Like many people around the world, I rejoiced with the liberated Syrian people when the tyrannical dynasty of a father and son that oppressed them for more than half a century finally came to an end.

There is no doubt that the revolutionary lightning that struck Syria and brought down the regime with the speed of light would have enormous geopolitical implications and perhaps a regional rippling effect.

No one can deny the historic significance of December 8. Future generations will be discussing and debating how ill or how well it changed the Middle East.

As in all victories, heroes emerged, and some even gained instant notoriety for being part of those who toppled Bashar al-Assad. Abu-Mohammed al-Jolani, who is the leader of Ha’yat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), is one of them.

Already Qatar opened diplomatic communication with Mohamed al-Bashir as soon as he was appointed to lead Syria's transitional administration. Other regional states such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Jordan are expected to follow suit.

Too Good To Be True?

It is important to note that HTS is the leading militia of the coalition of revolutionary rebels of all shades that liberated Syria. This coalition of Syrian and different foreign elements whose compatibility is untested—a coalition that I would call the Union of Clashing Interests (UCI)—seems to be united only on one objective: deposing Bashar Al-Assad.

This reminds me of the coalition of militias led by General Mohamed Farah Aidid that marched into Mogadishu, Somalia, in 1991. The only thing they all agreed on was to get rid of President Mohamed Siyad Barre. They got their wish, but shortly after, it became obvious that their unity had more holes than Swiss cheese and warlordism was their preferred power-sharing mechanism.

In geopolitics, if something looks too convenient or too good to be true, follow your gut feeling. In this case, the timing—immediately after the Israel and Lebanon ceasefire was secured—and how al-Assad’s grip on power was easily unclenched raise questions.

Likewise, how the meticulously synchronized implementation process was successfully executed by UCI and its foreign partners in one of the most complex, oppressed, religiously, and ethnically diverse countries in the Middle East without any resistance.

The Doha Deal

Though the master strategy, training, funding, and mobilization was in the works for more than a decade, the implementation did not take place until the Foreign Ministers of Turkiye, Russia, and Iran met in Doha under the Qatari diplomatic facilitation. Russia and Iran realized the checkmate status they were facing once they were told that Assad accepted a deal after realizing that resistance was futile.

Qatar presumably delivered the U.S. commitment to honor the tripartite agreement or whatever privileges Russia and Iran were to get once they came on board. The meeting was by no means a smooth one, but in the end, Russia and Iran had no choice but to accept the deal presented to them.

Distribution of Spoils

History will tell what deals and arrangements were finalized in Doha. We only know that some of Syria’s friendly countries, such as Russia and Iran, have abruptly lost their strategic advantage while others, more hostile stakeholders such as Israel, the U.S., and Turkiye, have gained. If the force driving this whole thing was a cooperative grand strategy, and it must’ve been, we now have the advantage of hindsight to reconstruct what it may’ve included.

The UCI gets its main objective: ending the Assad tyrannic dynasty. UCI also accepts only to claim specifically designated geographical territories within Syria that are not already under foreign control, regardless of how existentially critical those territories might be for state-building.

Assad gets an offer he could not refuse since his regime was already broken beyond repair and his economy was devastated to the point of being unable to pay his soldiers and civil servants’ salaries, or even keep the lights on in Damascus.

He and his immediate family would get safe exit to Russia via UAE. He would command his generals and cabinet ministers to avoid sabotaging the takeover process and to ensure a smooth transitioning of power.

Turkiye, which is in a strategic partnership with the U.S. (and Israel), gets to keep the areas it already controls in Syria and gets to replace Russia as the most influential political actor. To be more specific, Turkiye will be the one running the new Syria, due to its decade-long investment and strategic allegiance with the HTS and other Syrian and Turkic rebel militias that are part of UCI.

The U.S. gets to keep Syria’s oil and gas fields and the agricultural territories that it has been exploiting for more than a decade. Turkiye will ignore this, as it has been doing for a decade. This awkward but pragmatic position has labeled President Erdogan with hypocrisy in some circles.

You can see in this 2019 clip, then-President Trump reasserting the U.S.’ determination to keep Syria’s oil and gas fields while President Erdogan was seated next to him in the White House. The U.S. also retains the Syrian Kurds as a strategic leverage.

Though losing its last loyal client in the Middle East is a major setback, Russia receives reassurances that it can keep its sizable airbase in northwestern Syria and a naval facility at the Mediterranean port of Tartus.

Iran receives reassurances that the Shia community will not be targeted for revenge. With previously telegraphed opportunity to get de-sanctioned, which is also a green light to pursue its nuclear program, it was not a hard sell. Some policy and military experts advocate a Middle East version of MAD (mutually assured destruction) strategy to deter Israel’s four-decade-long threat. In exchange, Iran would cancel its planned retaliation attack against Israel.

Exploitation by the Usual Suspect

So, does this latest revolution in Syria lend a free hand to Israel to continue the genocide in Gaza and the annexation of the West Bank? The short but painful answer is yes. However, this could also expedite the Zionist genocidal regime’s demise.

Despite Netanyahu’s rhetoric of reengineering the Middle East to his preferred balance of power and making Israel the grand hegemon that totally dominates the region militarily, economically, and politically, such a claim is nothing more than a pipedream.

Of course, some may strongly disagree with this conclusion after seeing the military power that Israel has been projecting in its massive bombings of several countries at the same time and its total destruction of all of Syria’s air and navy bases with all its fighter jets, navy ships as well as weapons factories and storage facilities since Assad’s departure.

Within 48 hours, Israel executed 350 major air strikes in Syria—an average of 7 strikes per hour. That is quite a shock and awe. But if military might alone could help Israel achieve its Zionist ‘greater Israel’ ambition, it would have happened 76 years ago.

In the past 14 months of sadistic genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, people are still courageously insisting ‘give me freedom or give me death.’

During this period, Israel has become diplomatically more radioactive than ever before. Things have never been worse for Israel in terms of security, unity, economy, and demography as a large number of its citizens have been fleeing the country to Europe and the U.S. Like Ukraine, Israel is suffering from a shortage of soldiers.

Yet it continues to start a new war across the region. Netanyahu and his extremist regime are yet to learn that hubris is evil, and evil boomerangs.

Can the Second Revolution Last?

The litmus test on the authenticity of this latest revolutionary movement is buried in the names of HTS and its leader, al-Golani. If the movement’s objective, as indicated in its Arabic name, is to liberate Sham, then the historical Sham included modern-day countries such as Syria, Palestine, Israel, Lebanon, Jordan, and parts of southern Türkiye.

Al-Golani is a nickname to indicate HTS leader’s ancestral roots—the Golan Heights, which is illegally annexed by Israel. And since al-Golani and the militias he leads took over Syria, Israel grabbed more Syrian land to keep as a “buffer zone.”

Though al-Golani and his militia group remain on the U.S. terrorist lists, they are being afforded platforms in Western media such as CNN and are being presented as reformed moderate rebels. This questionable relationship is explained by Jake Sullivan, the current National Security Advisor, in a declassified email he sent in 2012 to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton: “AQ is on our side in Syria,” Al-Qaida/ISIS is a pawn.

Though his reconciliatory statements and promises to institute a democratic process for legitimacy and guarantees of protection to all minority communities are greatly appreciated, whether al-Golani has the vision, strategic patience, leadership skills, and the competent team necessary to lead broken Syria to become a functional and unified state again is to be seen.

Once the euphoria subsides, there must be an objective reassessment and accountability. Meanwhile, divine intervention aside, the reconstitution of a single Syrian state within the current geopolitical dynamics in the region is simply too idealistic.

This would require a unified Syrian-owned master strategy to disentangle the geopolitical live wires encircling this traumatized nation. There is a lot to learn from the Somalia experience. It is an open lesson.