The events in Syria should serve as a stark reminder that the world’s leadership vacuum is only growing. Seemingly contained events in places like Ukraine and Gaza can echo far beyond their borders, and into the future.
NEW YORK – When one door closes, another one opens. Just as the yearlong war between Israel and Hezbollah gave way to a ceasefire agreement, a new front in the Middle East conflict opened in Syria.
The two events are connected. The dormant 13-year-old Syrian civil war was reignited when anti-government fighters opposed to President Bashar al-Assad’s regime launched a surprise offensive on one of Syria’s largest cities, Aleppo. Syrian army forces, who had been in control of most of the country’s territory since 2017-18, thanks to Iranian and Russian support, were swiftly routed. With their attention elsewhere, Iran and Russia were caught off guard and failed to counter the rebel advance.
Led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a Sunni Islamist group with earlier ties to al-Qaeda, and occasionally backed by Turkey, the insurgents swept through northwest Syria and forced Assad’s troops to retreat from Aleppo in a matter of days. They have since advanced south into Hama governorate, roughly 200 kilometers (125 miles) from the capital, Damascus.
The most significant territorial change in nearly a decade, Aleppo’s capture is a blow not just to Assad’s regime but also to Iran and Russia’s positions in Syria. Even if government forces manage to halt the rebel advance, they will need substantial external support to retake the territory that was lost. Aleppo itself – Syria’s commercial center, a major Iranian military and economic hub, and a symbol of Russia’s influence in the country – looks set to remain outside the government’s control for the foreseeable future.
While HTS reportedly had been planning this operation for months, shifting geopolitics made this an especially opportune time to strike. Israel’s destruction of Hezbollah in Lebanon, and its degradation of Iran’s proxy network in Syria and elsewhere over the last few months, had weakened Assad and drained his Iranian patron of resources. Moreover, support from his other backer, Russia, had been waning. The Kremlin has been focusing on its three-year-long war in Ukraine, where it is frantically trying to take as much land as possible before US President-elect Donald Trump seeks a ceasefire after January 20.
In hindsight, it should have come as no surprise that the rebels chose this moment to pounce. The more distracted or exhausted Assad’s backers are, the more vulnerable his regime becomes. But as weak as Assad is, the fighting is unlikely to topple his regime. He is too important an ally for Iran and Russia to lose. Though the resources Iran can devote to Syria are limited by Western sanctions and the prospect of having to rebuild Hezbollah, Iran’s leaders want to avoid another major loss in their “Axis of Resistance.” Iran will duly increase support to prop up Assad, including by intervening with personnel, as it has already done by deploying Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-aligned militia fighters from Iraq.
At a time of escalating global turmoil, there is an urgent need for incisive, informed analysis of the issues and questions driving the news – just what PS has always provided.
Subscribe to Digital or Digital Plus now to secure your discount.
Subscribe Now
For its part, the Kremlin is keen to maintain its access to military bases in Syria, and to avoid a humiliating foreign-policy failure. Despite being stretched in Ukraine, it will continue to back Assad’s forces with increased air strikes and new military hardware.
In fact, no major regional player – including those who benefit from a weaker Assad – wants to see the Syrian strongman violently ousted at this point. Israel, for example, is happy to see another Iranian ally pummeled and Hezbollah’s supply lines in Syria disrupted. But it is wary of a power vacuum along its borders, which would threaten its own security. Its optimal scenario is a controlled rebel advance that forces Iran to divert its attention and resources to Syria, but that stops short of overthrowing Assad. Continued fighting in Syria would also help preserve the fragile ceasefire in Lebanon, as neither Iran nor Hezbollah will want to reopen that front as long as their ally is on the ropes.
Even Turkey, which has often supported HTS and other anti-government militias, is uninterested in a regime collapse. Though it stands to gain regional influence from the current fighting and the void left by Iran’s diminished presence in the Levant, Assad’s downfall would destabilize the entire region, ignite another refugee crisis, and risk a direct military confrontation between Turkey and Russia. For Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the happy medium is a controlled offensive that gives him the upper hand in dictating the terms of diplomatic normalization with Syria (he has long wanted to arrange the return of millions of Syrian refugees), as well as any ultimate political settlement there.
Assad defied the odds 13 years ago when Barack Obama’s administration said that he “must go,” and he is likely to do so again. But the renewal of fighting in Syria should serve as a stark reminder that the world’s leadership vacuum – what I call the “geopolitical recession” – is only growing. Seemingly contained events in places like Ukraine and Gaza can echo far beyond their borders, and into the future.
To have unlimited access to our content including in-depth commentaries, book reviews, exclusive interviews, PS OnPoint and PS The Big Picture, please subscribe
With German voters clearly demanding comprehensive change, the far right has been capitalizing on the public's discontent and benefiting from broader global political trends. If the country's democratic parties cannot deliver, they may soon find that they are no longer the mainstream.
explains why the outcome may decide whether the political “firewall” against the far right can hold.
The Russian and (now) American vision of "peace" in Ukraine would be no peace at all. The immediate task for Europe is not only to navigate Donald’s Trump unilateral pursuit of a settlement, but also to ensure that any deal does not increase the likelihood of an even wider war.
sees a Korea-style armistice with security guarantees as the only viable option in Ukraine.
Rather than engage in lengthy discussions to pry concessions from Russia, US President Donald Trump seems committed to giving the Kremlin whatever it wants to end the Ukraine war. But rewarding the aggressor and punishing the victim would amount to setting the stage for the next war.
warns that by punishing the victim, the US is setting up Europe for another war.
Within his first month back in the White House, Donald Trump has upended US foreign policy and launched an all-out assault on the country’s constitutional order. With US institutions bowing or buckling as the administration takes executive power to unprecedented extremes, the establishment of an authoritarian regime cannot be ruled out.
The rapid advance of AI might create the illusion that we have created a form of algorithmic intelligence capable of understanding us as deeply as we understand one another. But these systems will always lack the essential qualities of human intelligence.
explains why even cutting-edge innovations are not immune to the world’s inherent unpredictability.
NEW YORK – When one door closes, another one opens. Just as the yearlong war between Israel and Hezbollah gave way to a ceasefire agreement, a new front in the Middle East conflict opened in Syria.
The two events are connected. The dormant 13-year-old Syrian civil war was reignited when anti-government fighters opposed to President Bashar al-Assad’s regime launched a surprise offensive on one of Syria’s largest cities, Aleppo. Syrian army forces, who had been in control of most of the country’s territory since 2017-18, thanks to Iranian and Russian support, were swiftly routed. With their attention elsewhere, Iran and Russia were caught off guard and failed to counter the rebel advance.
Led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a Sunni Islamist group with earlier ties to al-Qaeda, and occasionally backed by Turkey, the insurgents swept through northwest Syria and forced Assad’s troops to retreat from Aleppo in a matter of days. They have since advanced south into Hama governorate, roughly 200 kilometers (125 miles) from the capital, Damascus.
The most significant territorial change in nearly a decade, Aleppo’s capture is a blow not just to Assad’s regime but also to Iran and Russia’s positions in Syria. Even if government forces manage to halt the rebel advance, they will need substantial external support to retake the territory that was lost. Aleppo itself – Syria’s commercial center, a major Iranian military and economic hub, and a symbol of Russia’s influence in the country – looks set to remain outside the government’s control for the foreseeable future.
While HTS reportedly had been planning this operation for months, shifting geopolitics made this an especially opportune time to strike. Israel’s destruction of Hezbollah in Lebanon, and its degradation of Iran’s proxy network in Syria and elsewhere over the last few months, had weakened Assad and drained his Iranian patron of resources. Moreover, support from his other backer, Russia, had been waning. The Kremlin has been focusing on its three-year-long war in Ukraine, where it is frantically trying to take as much land as possible before US President-elect Donald Trump seeks a ceasefire after January 20.
In hindsight, it should have come as no surprise that the rebels chose this moment to pounce. The more distracted or exhausted Assad’s backers are, the more vulnerable his regime becomes. But as weak as Assad is, the fighting is unlikely to topple his regime. He is too important an ally for Iran and Russia to lose. Though the resources Iran can devote to Syria are limited by Western sanctions and the prospect of having to rebuild Hezbollah, Iran’s leaders want to avoid another major loss in their “Axis of Resistance.” Iran will duly increase support to prop up Assad, including by intervening with personnel, as it has already done by deploying Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-aligned militia fighters from Iraq.
Winter Sale: Save 40% on a new PS subscription
At a time of escalating global turmoil, there is an urgent need for incisive, informed analysis of the issues and questions driving the news – just what PS has always provided.
Subscribe to Digital or Digital Plus now to secure your discount.
Subscribe Now
For its part, the Kremlin is keen to maintain its access to military bases in Syria, and to avoid a humiliating foreign-policy failure. Despite being stretched in Ukraine, it will continue to back Assad’s forces with increased air strikes and new military hardware.
In fact, no major regional player – including those who benefit from a weaker Assad – wants to see the Syrian strongman violently ousted at this point. Israel, for example, is happy to see another Iranian ally pummeled and Hezbollah’s supply lines in Syria disrupted. But it is wary of a power vacuum along its borders, which would threaten its own security. Its optimal scenario is a controlled rebel advance that forces Iran to divert its attention and resources to Syria, but that stops short of overthrowing Assad. Continued fighting in Syria would also help preserve the fragile ceasefire in Lebanon, as neither Iran nor Hezbollah will want to reopen that front as long as their ally is on the ropes.
Even Turkey, which has often supported HTS and other anti-government militias, is uninterested in a regime collapse. Though it stands to gain regional influence from the current fighting and the void left by Iran’s diminished presence in the Levant, Assad’s downfall would destabilize the entire region, ignite another refugee crisis, and risk a direct military confrontation between Turkey and Russia. For Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the happy medium is a controlled offensive that gives him the upper hand in dictating the terms of diplomatic normalization with Syria (he has long wanted to arrange the return of millions of Syrian refugees), as well as any ultimate political settlement there.
Assad defied the odds 13 years ago when Barack Obama’s administration said that he “must go,” and he is likely to do so again. But the renewal of fighting in Syria should serve as a stark reminder that the world’s leadership vacuum – what I call the “geopolitical recession” – is only growing. Seemingly contained events in places like Ukraine and Gaza can echo far beyond their borders, and into the future.