The lightning-fast overthrow of Bashar al-Assad by Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) in late 2024 has dramatically changed the regional balance of power in Syria. After years of military dominance patronized by Iran, Russia and Hezbollah, the regime of Assad crumbled due to a combination of internal decay, declining morale among his forces, and strategic miscalculations. HTS’s blitzkrieg-like offensive won major cities such as Aleppo, Hama and Damascus within little more than a week, exploiting the weaknesses of the Syrian Army and its over-extended patrons.

The fall of the Assad regime is more than the collapse of one leader, but an event which dislocates the state’s centralized authority and could turn Syria into a failed state. This could heighten sectarian violence, the internal struggle for power within the opposition, and portend the return of extremist groups like ISIS. Besides, there is a grim fear that chemical weapon stockpiles may have fallen into jihadist hands due to losses inflicted on the regime.

Turkey’s strategic role and ambitions

Turkey has emerged as a pivotal actor in the Syrian crisis. Leveraging its geographic advantage and military capabilities, Turkey is positioning itself to play a decisive role in shaping the post-Assad landscape. For years, it backed significant opposition forces against Assad, aligning itself with the broader calls for democratic reform inspired by the Arab Spring.

However, Turkey’s priorities have shifted, with its fight against Assad now taking a backseat to its efforts to counter the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). Ankara views the SDF as an existential threat due to its ties to the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), a rebel group active within Turkish territory. Supporting the Syrian National Army — a group entirely dependent on Turkey — illustrates Ankara’s dual strategy of undermining Assad while suppressing Kurdish ambitions.

Turkey’s actions have also inadvertently bolstered the rise of HTS, as its provision of arms and logistical support has indirectly benefited the jihadist group, even though Ankara does not directly control it. While the fall of Aleppo and Hama has strengthened Turkey’s influence in northern Syria, it comes with significant risks. The empowerment of a hostile jihadist group raises serious concerns about potential spillover effects, such as refugee flows and instability along Turkey’s southern border.

Turkey’s foreign policy today is deeply influenced by a nostalgic vision of its Ottoman past. As Turkey moves further away from European integration, the legacy of the Ottoman Empire has taken center stage in shaping its regional ambitions. This strategy, often referred to as Neo-Ottomanism, envisions Syria as a crucial part of Turkey’s sphere of influence, framing it as an extension of its strategic depth.

Diminished influence of Iran and strategic calculations

The fall of Assad has fundamentally weakened Iran’s leading role in Syria under his rule. Syria was a cornerstone in the Iranian-sponsored “axis of resistance,” providing a vital conduit through which to support Hezbollah in Lebanon and project power across the Levant. The collapse of the Assad regime has cut that critical link and put a large tear into the Iranian strategy across the region.

The decapitation of Hezbollah’s leadership by the Israelis and weakening of other Iranian proxies, such as Iraqi Shia militias, have caused further erosion of Tehran’s influence. Despite heavy investment in propping up Assad, Iran faces a strategic vacuum in Syria. This has forced Tehran into reassessing its priorities in balancing the desire to retain a foothold in the region with the need not to overextend itself in view of mounting domestic and international pressures.

Retreat and falling influence of Russia

The intervention of Russia in Syria saved the Assad regime during the most intense period of the civil war. With its air support, sophisticated weaponry, and diplomatic cover, Moscow managed to establish itself as the main power broker in the conflict.

But with the fall of Assad, the chinks in the armor of the Russian strategy have been exposed. More preoccupied with its ongoing war in Ukraine and under the grip of economic sanctions, Russia has failed to hold its positions in Syria. This has been manifested in the retreat from some key bases and failure to stop HTS’s advance. The fall of Assad removes a strategic ally of Moscow in the Middle East and lessens its levers in regional politics, along with undermining its geopolitical influence more generally.

United States and the Kurdish question

The United States role in Syria is complex: first ad foremost, it focuses its efforts on the fight against ISIS, but supports the SDF as a partner in this effort. It is because of this partnership that Washington developed tensions with Ankara over its view of the SDF as terrorists.

The US presence in northern Syria, comprising some 900 troops, has helped keep at bay the ISIS terror group and maintain stability in the region. But Washington finds a whole new set of dilemmas with the fall of Assad. The new power vacuum in Syria brings up questions about the future of US support for the Kurds, and its larger strategy in the Middle East. US withdrawal would therefore only embolden such jihadist foes as Iran and Turkey while offering jihadist groups and other enemies of the regime chances to reconsolidate.

The incoming administration of Donald Trump must navigate these complexities with care, balancing counterterrorism objectives against its commitments to regional allies. The approach of the new US administration toward the Middle East could play a pivotal role in shaping future developments. Meanwhile, other global powers, such as China, perceive opportunities in Syria and are eager to influence its future in line with their interests and diplomatic strategies.

Security challenges for Iran amid a weakened axis of resistance

The fall of Assad’s regime dealt a significant blow to Iran’s so-called “axis of resistance,” a network of allies and proxies intended to oppose Israeli and Western influence in the Middle East. With Hezbollah’s leadership crippled and its operational capacity severely weakened, Iran’s ability to project power across the region has been substantially curtailed. Assad’s ousting would further isolate Tehran by severing its land corridor to Lebanon and complicating its efforts to support Shia militias in Iraq and Syria.

These setbacks have forced Iran to reevaluate its strategic posture. While Tehran may attempt to leverage its status as a nuclear threshold state as a deterrent, its conventional and proxy-based strategies are faltering. The erosion of its regional alliances not only diminishes Iran’s influence but also exposes it to heightened security risks, including potential Israeli strikes on its nuclear facilities and growing domestic unrest over its foreign policy priorities.

Since October 7, as the Iranian regime faces declining influence through Hezbollah, Hamas, and the critical blow of Assad’s fall, its narrative of security has shifted. Tehran is now focused on preserving the Islamic regime rather than prioritizing regional designs. This evolving strategy relies on advancing its nuclear threshold capabilities, expanding its missile program, and investing in cost-effective yet sophisticated drones.

Prospects for stability and peace

The current situation in Syria offers little hope for a quick resolution. The conflict remains a zero-sum game, pitting the HTS against the remnants of the Assad regime in a struggle for control. In the absence of any effective central authority in Syria, the potential for long-term instability dominates, with various factional groups contending for power.

The international community should not encourage any further inflammation of the Syrian crisis. Turkey, Iran, Russia, and the United States have vested interests in Syria, but their competing agendas create barriers to coordinated actions. More fragmentation and the possibility of chemical weapons falling into the wrong hands make a sustainable solution most needed.

As Syria enters the post-Assad period, the international community faces a crucial test. The decisions made in the coming months will determine whether the country descends further into chaos or begins a fragile path toward stability. For Iran, the collapse of its axis of resistance requires strategic adaptation. Turkey must balance its expanding influence with careful fallout management, while both the United States and Russia must recalibrate their policies in light of shifting regional dynamics.