The article examines Oman’s response to the recent regime change in Syria, highlighting its unique diplomatic stance throughout the Syrian civil war and the complexities of domestic opinions regarding Assad’s fall. As Oman engages with the new governance in Syria, it balances regional pressures against its historical commitment to neutrality and dialogue. The article also addresses public sentiment in Oman regarding Israel’s actions in the region and the potential implications of these changes for broader Middle Eastern stability.
The recent overthrow of Bashar al-Assad in Syria after 61 years of Baathist rule has taken the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states by surprise, especially as the rebel forces, led by Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), swiftly captured more cities in a short offensive. This unexpected regime change has prompted Gulf Arab monarchies to engage pragmatically with the new leadership in Damascus, aiming for regional stability and the prevention of power vacuums. Notably, Oman has maintained a unique stance throughout the Syrian civil war, never fully downgrading diplomatic relations with Damascus, and recently reinstating its ambassador in 2020 as it aims to position itself strategically amidst the changing political landscape.
Oman’s approach to the Syrian conflict has been characterized by its focus on diplomatic solutions, exemplified by visits from its former foreign minister to meet with Assad and discuss potential resolutions. Following the regime change, Omani officials have cautiously accepted this new reality, with calls emphasizing respect for the will of the Syrian people while also advocating for Syria’s territorial integrity. This stance aligns with Oman’s broader foreign policy framework, reflecting equidistant relations with all regional powers and a commitment to non-interference in internal affairs.
While the Omani government has adopted a pragmatic view of the new post-Assad environment, public opinion within Oman is notably divided. Some citizens support Iran’s influence in the region, viewing Assad’s fall as detrimental to the Arab world, while others advocate for the revolution against his tyranny and welcome the HTS’s narrative of inclusivity and moderation. Additionally, liberal segments within Omani society express concerns regarding a potential rise of Islamist rule following Assad’s ouster.
Despite the divisions regarding Assad’s downfall, Omani society has unified in their criticism of Israel’s military actions in Syria, especially following the recent escalations in Gaza. These sentiments have strengthened anti-Western feelings among the populace, prompting a more vocal stance from the Omani government against perceived Israeli aggression. The Omani Grand Mufti’s supportive position towards resistance movements against Israel further illustrates the public sentiment.
In light of the ongoing geopolitical tensions, Oman remains committed to fostering dialogue and preserving Syria’s unity in the face of external threats, advocating for international support while allowing Syrians to guide their political transition. This careful diplomatic maneuvering reflects Oman’s historical approach to regional conflicts, seeking stability while maintaining a neutral stance toward internal matters in neighboring countries. Ultimately, the transformation in Nepal’s policy illustrates its intent to navigate the post-Assad era while advocating for positive relations with the new Syrian government.
The article addresses the significant political shift following the unexpected ousting of Bashar al-Assad, which has created a new dynamic within the GCC, particularly in Oman. Historically, Oman maintained a diplomatic relationship with Syria during the civil war, viewing the conflict as requiring a solutions-based approach. The article highlights Oman’s strategic engagement with the new regime, contrasting it with varying societal responses to Assad’s fall, particularly in light of the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Key aspects include Oman’s traditional foreign policy of neutrality and its recent criticism of Israeli actions in Syria.
The transformation of Syria’s political landscape after Assad’s removal presents both challenges and opportunities for regional actors, particularly Oman. Adopting a cautious yet engaged approach, Oman aims to support Syria’s stability while navigating its internal societal divisions and bolstering diplomatic relations. As regional sentiments shift, the Sultanate’s commitment to non-interference and dialogue remains pivotal in promoting a cohesive political transition and addressing external pressures, particularly from Israel. Thus, Oman’s actions signify a broader commitment to fostering peace and stability in the Middle East, adapting to changing realities while preserving its historical principles.
Original Source: arabcenterdc.org
