Urgent Action Needed: Atlantic Council Warns Patience Could End Soon if HTS Overlooks Critical Needs
In a recent commentary published by the Atlantic Council, it has been highlighted that the patience of the Syrian public may diminish quickly if the new government, led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), fails to meet their immediate needs. The article warns that the challenges facing the HTS government are significant and that their leader, Ahmad al-Sharaa, has a limited timeframe to effect change. The commentary, titled “Syria’s post-Assad honeymoon is over. Now the hard work of state-building begins,” was authored by Sinan Hatahet, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Middle East Programs.
The fall of the Assad regime initially inspired relief and hope among Syrians from various backgrounds, including some former loyalists who became disillusioned by the government’s inability to address the escalating crises in the country. However, the emergence of a new government has ushered in a wave of uncertainty as its leadership remains largely unfamiliar to the populace. While there have been commendations for the governance and economic management model implemented in Idlib under HTS, skepticism exists regarding its scalability to govern all of Syria effectively.
The transition from initial optimism to a sobering realization highlights the monumental challenges that lie ahead. A common Syrian saying encapsulates this sentiment: “The intoxication is over, and now comes the reckoning.” Despite their political differences, Syrians share a pressing urgency for solutions to their daily struggles, including:
- Securing electricity
- Rebuilding infrastructure
- Creating jobs
- Ensuring access to basic necessities
These immediate needs are crucial for establishing any trust that the transitional government hopes to build. If these needs go unaddressed, the government risks losing its fragile legitimacy, and public patience may evaporate much quicker than anticipated.
Ahmad al-Sharaa, the newly appointed de facto leader of Syria, currently enjoys significant public support. However, he faces very little competition as potential rivals are hesitant to assume the daunting responsibilities associated with the rebuilding process. Nonetheless, his leadership comes with a clear expiration date, as Syrians are closely monitoring his actions, expecting prompt and substantial efforts to restore stability and improve their livelihoods. The stakes for Sharaa are exceptionally high; failure to demonstrate effective governance could destabilize his position and potentially lead to renewed fragmentation or chaos.
The challenges confronting the HTS government are formidable. Despite its influence, HTS lacks the necessary technocratic expertise to navigate the complexities of governing a nation like Syria. The group’s governance in Idlib has relied heavily on improvisation and local alliances, but effectively managing an entire country demands a higher level of institutional capacity and expertise. HTS leadership must now address the critical challenge of integrating its localized governance methods with the requirements of a cohesive national administration. Their ability to maneuver through Syria’s volatile political landscape will be essential.
Throughout the ongoing conflict, Syrians have displayed remarkable resilience and creativity in crafting local solutions to their challenges. Self-reliance has become a hallmark of survival, particularly in cities like Damascus and Aleppo, where basic services are often managed locally with minimal state involvement. Initiatives such as solar energy adoption and small-scale enterprises have emerged as vital lifelines. This self-reliance extends to governance, with a few individuals often overseeing local traffic management and security.
However, the success of these localized solutions is not guaranteed. The scale of Syria’s national challenges necessitates coordination and resources that local efforts alone cannot supply. Moreover, there is a growing concern that, without progress, the government may resort to centralized security measures to maintain control, potentially replicating the authoritarian practices of the Assad regime, which alienated the populace and failed to yield meaningful results. The risk of reverting to such methods is amplified by the international community’s reluctance to support a strong centralized authority in Syria, leaving the government with limited options and resources.
Further complicating matters is the deep societal fragmentation resulting from years of war. The devastation of the conflict has not only caused physical destruction but also diminished trust among various communities. To heal these divisions, the government must ensure that its governance is inclusive and representative of Syria’s diverse political factions. Without genuine participation from across the spectrum, there is a significant risk of alienating critical groups, which could further destabilize the fragile transition.
The international community, especially the United States, plays a crucial role in facilitating Syria’s recovery. So far, U.S. policy has primarily focused on allowing regional states to provide financial support to the transitional government. This was made possible through the issuance of General License 24 by the U.S. Treasury, which permitted the provision of energy supplies and wage subsidies but did not extend support to Syria’s private and civil sectors. While this policy has provided some relief, it has disappointed Syria’s private sector, which has been instrumental in financing livelihoods and delivering essential services in the absence of state support.
To truly foster stability and rebuild the Syrian economy, the international community must lift sanctions on critical financial institutions, including the central bank, and facilitate foreign investment while empowering private enterprises. Without such measures, economic pressures on the Syrian population will only worsen, threatening the fragile progress achieved thus far.
Syria’s transitional government stands at a critical juncture. To establish a sustainable and inclusive political future, it must prioritize enabling the private and civil sectors. By empowering these sectors, the government can alleviate pressure on itself while simultaneously building trust with the population, a key ingredient for long-term stability.
Delays in lifting sanctions and providing targeted support could undermine these efforts, potentially crippling Syria’s chances for recovery. The coming months will be pivotal in determining whether Syria’s post-Assad era will unfold as a narrative of renewal or become yet another missed opportunity. Syrians are longing for change, but they cannot shoulder the burden alone. The stakes are incredibly high—not just for Syria but for a region that is desperately in need of hope and stability.
