By: Dr. Adnan Bozan

Amid the complex political and military landscape Syria has endured for over a decade, the country is heading toward perilous scenarios, the worst of which could be complete partition. Meanwhile, the most viable option—if rational solutions can still be discussed—appears to be the adoption of a federal state model. Recent statements by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu regarding Israeli intervention in southern Syria to protect the Druze minority, along with efforts to prevent the advance of factions loyal to the new Syrian government in the south, clearly reveal new geopolitical shifts that may redraw Syria’s future map.

Given these rapid transformations, the question is no longer about whether the Syrian state will survive in its old form, but rather what its new shape will be after the collapse of the Baathist regime and the rise of an Islamist-jihadist government led by Ahmad Al-Sharaa (Abu Muhammad Al-Jawlani). This radical shift in power opens the door to unprecedented scenarios, ranging from actual partition to the imposition of a federal model that reflects the new balance of power on the ground.

1. Southern Syria: Toward Autonomy with Regional Backing?

With the increasing Israeli intervention in southern Syria under the pretext of protecting the Druze minority, indications suggest that this region is moving toward a form of autonomy, similar to the Kurdistan Region in Iraq. Israeli intervention is not merely driven by humanitarian concerns but is also part of a regional strategy to prevent the new Islamist factions in Damascus from extending their control over the south. This dynamic could transform Daraa and Suwayda into a semi-independent entity under international protection or even with direct support from Jordan and Israel.

In this context, local Druze forces appear to be aligning with this direction, particularly as concerns grow over the policies of the new Islamist government in Damascus. These fears may push the Druze community to seek regional alliances to secure its position in the post-Baathist era.

2. The Syrian Coast: Fragmentation or Realignment?

Contrary to some expectations, the collapse of the Baathist regime and the rise of an Islamist government in Damascus will not necessarily lead to the Syrian coast declaring independence under the remnants of the old regime. Instead, the new government in Damascus may attempt to consolidate its control over this strategic region, whether by force or through new alliances.

If the new jihadist authority fails to extend its full influence over the coast, local forces may emerge seeking to establish an independent or semi-independent entity, potentially backed by regional powers such as Russia, which is unlikely to relinquish its military bases in Tartus and Latakia easily. This region could witness conflicts between the newly empowered jihadist factions and local Alawite forces, which would face two choices: armed resistance or negotiating some form of self-governance.

3. East of the Euphrates: The Kurdish Federation Takes Root

Since the outbreak of the Syrian revolution, the Kurds, Arabs, and other ethnic groups have managed to establish a robust model of self-administration in their territories east of the Euphrates. Today, with the fall of the Baathist regime and the rise of an Islamist government in Damascus, the prospect of a Kurdish federal entity is more feasible than ever.

The ideological contradiction between the new government in Damascus and the Kurdish self-administration will further solidify the boundaries separating the two sides. The new Islamist authority will find it difficult to impose its vision on a region with a distinct national identity and strong U.S. backing. Consequently, the future of eastern Syria appears more predictable than that of other areas, as the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria moves toward a declared federation or even a de facto independent state.

4. Damascus and Aleppo: The New Power Struggle

With an Islamist government taking control of Damascus, the pressing question remains: how will it deal with the rest of Syria? Will it attempt to impose its model across the entire country, or will it accept federalism as a political solution?

Aleppo, being a key economic hub, is likely to become a battleground for influence between the new jihadist forces and regional powers, particularly Turkey, which may support local groups to maintain its influence there. Meanwhile, Damascus could remain isolated under Islamist rule, struggling to assert control over the entire country.

5. Federalism: The Least Costly Solution?

As divisions deepen, federalism appears to be the only viable option to prevent Syria from fracturing into warring mini-states. A federal system would grant each region self-governance within a unified Syrian framework. While this solution may be acceptable to some international players, it clashes with the vision of the new Islamist government, which may reject any model that does not align with its ideology.

Conclusion: Where Is Syria Heading?

Without a swift political solution, Syria risks descending into even greater chaos, becoming a battleground for conflicts among Islamist factions, local forces, and regional and international stakeholders. De facto partition may become inevitable, particularly if the ideological struggle between the new rulers in Damascus and other Syrian components persists.

What is clear so far is that the Syria that existed before 2011 is no longer viable. What comes next will be even more complex—whether through federalism or an irreversible slide toward full partition.

Add comment