Newsletters
In Washington’s old playbook, Syria was a write-off - a sanctions-ridden graveyard of failed policies, subcontracted to NGOs, UN envoys, and the occasional airstrike. On Nov. 10, 2025, that script was finally burned. Ahmed al-Sharaa - the former HTS commander turned president of post-Assad Syria - walked into the White House as a partner, not a target. The United States extended its suspension of key Caesar Act sanctions, endorsed a “stable and unified Syria,” and aligned itself, however cautiously, with Damascus’s state-rebuilding project.
The easy narrative says that Syria has simply exchanged masters, moving from Tehran and Moscow to Ankara or Washington. That line is analytically lazy and blind to the regional balance now taking shape. What is emerging is something far more uncomfortable for Western orthodoxy: a sovereign Syrian state, led by a hard but pragmatic president, working with Türkiye, the United States, and - increasingly - Saudi Arabia, without collapsing into anyone’s vassal.
Trump’s embrace of al-Sharaa has been mocked as another display of his affection for “strongmen,” but that caricature ignores the deeper shift it represents. Publicly, Trump hailed al-Sharaa as a leader who can “make Syria successful” and called the regional realignment a “great miracle.” Privately, this was Washington conceding that Assad’s order is gone for good, that isolation only deepened dependence on Iran and Russia, and that there is now a Syrian interlocutor capable of centralizing force, fighting Daesh, curbing Iranian leverage, and reopening the economy to regulated investment.
The 180-day waiver under the Caesar Act - renewed during al-Sharaa’s visit - allows civilian goods and technology to flow while preserving restrictions on dealings with Moscow and Tehran. It is not a blank check but a carefully designed lever that rewards sovereignty instead of dependency.
Al-Sharaa’s response underscores this logic. Syria’s cooperation with the anti-Daesh coalition is limited to intelligence and security coordination; there is no surrender of command or policy. He has declined to be drawn into the Abraham Accords, framing the new relationship with Washington as a partnership built on investment and mutual interest. The message is clear: this is not the language of a proxy but of a state reclaiming its freedom to act.
Much of the post-Assad commentary in Western and Arab media lazily pivoted to another cliché - that Syria has become a Turkish protectorate. That notion ignores both Ankara’s constraints and Damascus’s strategy. Türkiye’s position is straightforward. The PKK remains a designated terrorist organization in Türkiye, the U.S., and the EU, and the YPG-PYD-SDF structure in northern Syria is widely viewed as a PKK derivative. Western euphemisms calling the SDF a “local partner” never changed the fact that its leadership, ideology, and command channels came directly from the PKK. Türkiye’s red line is therefore structural: no PKK-run enclave across its border and no permanent U.S.-protected militia statelet.
Ankara’s concern is security, not empire. It cannot afford to bankroll a dependent Damascus even if it wanted to. Türkiye’s economy is feeling the strain, as inflation stays elevated and public confidence wears thin; turning Syria into a subsidized appendage would be political suicide. For al-Sharaa, that reality is an opening. By dismantling PKK-linked structures through disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration under a unified national command, he can satisfy Türkiye’s security concerns while reasserting Syrian sovereignty over territory, borders, and oil fields. That is cooperation, not subordination.
The hardest problem in this new architecture remains the SDF itself. For a decade, Western policy hid behind polite fictions while the PKK quietly built a parallel state in northeastern Syria. The Sharaa government’s integration plan, quietly backed by Washington and tolerated by Ankara, seeks to fold SDF units into the Syrian Arab Army under the Defense Ministry, restore central control of crossings and energy assets, and offer amnesty for local conscripts. If implemented carefully, this approach would not marginalize the Kurds but rather conclude a partisan military experiment and integrate Kurdish communities into the constitutional order. It serves Türkiye’s need for border stability, Washington’s need for a counter-Daesh partner with legitimacy, and Damascus’s need for one flag and one chain of command. If the process collapses, the winners will be Daesh remnants, traffickers, and the ghosts of Assad’s war economy.
What most Western analysts have missed is the role of Saudi Arabia. If Trump’s sanctions relief opened the political door and Türkiye’s security posture cleared the military equation, Riyadh now holds the key to Syria’s economic resurrection. Saudi officials have already begun clearing Syrian arrears with international institutions and preparing large-scale investment packages in infrastructure, energy, logistics, and real estate - not as aid but as profit-driven Vision 2030-style projects. By doing so, Riyadh could anchor Syria’s recovery in Arab capital rather than Iranian or Russian patronage. For al-Sharaa, this is the decisive partnership: the money that turns sovereignty from a slogan into an institution, and the Gulf umbrella that helps insulate Syria from renewed isolation.
Seen from Ankara, this outcome is ideal. A reconstructed, stable, PKK-free Syria reduces the security burden on Türkiye’s border, opens new trade corridors, and spares Ankara the cost of empire. Seen from Riyadh, it aligns with the Kingdom’s regional re-engineering - exporting investment rather than ideology. And seen from Washington, it marks a rare Middle Eastern policy that produces tangible stability without a U.S. troop surge.
The vassal narrative collapses under scrutiny. Türkiye gains more from a confident Syrian neighbor than from a dependent one. Washington uses sanctions relief and political recognition not to own Damascus but to correct its own policy failure. Riyadh invests for return and leverage, not domination. And Damascus, under al-Sharaa, is openly practicing strategic diversification - multiple partnerships, no single patron, and a clear red line on sovereignty.
The real question is whether Syria can institutionalize this balance fast enough: dismantle all non-state armies through credible DDR, attract Gulf investment transparently, and anchor foreign relations in reciprocity rather than submission. If al-Sharaa delivers, Syria will not be remembered as anyone’s client but as the state that walked itself back from the edge by turning others’ interests into its own survival strategy.
For the first time in fifteen years, the center of gravity in the Levant is shifting toward Damascus — and for once, it is not because of a foreign occupation or a proxy war, but because Syria is quietly reclaiming the one commodity the region stopped believing it possessed: sovereignty.
2 min read
3 min read
