Abdaljawad Omar
Mondoweiss / December 10, 2024
The October 7 Hamas attack unravelled truths across the region, reopening questions of the future that lay dormant for years. Now, with the fall of Assad, the power map is being redrawn, presenting new threats and possibilities.
War, in its inexorable violence, occupies a paradoxical space—a force that can simultaneously overthrow and unmake, open possibilities while foreclosing them in tragic finality. The events in Syria in the past two weeks stand as a profound example of this paradox, a testament not only to the possibilities unleashed by the eruption of war, beginning with Tufan al-Aqsa and its reverberations across the region and the world, but also to war’s transformative power to awaken what was dormant and animate what was frozen (Tufan al-Aqsa is the romanization of “عملية طوفان الأقصى” which translates as “Operation Al-Aqsa Flood” the name of the Hamas-led operation on October 7, 2023).
The events in Syria, while awaiting more historically detailed analysis in the future, already align with the broader patterns of strain and vulnerability that the ‘Axis of Resistance’ has accumulated throughout its year-long confrontation with Israel, and decades or so confrontation with various geopolitical forces. However, the stark truth is that Assad’s regime effectively collapsed within twelve days—and it did so without putting up a meaningful fight.
One can already anticipate the theses that will emerge in future analyses. Structural arguments will likely focus on how Hezbollah’s and Iran’s deep entanglement in the Syrian conflict weakened the broader axis, stretching its resources and diminishing its political capital, while simultaneously revealing how the very success in expansion and maintaining alliances planted the seeds for future failure. Others will underscore the moral and narrative cost of supporting a regime that was undeniably brutal, a decision that eroded the Axis’s legitimacy in the eyes of many. Additional arguments will inevitably flow. Chief among them will be the contention that occupying the mantle of resistance, particularly by regimes like Assad’s, requires more than logistical support for resistance movements. It demands direct confrontation with Israel—an element conspicuously absent for the past fifty years. Some analyses will likely delve into the role of sectarianism, disentangling its implications for the Axis’s fragmentation and cohesion. Others will interrogate authoritarianism’s entrenchment within the resistance framework, while yet another line of thought will address the impact of imperial interventions and their reconfiguration of power within the region.
Some analyses will pivot away from focusing solely on the Axis of Resistance or imperial intervention and instead examine the nature, character, and evolution of the actors on the ground. These arguments will likely underscore the lack of cohesion among the forces that fought against Bashar al-Assad’s regime during the years when Assad managed to fend off opposition and maintain control over Syria after 2011. However, this fragmentation and inability to unify, hegemonize, or effectively organize began to shift in Idlib, where specific factions rose to prominence in the anti-Assad struggle. Backed by Turkey and strategically employed to counterbalance Kurdish ambitions, these factions marked a turning point in the conflict.
In Idlib, this fractured reality began to gradually stabilize. The establishment of a Keyan or “state,” centered around Sunni Muslims and operating in a more structured manner, laid the foundation for a ground offensive that exposed the Assad regime’s inherent weaknesses. This shift represented a significant moment in the broader struggle, as it showcased how localized organization and external support could erode the regime’s capacity to maintain dominance. Whatever the eventual analyses or interpretations—whether they trace the legacies of colonialism in shaping the modern Syrian state or investigate the regime’s brutal crackdowns, prisons, and apparatuses of control—the stark reality remains: the Syrian army did not put up a fight. In the face of mounting pressure, Assad and his family, like many leaders before him, fled to Russia, leaving behind a shattered state and a battlefield for competing powers.
Truth and Tufan al-Aqsa
Tufan al-Aqsa has recently been blamed for the broader decline of the Axis of Resistance in the region by many commentators. Yet, beneath this surface reading lies a more disquieting terrain, riddled with questions that resist immediate resolution. These are questions of truth—not the kind enshrined in political or military classifications but the kind that lurks beneath, destabilizing the masks, rupturing alignments, and unsettling the supposed coherence of this historical moment. In many ways, if there is something the Tufan offers beyond its promise of liberation is the ability to unravel truths. In the flood’s violent turbulence, certain questions emerge, weighted with the gravity of what they reveal: Who stands beside Palestine and its horizon, truly? Who negotiates for survival, their loyalty dissolved in the crucible of fear? Who collapses because their system, propped up by flimsy artifices, was always destined to fail? Who dares to venture into the abyss of commitment, and who shrinks back, their resolve brittle? Who abstains entirely, their inaction complicit? And whose monstrous cruelty is laid bare, their narratives crumbling under the harsh glare of scrutiny, the blindness of others no longer an adequate shield?
Israel, for decades cloaked in the garments of democratic sanctity, now stands exposed—a state of relentless brutality, fashioned from colonial violence and sustained by genocide. A state whose existence depends entirely on the scaffolding of Europe and the United States, choking the Arab world, extinguishing its futures before they can articulate themselves. Its narrative of legitimacy unravels under the weight of its own violence, its claim to moral high ground eroded. Meanwhile, Assad’s Syria stumbles forward, paralyzed, drained of its own vitality by the redundancy of its rhetoric and the inertia of its governance. Iran, ever pragmatic, weaves through the chaos, supporting and manoeuvring yet hesitating to fully commit. It clings to its project with calculated caution, refusing to disrupt the status quo radically—a delicate dance that avoids the precipice but risks irrelevance.
The Arab state system, locked in its obsessive self-preservation and desperate to maintain Western favour, suffocates the cry of Palestine within its people’s hearts. These regimes, indifferent to the charred bodies before them, circulate images of horror, not to galvanize but to pacify—to teach the dreamers among them the cost of rebellion, the brutal certainty of their suppression.
And what of the Palestinians? Amid genocide and relentless confrontation, divisions persist. Arrows are aimed inward, toward the “internal enemy,” as the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank falters, incapable of defending itself or its people. These truths and many more, sharp and unrelenting, collapse into each other, their weight dismantling the old world and shaping the contours of a new one. Tufan al-Aqsa is not merely an event; it is a moment of unravelling, where the grand narratives are torn asunder, and the boundaries of power and legitimacy are violently redrawn. It is a scene drenched in the blood of innocents, its final lines etched in a language of devastation and rupture, demanding that we confront what lies beyond comprehension.
In Syria, the Assad regime, which chose to sit idle and refrain from confronting Israel when Gaza called on the world to act in solidarity, justified its inaction by claiming the need to safeguard its forces to contain the rebels. Ironically, the same regime that prioritized self-preservation over broader resistance was ultimately unable to contain those very rebels, revealing both its strategic miscalculations and the fragility of its position. The opportunity was there to renew some legitimacy, to back the battered Hezbollah, to forge a new path of unity out of a decade of disunity, but the regime chose to sit idle. This is the truth and with the weakness of its allies, both Hezbollah in Lebanon as well as Iran, the Assad regime fell rapidly, cracking under the first signs of pressure.
What about Gaza ?
The impact on the Palestinian cause and its resonance across the Arab world, as well as on the broader field of geopolitical competition, demands a more protracted and reflective assessment. Central to this evaluation is the role of post-Assad Syria: the modes of governance it adopts, the boundaries it draws—both politically and spatially— the trajectory it envisions for itself, and more importantly the ways it will define enemy from friend, or fail to reach any consensus recoiling to sectarianism and divisions that will eat up Syria into an endless war. The terrain does not look promising, the rebels are divided among themselves, and Syria already weakened and divided will be tested in the coming months and years, both internally, but also externally.
Already, Israel is showcasing a strategy it has long sought to exhibit: systematically dismantling Syria’s military capabilities through relentless bombings, targeting its arsenal to pre-empt any potential threat in the medium-term future. Simultaneously, it is expanding its hold on territories surrounding the Golan Heights, steadily encroaching and annexing new lands in a calculated effort to consolidate control, and using this moment to gain the most possible land, and leverage, but hopeful it will be able to establish a new security line and perhaps build its own local militias. This dual approach—eroding Syria’s defensive and offensive potential while advancing territorial ambitions—illustrates Israel’s intent not only to neutralize immediate risks but also to reshape the geopolitical landscape to its advantage. However, a weak Syria—regardless of who governs or presides over it—has always been favourable to Israel. Israel will now fight tooth and nail to shape Syria into a wasteland, keeping it underdeveloped and incapable of retaining any semblance of sovereignty. This strategy ensures that Syria remains fragmented and powerless, unable to pose any meaningful challenge to Israel’s regional ambitions or its broader geopolitical agenda.
While Western countries scramble to understand the emergence of new forces in Syria—some of which they themselves have backed—they also seek to capitalize on the opportunities this moment provides to shape the trajectory of a post-Assad Syria. At the same time, they remain deeply wary of the potential for Syria to evolve into an antagonistic force that could threaten their regional and global interests. This apprehension is not unfounded; it is grounded in historical precedents, particularly the case of the “mujahideen,” who were initially supported by Western powers but later turned against imperial interests. Such experiences underscore the unpredictable nature of alliances forged in times of conflict, further heightening the stakes of Western involvement in the evolving Syrian paradigm.
This also applies to the Axis itself, which is already signalling a willingness to negotiate, engage, and build relations with the new rulers of Damascus. The hope is that an anti-Western hegemonic stance might align these emerging forces with Hezbollah and Iran rather than against them, despite the years of war and blood between the rebels and these forces. However, such hopes remain speculative at best, as the immediate priority for the rulers of Syria is to maintain internal order and prevent the possibility of further fractures. Meanwhile, countries with significant leverage over the new forces are actively shaping the emerging paradigm, with Turkey playing a particularly prominent role. As the dominant external actor in the region, Turkey’s influence will be crucial in determining the trajectory of Syria’s political realignment and its broader role within the evolving regional order. The signals of what lies ahead, its uncertainty, the danger of more chaos rather than order, and the fear that Syria will be broken further into bits and pieces are all part of the panoramic picture of the current moment.
However, the fact also remains that the direct impact on Gaza appears minimal. The forces that previously provided critical support to Gaza have already withdrawn from the confrontation, choosing instead to settle for a ceasefire agreement in Lebanon and to de-escalate in the region. In doing so, they have effectively decoupled Gaza from Lebanon, severing a critical linkage that once bolstered the broader resistance axis. As a result, the immediate consequences of this decoupling on the current war are likely to remain limited. This is particularly true given that the most significant bargaining chip of the Palestinian resistance has already exited the war—battered, weakened, and now forced to navigate an increasingly hostile environment in Syria.
As events continue to unfold and radical shifts take place, some structures and systems will inevitably collapse, while others will rise from the wreckage. Israel, however, appears poised to navigate these shifts with calculated pragmatism, much as it did in the past when it strategically encouraged divisions among Palestinians—viewing the rise of Islamist factions as a counterforce to the then-dominant secular nationalist movements. Such tactical manoeuvres have historically allowed Israel to exploit fractures within its adversaries, further consolidating its own position. It hopes for a weak Syria, either fractured and unable to confront Israel, or stable but willing to negotiate Syria’s own surrender agreement. For now, it is satisfied that Iran has lost an important node, Hezbollah is further weakened, and its position in Lebanon remains further eroded.
What lies ahead
The fall of the Syrian regime offers a poignant reflection on the fragility of alliances, the calculus of survival, and the price of inertia. As Israel capitalizes on the fractures within its adversaries, carving new lines of dominance, it must reckon with the lessons of history—how strategies of division can lay the groundwork for unanticipated resistance. The collapse of Assad’s regime and the attenuation of the Axis signals not merely the end of one era but the genesis of a turbulent and uncertain future. What emerges is not a clean slate but a mosaic of competing ambitions, ideological divides, and imperial interventions, each vying to shape Syria’s fate. Amid this chaos, Palestine remains a litmus test, exposing the moral and strategic contradictions of regional and global powers, where words fail to align with action. Yet, the Tufan al-Aqsa has not only unravelled truths but also reopened the question of futures—who will author them, under what terms, and at what cost.
As with all moments of rupture, the task of commentary is to resist the pull of closure. Instead, we must confront the abyss of contingency that lies ahead. Will Syria, like so many lands before it, become a battleground of endless fragmentations? Or will it, against all odds, forge a path toward coherence and sovereignty, reshaping the region, and the global order in ways we have yet to imagine? The answers remain elusive, but the stakes are clear: the map of power is being redrawn, and in the margins of its upheaval, new possibilities flicker—uncertain, contested, and fiercely alive.
Abdaljawad Omar is a Palestinian scholar and theorist whose work focuses on the politics of resistance, decolonization, and the Palestinian struggle
