With ISIS regrouping in the north-east of the country and minority groups rebelling, the new Syrian government faces a war from within.
In a sweeping policy reversal, both the Trump administration and the European Union have taken coordinated steps to dismantle the international sanctions regime imposed on Syria—an unprecedented move aimed at propping up the transitional government led by Ahmed al-Sharaa, better known as Abu Muhammad al-Julani. Once a jihadist commander and leader of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), al-Julani now finds himself at the epicenter of a complex diplomatic reshuffle that could redefine Syria’s post-war trajectory.
The Western pivot toward Damascus was formalised through the suspension of the Caesar Act sanctions, originally enacted in 2019 to punish the Assad regime for war crimes and human rights abuses. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has emphasised the humanitarian need for sanctions relief to aid in Syria’s reconstruction, while cautioning that the window for stabilisation is rapidly closing. “If the interim government collapses, we could see a resurgence of ISIS and a re-fragmentation of the Syrian state,” Rubio warned in a statement.
The legitimacy of al-Julani’s government remains tenuous. Though he has publicly distanced himself from al-Qaeda and has made overtures toward moderation, the U.S. still classifies HTS as a terrorist organization. Nonetheless, the urgency of preventing a power vacuum appears to be trumping long-held reservations. Intelligence assessments indicate that ISIS has regained strength in northeastern Syria, with sleeper cells attempting to assassinate al-Julani and launching attacks on Syrian forces.
In response, al-Julani has initiated a series of strategic moves to gain Western favour. He has ordered the expulsion of pro-Iranian Palestinian factions from Syrian soil, arrested leaders of Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), and shuttered their operations across Syria. These actions suggest a dramatic pivot away from the so-called “resistance axis” long supported by the former Assad regime.
A parallel development—equally surprising—has been the emergence of backchannel negotiations between Israel and Syria, facilitated by the United Arab Emirates and reportedly sanctioned by Washington. Although details remain sparse, an Israeli official acknowledged “goodwill gestures” from Damascus and hinted at potential reciprocal moves. In a broader sense, the new regime’s flirtation with normalisation mirrors the trajectory of the Abraham Accords, with the third phase of proposed U.S. sanctions relief explicitly contingent upon Syria establishing diplomatic ties with Israel.
Meanwhile, regional players such as Turkey and Israel have reportedly established a “military hotline” to prevent accidental clashes in an increasingly volatile theater. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who participated virtually in Trump’s recent summit with al-Julani and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, called the sanctions relief “historic,” suggesting Ankara may be aligning with the U.S. vision for post-Assad Syria.
Despite these overtures, Syria remains fractured and volatile. Ethnic and sectarian divisions continue to plague the interim government’s efforts to consolidate power. The Alawites, Druze, and Kurdish communities have expressed resistance to al-Julani’s leadership, fearing a continuation of autocratic rule under a new face. Intelligence suggests ISIS could exploit these internal tensions to stage a comeback, particularly by storming Kurdish-run detention centres where thousands of jihadist fighters are held.
European capitals, led by Germany and France, have supported sanctions relief partly to incentivise the repatriation of Syrian refugees and to bolster French influence in the Levant. Japan is reportedly preparing to follow suit, underscoring a broader realignment of international attitudes toward Syria.
The Trump administration is reportedly debating between a “gradual” lifting of sanctions and a more aggressive, front-loaded approach. A leaked U.S. State Department memo outlines a three-phase process: immediate waivers for humanitarian aid, conditional expansion tied to governance reforms, and a final stage contingent on Syria joining the Abraham Accords and dismantling any remnants of chemical weapons programs.
Whether this roadmap will succeed or backfire remains an open question. Critics argue that Western support for a transitional regime with roots in jihadist ideology risks legitimizing authoritarianism under a new guise. Others maintain that the alternative—a vacuum exploited by ISIS, Iran, or even Russia—is far worse.
As regional power dynamics shift and Western alliances recalculate their strategies, Syria stands at a crossroads. Al-Julani’s future—and by extension, Syria’s—depends not only on external recognition but also on his ability to forge a genuinely inclusive political structure. For now, the West is betting on pragmatism over principle, with the hope that a fractured state can still be stitched back together under the shadow of global diplomacy.
