Rebuilding Syria may require interim president Ahmed al-Sharaa to adopt a federal system, acknowledging the fragmentation caused by civil war and the diverse interests of various groups. His current push for a centralized system conflicts with the realities on the ground, necessitating considerations of decentralization for lasting peace and stability. The solution may lie in inclusive governance that balances regional autonomy with national interests.
To effectively rebuild Syria, interim president Ahmed al-Sharaa may need to decentralize political power and consider a federal governance system. His pursuit of a centralized authority faces challenges due to the country’s fragmented landscape after a fourteen-year civil war, marked by tribal and sectarian divisions. Sharaa’s representation primarily focuses on Sunni Arabs, who comprise over two-thirds of the population, but healing Syria’s divisions may necessitate a more inclusive federal approach.
Control over Syria is currently fragmented among various groups. Sharaa’s interim government governs parts of western cities and some countryside, while other factions resist the new Syrian army’s formation. Kurdish forces engage cautiously with Sharaa amid their pursuit of autonomy. Additionally, pro-Turkish militias maintain control over key territories, reflecting the complex dynamics at play that complicate Sharaa’s unification efforts.
Sharaa’s proposed centralized system contradicts the realities established during the Syrian conflict. While he views federalism as a potential threat to national unity, many Syrians harbor fears of foreign intervention’s implications for their sovereignty. To remedy this, Sharaa aims to consolidate Sunni Arab factions into a unified military force, though he has yet to gain broad support beyond his coalition.
The transition from civil opposition to a cohesive national front has been obstructed by factionalism. Armed groups initially lacked a true national framework, limiting their collective impact. The HTS-led interim government includes members from various regions, thanks to individuals with local roots, enabling smoother interactions and local governance despite resource constraints.
Though personal loyalties currently underpin Syria’s political structure, Sharaa’s reliance on a tight-knit coalition raises concerns about broader national governance. He faces the challenge of implementing effective federalism without falling back into centralized control, a cautionary lesson learned from Bashar al-Assad’s experience. Inclusivity is essential to avoiding past mistakes and engaging the diverse Syrian population in a rebuilding process.
Foreign powers might consider linking sanctions relief to Sharaa’s adoption of a federal system to promote equitable governance. The establishment of autonomous regions may help accommodate the diverse interests of the Kurdish, Alawite, and Druze populations, although challenges remain regarding resource allocation that could exacerbate sectarian tensions. Effective governance will require balancing regional interests while ensuring that no single group monopolizes resources essential for national recovery.
If federalism is pursued, it must be implemented uniformly across all regions to cultivate stability and prevent continued conflict. Granting autonomy is crucial for alleviating central bureaucracy’s burdens and fostering local engagement, which is pivotal for Syria’s recovery and long-term viability. Sharaa’s administration must navigate this complex landscape carefully to avoid the pitfalls of past governance models.
In conclusion, the path to rebuilding Syria hinges on Ahmed al-Sharaa’s willingness to embrace a decentralized federal system that acknowledges the nation’s diverse sectarian and tribal realities. With power consolidation proving ineffective amidst a fractured landscape, adopting federalism could enhance national reconciliation. This approach must prioritize inclusivity and equitable resource distribution, providing autonomy to various groups while strengthening governance to avoid historical conflicts and foster long-term stability.
Original Source: www.washingtoninstitute.org
