
The swift fall of Bashar al-Assad on December 8, 2024, marked the dramatic end of over five decades of authoritarian rule by the Assad clan in Syria. The future of the war-torn nation, however, is still shrouded in uncertainty. After enduring more than a decade of devastating civil war, Syria has now become a battleground for competing powers that seek to shape its destiny to serve their own interests. Currently, Türkiye, Israel, and the United States are the most prominent players in Syria’s evolving geopolitical landscape.
Turkiye
Türkiye is undeniably the greatest beneficiary in the shifting dynamics of Syria. It views the fall of Assad as a golden opportunity to expand its influence over both the nation and the broader region. By supporting the establishment of Islamist forces aligned with Ankara in Damascus, Türkiye seeks to create a client state that serves its regional interests. This strategy also addresses Türkiye’s most immediate concern: stamping out the separatist aspirations of Syria’s Kurdish minority in the northeast. Ankara sees Kurdish separatism in Syria as a direct threat to its own territorial integrity, perceiving the People’s Defense Units (YPG) as an extension of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) that Türkiye has long designated a terrorist organization. By curbing Kurdish independence in Syria, Türkiye seeks to impede such an eventuality at home.
A dependent Syria also aligns with Türkiye’s broader goal of reasserting influence over territories that were once part of the Ottoman Empire. At its zenith, the empire of the Turks ruled vast stretches of the Middle East, including present-day Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Israel, Palestine, and western Iran. In a show of Neo-Ottoman revanchism, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has openly expressed his desire for the defunct empire’s Syrian territories to be reintegrated under Turkish influence. Damascus’ realignment with Ankara places Türkiye on a path to reclaim its status as the great power in the region, harkening back to its longstanding imperial legacy.
The prospect of a pro-Ankara government in Damascus, coupled with Erdoğan’s territorial ambitions, also strengthens Türkiye’s position as a dominant player in the Islamic world. Ankara’s vast military capabilities - Türkiye is an important member of NATO and has one of the most powerful militaries in the world - as well as diplomatic leverage both in the East and the West can further propel this vision, particularly as Iran’s influence wanes. Syria’s realignment enables Türkiye to reclaim the Ottoman Empire’s status as the guardian of the Holy Land, presenting itself as the primary champion of Palestinian Arab rights and statehood. Erdoğan has even controversially hinted at the possibility of reclaiming Jerusalem, a provocative statement that underscores his ambition to restore Türkiye’s centrality in Islamic affairs.
Israel
Israel is arguably the second most significant beneficiary of the regime change in Syria, reaping substantial strategic advantages. It greatly benefits from the fracturing of the so-called “Shiite Crescent” and the dismantling of the “Axis of Resistance” led by Iran. The fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime has largely neutralized Iran’s influence through the regime in Syria and its ally Hezbollah in Lebanon, both of which posed significant threats to Israel. Notably, Israel played an active role in shaping the events leading to Assad’s downfall. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu later admitted to this involvement, highlighting that Israel’s actions against Iran and Hezbollah contributed to Syria’s destabilization and Assad’s weakening grip on power.
In the aftermath of Assad’s fall, Israel capitalized on the opportunity to incapacitate Syria’s military infrastructure. Through hundreds of airstrikes, it systematically dismantled Syria’s offensive and defensive capabilities. While Israeli authorities justified these strikes as measures to prevent military assets from falling into extremist hands, the broader implication appears to be a strategy to keep Syria’s military incapacitated for an extended period of time, ensuring it remains unable to challenge Israel’s dominance. The chaotic regime change in Syria also provided Israel a chance to consolidate its hold on the hotly-contested Golan Heights, a region of strategic importance that Israel has stated it means to permanently annex. Additionally, the Israeli army advanced deep into Syrian territory, nearing Damascus, with signals that it intends to maintain its presence in those areas for an extended period of time.
A destabilized Syria, particularly under authoritarian rule, also serves Israel’s broader geopolitical interests. It provides a pretext for Israel to delay or abandon the implementation of the Two-State Solution due to grave national security concerns. Israel can cite the ongoing chaos in an Islamist-dominated Syria as an existential threat to itself, arguing that it must not compromise its strategic depth by allowing the establishment of a pro-Islamist Palestinian state in its neighborhood (the heavy influence of the radical Sunni Muslim Brotherhood is a common factor in both places).
Moreover, to increase its strategic depth, Israel is already vocally supporting the Kurdish separatists in Syria with an eye to exploiting them as potential proxy forces against Türkiye. This not only undermines Syrian sovereignty but will also destabilize the neighboring Türkiye (home to the largest Kurdish population in the world), and by extension Iran and Iraq. As such, with Iran and Russia largely out of the picture, Syria has turned into a turf for the emerging Israeli-Turkish proxy war.
The USA vs. Iran and Russia
The United States also stands to benefit greatly, albeit indirectly, from the recent regime change in Syria, aligning this development with its broader strategic goals. Over the past decade, the U.S. has steadily reduced its presence in the Middle East, instead shifting its focus toward the Far East. This trend suggests that Washington is unlikely to significantly reverse course in the near future. However, a diminished but more favorable presence in the Middle East remains a key objective. The regime change in Syria contributes to that goal, offering opportunities to recalibrate U.S. influence without requiring substantial reinvestment of personnel and military assets.
An Assad-ruled Syria, bolstered by Russo-Iranian support, posed a significant challenge to U.S. interests in the Middle East. Through being present in Syria, the Iranian Revolutionary Guards were able to more easily target American assets and military in the region. The fall of Assad removed that threat to a large extent. It also greatly undermined Hezbollah, a major proxy of Iran known for its role in terrorism, arms trafficking, and global narcotics distribution—issues of critical concern to Washington. The diminishing of Tehran’s influence in Syria bolsters the security interests of the United States and its regional partners such as Arabs and Israel.
In parallel, a potential removal of Russia’s military presence from Syria, particularly its air and naval bases along the Mediterranean coast, erodes Moscow’s strategic foothold in the Middle East and disrupts its power projection in Africa. Russian bases in Syria have long served as hubs for training and deploying proxies and paramilitary forces to African countries, fueling anti-Western sentiment and facilitating the ouster of French and American missions from several nations. A weakened Russian position in Syria can potentially reverse that trend, creating opportunities for Western re-engagement in Africa and restoring its standing in those strategically important regions.
Finally, Moscow’s diminished influence in the Middle East and Africa provides Washington with a critical advantage in ongoing geopolitical contests beyond that region, most notably regarding the war in Ukraine. With its leverage in the Middle East eroded, Russia loses a significant bargaining chip with the West in negotiations over the Ukraine war. This shift strengthens America’s hand, which can in turn negotiate a peace deal with Moscow that is more favorable to Ukraine and the overall security of the democratic world. That outcome will strengthen Washington’s strategic position in an evolving global landscape.
In conclusion, the fall of Bashar al-Assad has reshaped the regional power dynamics in the Middle East, significantly benefiting Türkiye, Israel, and the United States in distinct but interconnected ways. Türkiye aims to capitalize on a pro-Ankara Syria to regain historically lost territory, emerge as a dominant regional power, and reassert itself as the leader of the Islamic world. Israel seeks to exploit the chaos to neutralize immediate threats, consolidate its territorial ambitions, and increase its strategic depth by planting a permanent thorn in Türkiye’s side in the form of a Kurdish client state. Meanwhile, the United States leverages the diminished Russo-Iranian influence to strengthen its strategic position both regionally and globally, with the American presence hopefully creating a balancing act between Israeli and Turkish ambitions and bringing a measure of stability to the war-torn country. The evolving power dynamics among these major powers underscores the broader geopolitical rivalries that continue to shape the post-Assad Syria.
Reza Parchizadeh, PhD, is a political scientist, security analyst, and international affairs specialist. He has written extensively on the development of liberal democracy worldwide, dynamics of authoritarian and totalitarian regimes, military and paramilitary applications of political ideologies, and global terrorism and sectarianism. He often explores the philosophical foundations of political systems and the real-world impact of political thought. His work frequently centers on the ideological and geopolitical strategies of Middle Eastern states, with a particular emphasis on interstate dynamics, regional stability, and interactions with the West. Parchizadeh has appeared on Al Arabiya, BBC, Fox News, and Radio Israel, and is a regular commentator on the U.S. government’s Voice of America.