The ongoing Syrian conflict has left the nation fractured, with wounds that run deep across its social, political, and religious fabric. Central to Syria’s woes has been the sectarian dominance of the Alawi Shia minority, embodied by the Assad regime. For decades, this regime entrenched itself in power through a system that prioritised loyalty over merit, sectarian affiliations over national unity, and repression over dialogue. As Syria inches toward a potential future under a unity government led by the rebels, there emerges a glimmer of hope for healing and rebuilding. Such a transition holds the promise of steering the nation away from sectarianism toward inclusivity, peace, and securing a place of dignity for Syria on the international stage.
Sectarian Dominance of Assad Regime
For over five decades, the Assad regime has relied heavily on the Alawi community – a Shia offshoot – to maintain its grip on power. While the Alawites constitute only about 12 to 15% of Syria’s population, they came to dominate the military, intelligence apparatus, and political institutions under Hafez al-Assad and later his son Bashar al-Assad. This sectarian monopoly was not incidental but deliberately engineered to sustain the regime’s authority.
The Alawi dominance found its roots in the early days of the Ba’athist regime. Hafez al-Assad’s ascent to power in 1970 marked the beginning of systematic favouritism that placed Alawites in key positions within the armed forces and intelligence agencies. This created a praetorian (like an elite protective) guard that ensured the regime’s survival against both internal dissent and external threats.
Alawi officers became the gatekeepers of state security, while the Sunni majority, comprising over 70% of the population, was systematically excluded from meaningful participation in governance. Economic and social benefits were also concentrated within Alawi communities. Preferential access to government jobs, education, and development projects uplifted the Alawi minority, albeit unevenly.
Urban migration further consolidated their influence in key cities such as Damascus and Homs, where Alawite enclaves were established through deliberate demographic engineering. In contrast, Sunni rural areas and urban poor neighbourhoods were neglected, fuelling resentment and sowing the seeds of rebellion. The Assad regime’s policies extended beyond sectarian favouritism to outright repression. Sunnis, particularly from rural and conservative backgrounds, were often treated with suspicion and subjected to harsh crackdowns.
The infamous massacre in Hama in 1982, where tens of thousands of Sunnis were killed, remains a chilling reminder of the regime’s willingness to use mass violence to suppress dissent. The consequences of this sectarian governance were devastating. The Syrian uprising of 2011, which began as a peaceful call for reforms, quickly escalated into a full-blown civil war. Sectarian tensions were weaponised by the regime and its allies, particularly Iran and Hezbollah, to portray the conflict as a fight against Sunni extremism. This narrative, however, ignored the legitimate grievances of the Sunni majority and further polarised the country.
A Unity Government: Syria’s Path to Redemption
After the fall of the Bashar al-Assad regime, the prospect of a unity government led by the Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham (HTS) offers a beacon of hope. This new political order promises to transcend the sectarian divisions that have plagued Syria, paving the way for national reconciliation and inclusive governance. Such a transformation is not only essential for the country’s recovery but also critical for gaining the support and recognition of the international community.
The HTS leadership has articulated visions for a post-Assad Syria that prioritise equal representation, the rule of law, and the protection of minority rights. These principles stand in stark contrast to the sectarian exclusivity of the Assad era. A unity government would also address the socio-economic disparities that fuelled the uprising. By investing in marginalised Sunni regions and ensuring equitable distribution of resources, such a government could rebuild trust and restore faith in the state’s ability to serve all its citizens. The inclusion of Sunnis, Alawites, Christians, Druze, and Kurds in governance would reflect Syria’s rich diversity and strengthen its social fabric.
On the international stage, a unity government that champions inclusivity would find greater acceptance and support. The Assad regime’s record of mass violence and human rights abuses has left it isolated and delegitimised. In contrast, a government that upholds democratic principles and respects human rights would resonate with global norms and attract much-needed aid and investment for reconstruction.
Int’l Implications of a Reconciled Syria
A united and inclusive Syria would also contribute to regional stability. The Assad regime’s reliance on external actors such as Iran and Hezbollah had deepened regional tensions and exacerbated sectarian divides across the Middle East. A unity government, by contrast, could chart an independent foreign policy that prioritises diplomacy and cooperation over proxy wars.
Furthermore, a stable Syria would alleviate the humanitarian crisis that has displaced millions of Syrians both internally and externally. Refugees longing to return home could do so under a government that guarantees their safety and dignity. The international community, particularly Western and Gulf states, would be more willing to support a Syria that embodies the values of peace and inclusivity. The journey toward such a future will undoubtedly be arduous. It requires not only the dismantling of the Assad regime’s oppressive structures but also the cultivation of a political culture that values dialogue, compromise, and mutual respect. Syrians from all walks of life must come together to rebuild their nation, guided by the principles of justice and equality.
Hope for a better future
Syria stands at a crossroads. The sectarian dominance of the Assad regime has left a trail of destruction and despair, but it has also underscored the urgent need for change. A unity government led by the resistance fighters offers a chance to break free from the shackles of sectarianism and chart a new course for the nation. Such a government could restore hope to a battered people, rebuild trust among diverse communities, and secure Syria’s place as a respected member of the international community. For Syria’s Muslim majority, the vision of a just and inclusive government resonates deeply with the principles of Islam, which call for equality, compassion, and the rejection of tyranny.
By rising above sectarianism and embracing unity, Syria can not only heal its wounds but also serve as a model for other nations grappling with similar challenges. The path ahead is fraught with difficulties, but the promise of a brighter future – a new hope for Syria – is worth every effort. May the sacrifices of the Syrian people pave the way for a nation where justice, peace, and unity prevail.