Foreign Fighters in Syria: Problem or Part of the Solution?

In this photo released by the Saudi Royal Palace, Syria's interim President Ahmad al-Sharaa, left, shakes hands with President Donald Trump, center, in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Wednesday, May 14, 2025. At right is Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.(Bandar Aljaloud/Saudi Royal Palace via AP)
In this photo released by the Saudi Royal Palace, Syria's interim President Ahmad al-Sharaa, left, shakes hands with President Donald Trump, center, in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Wednesday, May 14, 2025. At right is Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.(Bandar Aljaloud/Saudi Royal Palace via AP)
TT

Foreign Fighters in Syria: Problem or Part of the Solution?

In this photo released by the Saudi Royal Palace, Syria's interim President Ahmad al-Sharaa, left, shakes hands with President Donald Trump, center, in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Wednesday, May 14, 2025. At right is Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.(Bandar Aljaloud/Saudi Royal Palace via AP)
In this photo released by the Saudi Royal Palace, Syria's interim President Ahmad al-Sharaa, left, shakes hands with President Donald Trump, center, in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Wednesday, May 14, 2025. At right is Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.(Bandar Aljaloud/Saudi Royal Palace via AP)

US President Donald Trump’s announcement to lift sanctions on Syria came with five conditions, chief among them the demand that “all foreign fighters” leave Syrian territory, a requirement that poses a significant challenge to the new administration of President Ahmed al-Sharaa.

The presence of these fighters, many of whom have been allied for years with Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), underscores the complexity of Trump’s demand. These militants played a key role in the conflict against former President Bashar al-Assad, and many in HTS view them as having earned their place on the battlefield through loyalty and sacrifice.

The influx of foreign fighters into Syria began with the formation of the Free Syrian Army in the early days of the uprising. Türkiye’s border soon became a dual gateway, a route of escape for Syrians fleeing war, either settling in Türkiye or continuing toward Europe, and a corridor for hundreds of non-Syrian fighters arriving to join the battle.

Initially, many of these fighters aligned themselves with non-ideological armed groups. But over time, especially between 2012 and 2014, as the regime intensified its use of barrel bombs and heavy weaponry on opposition-held neighborhoods, the foreign fighters gained prominence in what became known as the “revolutionary strongholds,” particularly in Syria’s north.

‘The Migrants’ of the Revolution

Their combat skills and commitment earned them both fear and admiration. In this period, foreign fighters often led the charge in so-called “inghimasi” (commando-style) and suicide operations, which won them significant support among local communities. They were dubbed “al-Muhajireen” - the migrants - a reference both to their origins and their perceived dedication to the Syrian cause.

Following the collapse of the former Syrian regime on December 8, foreign fighter factions such as the Turkistan Islamic Party, Ajnad al-Sham and Ajnad al-Kavkaz (Chechens) emerged as key players within the operations command room led by the HTS.

In his first public remarks on the presence of foreign fighters, Syria’s new president described them as instrumental in toppling Bashar al-Assad’s regime and said they “deserve to be rewarded.”

Speaking to journalists in mid-January, al-Sharaa said the atrocities committed by the former government had necessitated foreign support, and hinted at the possibility of granting these fighters Syrian citizenship, a suggestion that sparked widespread debate.

Soon after, the new administration took steps that signaled both gratitude and political calculation: several foreign fighters were appointed to senior military posts in the newly restructured Syrian army, with ranks ranging from colonel to brigadier general.

Among the most prominent were Jordanian Abdulrahman Hussein al-Khatib, promoted to brigadier general; Egyptian Alaa Mohamed Abdel Baki; Uyghur militant Abdulaziz Dawood Khodabardi; Tajik national Moulana Tursun Abdulsamad; Turkish fighter Omar Mohamed Jeftchi Mukhtar; Albanian Abdul Bashari Khattab; and Dagestani native Zanor al-Basri Abdelhamid Abdullah, the commander of the “Army of Emigrants and Supporters.”

A Dilemma at the Heart of Syria’s Future

A former HTS commander, speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat on condition of anonymity, said the al-Sharaa administration is unlikely to oppose the US demand.

“The muhajireen brothers themselves are not clinging to their positions if they stand in the way of the country’s interests,” he said.

Indeed, less than 24 hours after Trump and al-Sharaa met in the Saudi capital, local Syrian outlets began reporting that General Security forces had raided foreign fighter strongholds in rural Idlib.

Asharq Al-Awsat was unable to independently verify the reports, but whether the raids were genuine or simply political theater, analysts say the message was unmistakable: Damascus may be willing to act decisively to secure international recognition and economic relief.

Kareem Mohammed, a current Syrian army commander and former battalion leader in the HTS with direct ties to foreign fighters, told Asharq Al-Awsat from Damascus that these combatants still hold significant sway within the country’s military and security apparatus, as well as among the revolution’s grassroots base.

“There is no interest for the government in taking negative action against them,” Mohammed said. “They remain popular within the ranks of the new army and the revolutionary heartland.”

Mohammed added that several countries have recently begun raising the issue of foreign fighters as a bargaining chip in their engagement with Syria’s new leadership. But he emphasized the crucial role these militants - referred to by rebels as al-Muhajireen (the migrants) - played from the outset of the uprising.

“These fighters had a decisive impact from the early days of the revolution. Their military expertise stood out in key battles,” he said.

According to Mohammed, the al-Sharaa government is actively working to distance the muhajireen from internal political conflicts and reassign them to their former positions in Idlib. There are also promises of eventual integration into Syrian society and possibly even the granting of citizenship down the line.

The ongoing debate over the presence of foreign fighters in Syria may be based on a misunderstanding, according to extremist group researcher Hossam Jazmati, who says Western powers are not explicitly calling for their expulsion.

“The American and Western demands are not about deporting foreign fighters,” Jazmati told Asharq Al-Awsat.

“Rather, they focus on two main conditions: that these individuals do not hold prominent positions in the emerging Syrian state, particularly in the army, security, or government , and that Syrian territory is not used by any of them to launch, prepare for, or train for military operations abroad.”

Jazmati noted that even during Hayat Tahrir al-Sham’s control over Idlib in recent years, the group maintained a policy of preventing factions from using Syrian territory as a base for cross-border attacks.

“HTS managed to keep the jihadist movements in check, discouraging any ambitions of launching operations beyond Syria’s borders,” he said.

As the future of foreign fighters in Syria hangs in the balance, allies and commanders aligned with the so-called muhajireen are rejecting any calls for their expulsion or forced repatriation.

“What their brothers and allies refuse is the idea of throwing them out of a country they fought to defend against a brutal regime, or handing them over to their home countries, where prison, or even execution, likely awaits,” said Jazmati.

“Generally speaking, I don’t believe that leaders and fighters in the HTS, or other factions, or even the religious and revolutionary base that admires the muhajireen model, insist on these fighters taking part in building the new state,” he added. “Nor do I think the foreign fighters themselves want that.”

That sentiment is echoed by Abu Hafs al-Turkistani, a former leader in the Turkistan Islamic Party who now heads a battalion within the Syrian army under the Ministry of Defense. His unit, composed mainly of Uyghur fighters, is stationed between Idlib and the Latakia countryside.

“We didn’t come to Syria to kill Syrians,” Turkistani told Asharq Al-Awsat. “We didn’t come here for money or positions. We came to support them, to share their suffering and help them as best we could, and thanks to God, victory was achieved, and we are honored to have taken part in it.”

Turkistani dismissed accusations linking foreign fighters to recent violence in coastal areas or in Sweida as part of a broader media campaign to vilify them. “These are baseless allegations,” he said.

Turkistani insisted that foreign fighters have largely kept to themselves and respected Syrian customs and traditions.

“We never interfered in the lives of Syrians. We’ve lived among them for years and stayed out of their personal affairs. Every nation has its differences, and while we may not agree on everything, we never tried to impose ourselves on their society,” he said.

As for past incidents in Idlib involving foreign fighters, Turkistani acknowledged isolated cases but said they were not repeated and did not reflect a broader pattern of misconduct. “The Syrians know that well,” he added.

Jazmati says Syria’s new leadership could resolve the foreign fighters dilemma by allowing them to stay under clear legal terms, provided they step away from power and military involvement.

“The muhajireen can remain in Syria under officially agreed legal arrangements, as civilians only,” Jazmati told Asharq Al-Awsat.

“They were never here to govern, and should not be placed at the forefront of a state they have no intention of ruling. But they must also pledge not to use Syrian territory to plan or launch jihadist operations in their home countries or elsewhere, as that could cause serious harm. If they refuse, they can leave for a destination of their choice.”

Appointments Stir Controversy

A foreign fighter of Arab nationality, known as Abu Mohammed, told Asharq Al-Awsat that he and others remain committed to the state led by al-Sharaa.

“We will not turn against Sharaa. We never did,” he said. “We avoided factional infighting and always prioritized Syria’s interests, which never clashed with our own. We were ready to die for the lives of Syrians, and now we know how to live under a state we respect and value.”

However, Jazmati warned that the real challenge lies in undoing the senior military appointments made shortly after the fall of the Assad regime, including three generals and three colonels, all foreign nationals.

“Reversing those promotions and assignments is a political and institutional dilemma,” Jazmati said. “It’s only been three weeks since the regime’s collapse, and these titles carry weight.”

According to confidential information seen by Jazmati, Syrian officials have pledged to halt the appointment of non-Syrians going forward.

But resolving the status of those already promoted remains a sensitive issue, one that may require a compromise that preserves their dignity, rank, and possibly even their current roles.

Efforts to limit the influence of foreign fighters in Syria’s post-Assad era are unlikely to trigger a resurgence of al-Qaeda or ISIS, according Jazmati.

“I don’t see al-Qaeda seeking a revival in Syria after its affiliate, Hurras al-Din, was dismantled,” Jazmati told Asharq Al-Awsat.

“As for ISIS, while its Syrian strategy remains unclear, it could attempt to recruit disaffected individuals, both Syrian and foreign, who are frustrated by the new government’s policies. Other smaller groups may also emerge, especially those that believe the current leadership is straying from their interpretation of Islamic law.”

Fragmented Landscape of Foreign Fighters

Not all foreign fighters in Syria fall along a single ideological spectrum. Divisions among them have existed since the early days of their arrival, influenced by how they were recruited and the routes they took to join the war.

Some were brought in through structured recruitment networks. These fighters were often contacted online, vetted, and then smuggled into Syria through well-organized channels. Others arrived independently, relying on human smugglers and covering their own travel costs, usually via Türkiye on tourist visas.

By mid-2013, as the rebel scene in Syria splintered, foreign fighters mostly gravitated toward jihadist factions, especially Jabhat al-Nusra. A smaller number joined so-called “moderate” groups such as Liwa al-Tawhid in Aleppo.

Ideological Rifts and Realignment

As rivalries over ideology and influence deepened, most foreign fighters shifted between groups, particularly after Jabhat al-Nusra’s break from ISIS. The split followed its former leader Ahmad al-Sharaa’s refusal to pledge allegiance to ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, instead aligning with former al-Qaeda chief Ayman al-Zawahiri.

That move sparked further defections, with some foreign fighters rejecting al-Zawahiri’s authority and joining ISIS.

Clashes between the factions ensued, eventually leading to the rise of independent groups like Jund al-Aqsa, founded by Abu Abdul Aziz al-Qatari, a jihadist of Palestinian origin born in Iraq.

Other units formed along national lines, including Uyghur, Uzbek, and Chechen battalions.

By mid-2014, the rise of ISIS across western Iraq and into Syria’s Deir Ezzor, Raqqa, parts of Hasakah, and the Aleppo and Idlib countryside intensified rivalries among jihadist factions.

ISIS declared other foreign-led groups apostates, even as many maintained ties with Jabhat al-Nusra and adopted a position of neutrality in the escalating infighting.

Factions like the Turkistan Islamic Party, Ajnad al-Sham, Ajnad al-Kavkaz, and Ansar al-Tawhid, as well as remnants of Jund al-Aqsa, survived through Assad’s fall, opting for autonomy or quiet alliance with the HTS.

The Syrianization of the Fight

Between 2014 and 2018, HTS, under the leadership of Abu Mohammad al-Jolani (al-Sharaa), systematically sidelined foreign fighters, removing them from leadership roles and the media spotlight.

Many were arrested or expelled, especially those affiliated with hardline factions such as Hurras al-Din, or those resistant to HTS’s pivot toward local governance.

The shift was both strategic and ideological.

Syrians increasingly resented the dominance of foreign leaders within the group, while international actors, particularly Türkiye, raised concerns about HTS’s associations with transnational jihadism.

Foreign fighters were often seen preaching al-Qaeda-style rhetoric and resisting cooperation with the Turkish military,which they denounced due to its NATO membership.

Al-Sharaa responded by launching a sweeping reform within HTS, marginalizing extremists regardless of nationality.

He rebranded the movement’s mission from global jihad to Syrian nationalism, using phrases like “Thawrat Ahl al-Sham” (“the revolution of the people of the Levant”) to underscore local priorities.

Many foreign fighters aligned with this vision, describing themselves as “supporters” rather than leaders of Syria’s future, as HTS moved to integrate them into the new nationalist framework.

Al-Sharaa’s project of “Syrianizing” the battle and its fighters aimed to distance the group from its jihadist roots and bring it closer to the political mainstream.

Now as president, al-Sharaa faces a new test: can he extend this project of ideological reform and integration under a national flag, while appeasing international stakeholders demanding limits on foreign fighters?

Observers say success will depend on his ability to restructure without alienating the fighters who once formed the backbone of the armed opposition.

The challenge lies in balancing their role in Syria’s recent history with the imperatives of diplomacy, reconstruction, and future security.

Whether Sharaa’s past efforts at moderation and localization can evolve into a credible state policy remains to be seen but with pressure mounting from both allies and adversaries, the answer may define the country’s next chapter.



What Al-Gaddafi’s Inner Circle Said about Musa Al-Sadr’s Disappearance

Imam Musa al-al-Sadr. (File photo)
Imam Musa al-al-Sadr. (File photo)
TT

What Al-Gaddafi’s Inner Circle Said about Musa Al-Sadr’s Disappearance

Imam Musa al-al-Sadr. (File photo)
Imam Musa al-al-Sadr. (File photo)

Fifteen years after the fall of Moammar al-Gaddafi’s regime, the circumstances surrounding the disappearance of Imam Musa al-Sadr, head of Lebanon’s Supreme Islamic Shiite Council, during a visit to Libya on Aug. 31, 1978, remain unclear. Al-Sadr was accompanied by Sheikh Mohammed Yacoub and journalist Abbas Badreddine. No trace of the three men has ever been found. To date, Lebanese authorities have not disclosed the outcome of contacts they held with the forces that governed Libya after al-Gaddafi’s fall in 2011.

The disappearance of Imam al-Sadr was among the subjects I raised with Libyan officials during conversations about al-Gaddafi, his rule and the abuses committed under his regime. What follows are accounts I heard from them.

Moammar al-Gaddafi. (Reuters file)

Abdel Moneim al-Houni: The killing of al-Gaddafi’s pilot

After the Sept. 1, 1969, coup that brought al-Gaddafi to power, Abdel Moneim al-Houni held several senior posts. He was a member of the Libyan Revolutionary Command Council, headed the intelligence service and served as both interior and foreign minister.

I asked Houni about the case of the Lebanese Shiite leader.

“It is clear that Imam al-Sadr was eliminated,” he said. “This is certain, and it is the conviction of every Libyan I have met.”

“I will tell you something. My brother-in-law was a pilot who flew al-Gaddafi’s plane. His name was Najm al-Din al-Yaziji, and he held the rank of lieutenant colonel. Shortly after Imam al-Sadr disappeared, my brother-in-law was eliminated.”

“Family members said his killing was connected to the al-Sadr case. He had transported the imam’s body for burial in southern Libya, in the Sabha area. Relatives say his knowledge of what happened to Musa al-Sadr prompted the Libyan security services to kill him to conceal the secret. These are things that happen in crimes of this kind.”

Jalloud: "I alluded to the disappearance once. He merely replied, ‘Are you accusing me?’ The conversation ended there.”

Jalloud: Khomeini asked only for an explanation

Days after the triumph of Iran’s 1979 revolution, a Libyan delegation led by Abdessalam Jalloud, the Libyan regime’s “number two,” visited Tehran to offer congratulations and met Khomeini.

I asked Jalloud whether Khomeini had raised al-Sadr’s disappearance during the meeting.

“Yes,” he replied. “He expressed the hope that an explanation would be released about the circumstances of the case so that there would be no obstacle to cooperation between the two revolutions.”

“While I was at the hotel, a demonstration was organized outside involving 37 people, led by al-Sadr’s sister and her husband. They chanted slogans, but security personnel affiliated with the revolution quickly removed and dispersed them.”

I asked whether the al-Sadr case later became an obstacle in relations with Tehran.

“No,” Jalloud said. “As I told you before, we gave Iran missiles and played a central role in helping it obtain weapons” during its war with Iraq in the 1980s.

“I met al-Sadr once, in Lebanon in the mid-1970s,” he recalled.

“I did not even know that he was visiting Libya. When I learned of his disappearance, I was deeply distressed for two reasons. The first concerned the man himself and what he represented. The second was that I considered the act vile. It is not an Arab custom to invite someone into your home or country and then turn on him. Such conduct goes against Arab morals and Islamic values. The whole affair was strange and subjected to a severe blackout.”

I asked whether he had ever confronted al-Gaddafi about al-Sadr.

“I alluded to the matter once,” he said. “He merely replied, ‘Are you accusing me?’ The conversation ended there.”

Asked about reports of an altercation between al-Gaddafi and al-Sadr, Jalloud said: “I do not know the details. But I heard years ago that the police officer who impersonated al-Sadr and traveled to Italy using his passport after his disappearance had been placed under heavy guard by Moammar, who feared that he might be abducted after people began talking about his role.”

Asked whether he believed al-Sadr had been killed and buried, he said: “That is what reason tells me. It is impossible that he has remained hidden until now. Before the incident, of course, I had heard al-Gaddafi express annoyance that Iran was sending clerics who wielded influence among Arab Shiites. The truth is that I never imagined matters would go this far.”

Imam al-Sadr speaks at a press conference. (Imam Moussa al-Sadr Center for Research & Studies)

Shalgham: He came to Libya on Boumediene’s recommendation

I asked former Foreign Minister Abdel Rahman Shalgham about al-Sadr’s case.

He said he had met al-Sadr once, when the imam came to Cairo to deliver a lecture while Shalgham was a student there. Shalgham said he was under house arrest when al-Sadr came to Libya.

“There were reports that he came to Libya on the recommendation of Algerian President Houari Boumediene,” Shalgham said. “It was said that he had asked the Algerian president for assistance and that Boumediene advised him to meet al-Gaddafi.”

“It was also said that a dispute arose between al-Gaddafi and al-Sadr over religious issues. That is possible: al-Gaddafi was a Sunni of the Maliki school, while al-Sadr was a Shiite. The claim later emerged that someone had impersonated al-Sadr and traveled to Italy,” he added.

Shalgham continued: “One day, when I was foreign minister, al-Gaddafi and I were walking in Bab al-Aziziya. He said to me, ‘Abdel Rahman, the Italians are your friends, including the foreign and interior ministers. I only want to know the truth about the Musa al-al-Sadr affair.’

“After al-Gaddafi’s regime fell, numerous scenarios circulated. Some spoke of a possible role in al-Sadr’s elimination by Sabri al-Banna, better known as Abu Nidal, the leader of what was called Fatah – the Revolutionary Council,” he said.

“Many wondered whether al-Sadr had received a sum of money and whether that money led to what happened to him. I asked around, but no one confirmed the story about the money. Abdel Moneim al-Houni says al-Sadr was killed in Libya.”

Former Libyan Foreign Minister Ali Abdussalam Treki. (AFP file photo)

Treki: A strange crime

I put the same question to former Libyan Foreign Minister Ali Abdussalam Treki.

“Let us speak honestly: I have no knowledge of the details,” he said.

“Imam al-Sadr did not come to Libya through the Foreign Ministry. The ministry’s only role was to convey an invitation to al-Sadr through the Libyan chargé d’affaires in Beirut. Coordination was subsequently handled by other parties,” Treki explained.

“I did not meet al-Sadr. What I heard was that he was a man of struggle who held Arab nationalist views,” he added.

Treki noted: “We at the Foreign Ministry did not know how or when he arrived. Later, after I left the post of foreign minister, the ministry contacted the Italians. The authorities said at the time that he had left Tripoli for Rome.

“It was later rumored that a heated argument had taken place between al-Gaddafi and al-Sadr, and led to what followed. The story is strange. This serious and regrettable incident brought no benefit to Libya or the Arab nationalist cause and caused extensive damage. It was a strange crime, and I do not know whose interests it served or in what context it occurred,” he stated.

The account of Mismari, the protocol chief and ‘the colonel’s shadow’

Nouri al-Mismari served as chief of protocol with the rank of minister of state and was regarded as “the colonel’s shadow,” accompanying al-Gaddafi at home and on his travels.

I asked him about al-Sadr and let him tell the story.

“Something happened whose significance I did not appreciate at the time,” he said.

“Abdullah Senussi called me. At the time, he was a junior officer in the Military Intelligence Department, whose office was on Shatt Street. The department was headed by Capt. Abdullah al-Hijazi. That was his rank at the time, of course, and he was among those al-Gaddafi called the ‘Free Officers.’”

“Senussi asked me: ‘Is it necessary for the Italian authorities to stamp the passport of someone seeking to enter their territory?’ I replied: ‘Of course. It has to be stamped. Those are the rules followed in every country.’ He ended the call,” said al-Mismari.

“Senussi contacted me later and said: ‘I will send you some passports, and you are required to secure Italian visas for their holders.’ I believe there were three passports, but we are talking about something that happened decades ago. A soldier sent by Senussi came to me and handed me the passports.”

“I had no reason to be suspicious, but I opened them and found that one belonged to Imam Musa al-al-Sadr, may God have mercy on him. I do not recall the other names,” continued al-Mismari.

“I called the Italian ambassador and said we wanted visas for guests who were staying with us. He welcomed the request. I sent the passports, but Senussi soon called again and asked, ‘Is it done?’ I told him the process needed some time and that I would send the passports to him as soon as they were returned to me. That is what happened.”

“I later heard about Imam al-Sadr’s disappearance, and the incident remained in my memory, particularly because it was Senussi who had sent the passports,” he added.

Al-Mismari said al-Sadr never left Libya and that the Italians were innocent and had been deceived. Three people entered Italy, including a tall officer who wore al-Sadr’s clothes. They deliberately left the passports of al-Sadr and his two companions at the hotel, along with the imam’s prayer rug, and later departed using Libyan diplomatic passports.


Nepal Floods Expose Risks to Hydropower in a Warming Himalayas

An undated handout photo of rescue workers taking part in a rescue operation near the tunnel of the Trishuli 3A Hydropower Project, following deadly flash floods and mudslides, in Rasuwa, Nepal. (Nepal Army/Handout via Reuters)
An undated handout photo of rescue workers taking part in a rescue operation near the tunnel of the Trishuli 3A Hydropower Project, following deadly flash floods and mudslides, in Rasuwa, Nepal. (Nepal Army/Handout via Reuters)
TT

Nepal Floods Expose Risks to Hydropower in a Warming Himalayas

An undated handout photo of rescue workers taking part in a rescue operation near the tunnel of the Trishuli 3A Hydropower Project, following deadly flash floods and mudslides, in Rasuwa, Nepal. (Nepal Army/Handout via Reuters)
An undated handout photo of rescue workers taking part in a rescue operation near the tunnel of the Trishuli 3A Hydropower Project, following deadly flash floods and mudslides, in Rasuwa, Nepal. (Nepal Army/Handout via Reuters)

Workers shoveled thick mud from a flood-ravaged power station in central Nepal this week, trying to restore electricity to more than 20,000 people.

The floods that swept through Nepal and China, killing hundreds and leaving thousands missing, have also overrun hydropower facilities, knocking out about 10% of Nepal’s power capacity.

Once the immediate aftermath of the disaster is dealt with, the question will be how to restore power plants, roads, bridges, schools and health facilities without exposing them to the same vulnerabilities, disaster experts said.

“Authorities have to take a hard look in the mirror now and ask how they will be rebuilding in these places. They will also have to take a close look at other projects in Nepal that have not been built yet, whether they’ll be approved after this event,” said Jakob Steiner, a geoscientist at the University of Graz in Austria, who is currently based in Dhaka, Bangladesh.

Rebuilding for resilience, not just replacement Hydropower projects that were operating or under construction were fully or partly destroyed across Rasuwa, Nuwakot and Dhading, among the worst-hit districts.

Hundreds of workers in Nepal are unaccounted for from a dozen hydropower projects, according to the Independent Power Producers’ Association, Nepal. Many had taken shelter in the tunnels but are stuck, waiting to be rescued, according to officials.

“The tunnels are built to access hydropower infrastructure and to divert water,” Steiner said, describing the tunnels as big enough for trucks to pass through.

Apart from the hydropower projects, tens of kilometers of roads, multiple bridges and essential buildings like schools and hospitals have been destroyed.

Ramraj Narasimhan, a senior director with the Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure, said rebuilding should focus on continuity of services rather than trying to make every structure indestructible.

“If it gets damaged, let it get damaged, but can we build in redundancy in the system?” he said.

That can mean choosing a better location for construction, alternate routes, backup power, improved early warning and financial tools such as insurance to speed recovery, Narasimhan said. Risk assessments should examine where a river bends, where slopes are unstable and where a single failure could cut off several communities.

Narasimhan’s organization estimates that $124 billion worth of Nepal’s infrastructure is exposed to climate-driven disasters, creating the potential for hundreds of millions of dollars in losses each year. A report by the coalition earlier this year found that Nepal’s average annual losses are nearly $760 million from various disasters, while the country’s national disaster funds is only a fraction of this amount.

Climate risks grow for Himalayan hydropower

Climate scientists said the Himalayan region, which is warming faster than many other parts of the world, is particularly at risk from increasing global warming as a result of human-caused climate change.

Climate experts said the flooding adds to evidence that infrastructure planning in the Himalayas should account for disasters that are increasing as the climate warms. Glaciers across the Hindu Kush Himalaya are losing ice at an accelerating rate, while permafrost degradation, unstable slopes, glacial lakes and increasingly erratic rainfall are raising the risks of floods, landslides and debris flows, according to reports by Kathmandu-based climate research group International Center for Integrated Mountain Development.

The stakes are particularly high for Nepal because hydropower is both a foundation of its electricity grid and an important source of economic growth and export revenue. Much of the country’s potential is run-of-river hydropower, Narasimhan said, meaning facilities are closely tied to steep river corridors where land is limited and hazards can cascade quickly.

Steiner said smaller floods can sometimes be managed with diversions that keep debris and high flows away from expensive infrastructure and tunnels. But for events as large as the latest flood, he said, physical defenses may be overwhelmed. In those cases, early warning becomes the critical protection for people.

He said the flood was detected at the China-Nepal border after moving rapidly from its source, leaving little warning time upstream. But there was still time as the flood traveled downstream toward hydropower sites, raising questions about whether warnings could have reached workers sooner.

The disaster is also likely to intensify scrutiny of where future projects are approved. Himanshu Thakkar, coordinator of the South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People, said environmental, social and disaster-risk assessments need to reflect the specific landscape and past hazards of each valley, backed by land-use rules and stronger accountability.

Hydropower projects can themselves become “force multipliers” when large structures, debris and altered river channels add to downstream damage, Thakkar said. He argued that Nepal should also consider more decentralized solar power as part of a broader energy mix.

Thakkar said the question now is not only how fast Nepal can rebuild, but what it chooses to put back in the path of the next flood.


72 Hours that Arranged the Succession: Khaddam Recalls What Happened after Hafez al-Assad's Death

Bashar al-Assad during his father’s funeral in June 2000. (AFP)
Bashar al-Assad during his father’s funeral in June 2000. (AFP)
TT

72 Hours that Arranged the Succession: Khaddam Recalls What Happened after Hafez al-Assad's Death

Bashar al-Assad during his father’s funeral in June 2000. (AFP)
Bashar al-Assad during his father’s funeral in June 2000. (AFP)

Former Syrian Vice President Abdul Halim Khaddam’s recent memoirs tackle the three days that followed the death of the late President Hafez al-Assad on June 10, 2000. He recalled the events from the perspective of someone who was inside the room where the succession was arranged.

The memoirs, edited and introduced by Ibrahim Hamidi, are due to be published in early September by Raff Publishing, a subsidiary of the Saudi Research and Media Group (SRMG).

Khaddam contacted Hafez al-Assad to ask permission to travel to Baniyas, leading to a lengthy conversation about health and age in which Assad said: "I have carried burdens beyond my capacity." He ended the conversation with a request: "Call me when you arrive."

Upon Khaddam's return to Damascus on Saturday, he was informed that the presidential palace was calling for him and that "Dr. Bashar" - Assad’s son - was waiting for him at home, at which point he realized that the president had died.

In the reception hall, he found the members of the Syrian command with Bashar and his brother-in-law Assef Shawkat with discussions focusing on how to announced the death. Minister of Defense General Mustafa Tlass informed him that the Regional Command had made two decisions: nominating Bashar for the presidency and amending Article 83 of the Constitution regarding the age of the President of the Republic since Bashar was 34 years old and the constitution required the minimum age to be 40. The People's Assembly was to meet in the evening to approve the amendment.

The memoirs are due to be published in early September by Raff Publishing, a subsidiary of the Saudi Research and Media Group (SRMG).

On the evening of Hafez’s death itself, Khaddam recalled that he met with Bashar at his home and suggested promoting him to the rank of general and appointing him Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Armed Forces, "so that he would have a legitimate status in the state" before a referendum.

Bashar asked him whether they should consult Tlass, and Khaddam replied that they would inform him of the decision rather than ask him.

The following day, the proposal was presented to Tlass in the presence of Bashar, whereupon the Defense Minister's face turned pale and he fell silent before stating that he would order the drafting of the decree.

Here, the memoirs record the most striking point of contention: the decree was delayed, and when the director of Tlass's office was asked about the reason, he replied that the General wanted to promote Bashar to the rank of "Lieutenant General" rather than "General", a proposal that would have kept the position of Commander-in-Chief of the Army within the reach of the Defense Minister.

Khaddam revealed his conviction was that Tlass "was not fit for this position," and that he had made a decision to support Bashar "to the end, even if it were at the expense of old comrades."

Bashar al-Assad and Abdul Halim Khaddam at the Syrian parliament in 2000. (AFP)

The memoirs reveal that Bashar’s path to the presidency began in 1994 with the death of his brother Bassel. Khaddam recalled that while everyone was in Qardaha for the burial, he learned that Anisa Makhlouf and her brother Mohammad Makhlouf had met and decided to terminate Bashar’s studies in London so that he could take his brother’s place as Hafez’s eventual successor.

Recalling that period, Khaddam said: "We must not forget that the elder Assad built a regime in which he placed Syrians before two choices: either to accept the regime with all its flaws, or civil war."

The issue is not merely a story of military protocol; it reveals the fragility of the moment of transition in a regime built for decades around a single individual, and how the party, constitution, army, and family intervened within a few short hours to produce a succession intended to appear natural. The details of those 72 hours appear in the book's chapter titled "The Death of Hafez al-Assad."