A flood of criticism and demands has been directed at the new rulers of Syria, specifically Ahmed al-Sharaa, since Bashar al-Assad fled to Russia on December 8. This isn't a question of whether these criticisms are pertinent, most of them have no basis in fact. I will discuss some of these criticisms here, but I can only cover the tip of the iceberg.
For instance, it was said that there is no military solution to the problems of Syria. Yet, military action pushed Assad out in 12 days, despite the presence of Russian and Iranian forces. President Putin claims that his country helped evacuate 4,000 Iranian fighters.
Now, it is said that Syria’s communities, particularly minorities, must be reassured after the regimes of the father and son had committed crimes against the majority for five decades. The new administration is being asked to meet several conditions, including those laid out in the Aqaba statement.
Meanwhile, Assad made no commitment to anything during his 24 years in power. When some Arabs tried to persuade him to distance himself from Iran, Assad exploited their efforts in the worst way. Lying is inherent to his politics, and he gave all his time to Russia until the moment he fled.
We have also heard the new Syria must reassure Lebanon, even though Assad the father had ruled and abused Lebanon. Bashar relied on assassinations and repression, disrupting all of Lebanon’s institutions. Most of those who are now demanding reassurances in Lebanon used to make pilgrimage in Assad’s Damascus!
It is said that the new administration must secure its borders, especially with Iraq, even though the world knows that Syria has been a gateway for weapons and militias (through the Iraqi Al-Bukamal crossing) since Saddam Hussein’s fall. It is said there is fear of militias in Syria, while there are militias that operate in Iraq, specifically the Popular Mobilization Forces.
Some people have stressed the need to preserve the Syrian army. However, old footage on YouTube featuring Gamal Abdel Nasser and Anwar Sadat shows that it was a sectarian army. The army collapsed due to defections following the revolution in 2011; Militias from Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, and Hezbollah have replaced the army.
On top of that, some now fear the division of Syria. It has been divided since 2011 among the Americans, Russians, Iranians, Turks, and Kurds, and before them, the Israelis.
Some Syrians claim that the attempt to bring Assad back into the Arab fold had divided the Syrian opposition before his fall. This is not true. What divided the opposition was the Astana agreement sponsored by Russia, Iran, and Türkiye. The Arabs had nothing to do with it.
Why doesn't the new Syria retaliate to Israel’s attacks, some ask? Meanwhile, Assad's regime never fired a bullet at the Israelis. In fact, Assad was the one who entrenched the phrase "respond at the right time," and the right time never came.
Hezbollah accepted a ceasefire agreement that grants Israel the right to strike the party abroad and inside Lebanon. The militias have not fired a bullet at the Israelis from Syrian territory despite all of Israel’s attacks on them in Syria.
It is said that Sharaa is classified as a "terrorist" by America. Assad was put in the same category under the Caesar Act. It is said that Türkiye controls Syria, and it is a basic principle of politics that every vacuum gets filled; politics "hates a vacuum." Those who are not helping Damascus are the problem.
Accordingly, that was an overview of the facts, and the list goes on.
