conflict between Jordan and the Palestine Liberation Organization), the invasion of Lebanon in 1976 for the benefit of Israel-backed Phalangist militias, and Syria’s participation in the first Gulf War alongside the United States in 1990 and 1991. From the 2000s onwards, business dealings, nepotism and corruption gradually took over.

This is the beginning of a new era for Syria and for the region, as the consequences of the fall of the Ba’athist regime extend beyond Syria’s borders and will have a significant impact on the entire Middle East. The situation is still evolving, and several major developments are expected in the weeks and months ahead.

Nevertheless, it is already possible to sketch out the contours of tomorrow’s Middle East, or at least those that Western imperialism and its armed wing, NATO, are seeking to shape.

Hayat Tahrir al-Cham: an Islamist regime in the service of imperialism

The coalition that has replaced the Ba’ath in Syria revolves around the Islamists of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS, Organization for the Liberation of the Levant). Created in 2017, HTS was formed through the merger of several Islamist rebel groups dominated by Osama bin Laden supporters, notably the al-Nusra Front. At their head is Abu Mohammed al-Joulani, a strong figure in the new regime now known by his real name, Ahmed Hussein al-Charaa. This transformation aims to present these former rebels as respectable politicians with whom regional and international powers can engage in dialogue. But what is the reality?

Despite promises which are only binding on those prepared to believe them, HTS is gradually imposing its retrograde ideas on society. And yet, Syria has a long tradition of secularism, with many communities living together as best they can. Revolts have already broken out, particularly among the Alawite, Kurdish, Druze and Christian communities, some of whose members have already taken up arms.

Meanwhile, Turkey – the new government’s main supporter – occupies a large part of the Syrian border territories. The United States has stepped up its military presence in Kurdish-controlled areas, while Israel continues its campaign of aggression, relentlessly bombing Syrian military bases and occupying whole swathes of territory.

The new Syrian regime, for its part, is more dedicated to the repression of religious and ethnic minorities, ignoring the integrity and unity of the country.

Consequently, the new regime is directly fuelling divisions and promoting the “Lebanization” of Syria, placing the country at the service of imperialism by compelling each community to look for an external protector.

And what about the Syrian economy? In an interview with the newspaper L’Orient-Le Jour at the end of December 2024, Syria’s new interim Minister of the Economy Bassel Abdel Aziz said: “Our challenge is to rebuild institutions on new foundations, moving from a corrupt, monopolistic socialist economy to a market economy based on free competition, as in Idleb, but on the scale of the whole of Syria.” In Idleb, the economy is tightly controlled by Ankara – the Turkish lira is the only currency in circulation there, and Turkish monopolies dictate the law. This is the model that HTS wants to generalize to the whole of Syria.

The uncertain future of the Middle East: between resistance, imperialist ambitions and the growing role of China

The lightning seizure of power by HTS and the spectacular rout of the Ba’athist regime raise questions about the strategy of the Iran-led “axis of resistance.” The fall of Syria and the significant weakening of Hamas and Hezbollah – whose historic leaders were murdered by the Israeli army – represent direct setbacks for Tehran.

This raises a fundamental question: What does the future hold for resistance based on religion and confessionalism, at a time when more and more countries in the region are fragmenting precisely because of confessional divisions? This leads us to reflect on the future of the nation-state in the Middle East and its capacity to become a future pole of resistance in the face of imperialist aggression.

The coming months and years will be decisive for the future of the region. Two options are emerging: either the states of the Middle East fragment further, leading to a generalization of sectarian civil wars to the benefit of imperialism and its regional relays, Israel and Turkey; or this a reawakening of a patriotic, anti-sectarian and independent movement that transforms into a genuine national liberation movement.

This historic task promises to be a difficult one, all the more so as the enemies are many. There’s the new Trump administration, which has already demonstrated in the past its willingness to sow chaos in the Middle East. Trump, while advocating de-escalation in Ukraine, has fuelled tensions in the Middle East. Did he not recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, in flagrant violation of international law? Did he not end negotiations on the Iranian nuclear issue and order the assassination of General Qassem Soleimani?

And what about his recent appointment of Marco Rubio as Rubio’s Secretary of State? Rubio – under official sanctions from China for his support of separatists in Xinjiang, Hong Kong and Taiwan – is a figure whose presence in government is bound to exacerbate tensions with Beijing. Behind this imperialist drive to subjugate the Middle East, it is ultimately China that is in the firing line.

Indeed, China is strengthening its influence in the Middle East, particularly by promoting peace initiatives as part of its ambitious Belt and Road Initiative. The peace agreement reached between Saudi Arabia and Iran, and the signing of a unity pact between the fourteen Palestinian factions in Beijing, are perfect examples of China’s new strategy of influence in the region.

Jad Kabbanji is president of the Mouvement québécois pour la paix

Translated from French by PV staff


Support working-class media!

If you found this article useful, please consider donating to People’s Voice or purchasing a subscription so that you get every issue of Canada’s leading socialist publication delivered to your door or inbox!

For over 100 years, we have been 100% reader-supported, with no corporate or government funding.

Sign up for regular updates from People's Voice!

You will receive email notifications with our latest headlines.