Preliminary Analysis of Syria’s Shifting Dynamics and Its Regional Ramifications

The total economic losses Syria has endured since the 2011 uprising exceed $600 billion—a figure almost incomprehensible, even in the age of artificial intelligence.

According to international reports, the estimated cost of reconstruction and infrastructure rebuilding is at least $120 billion.

Syria’s economy was once distinguished by its efficient use of agriculture for domestic consumption and export. However, the war has severely damaged agricultural lands, exacerbated water and fertilizer shortages, and caused agricultural output to decline by 60% compared to pre-war levels.

Rapid political and military developments across Syria continue to add to the losses, deepening the economic devastation, with the country’s GDP shrinking by 70% since 2011.

The Syrian crisis has dominated international and regional media coverage, with many outlets playing a negative role by accelerating the movements of various factions. Some of these groups achieved surprising victories, including the capture of Aleppo and the strategic advance into Hama, boosting their confidence while shaking the faith in state institutions.

The presence of armed groups, including foreign fighters, has expanded geographically and militarily, creating a chaotic scene that leaves all possibilities open in the Middle East. This situation poses multiple risks to the concept of a centralized state while reshaping regional and international alliances, including shifting roles between Iran and Turkey.

Observers of the Syrian political scene ask pressing questions about the implications for the region’s present and future: Was the dramatic collapse in Syria truly unexpected? Was this conflict part of a broader struggle to weaken Iranian influence? Has Moscow withdrawn its support for Damascus? While these questions are valid and critical, the more immediate concern is how new alignments and functional roles will shape the next phase.

The vacuum left by the fall of Damascus to armed groups and the retreat of the regular army would present everyone with difficult and delicate choices. It is also crucial to note that ideological and fundamentalist groups often serve specific functions.

Washington, regardless of whether led by a Republican or Democratic administration, pursues a strategy of legitimizing “governing militias” under the guise of a “national framework” to fragment Arab states.

In essence, Syria, the land of prophets and messengers, is shifting from being under Tehran’s (Moscow’s) proxies to becoming dominated by Washington’s (Ankara’s) proxies. A close examination of the ideological and organizational components of Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) (formerly Jabhat al-Nusra) reveals its functional role within Syria in recent years.

Its members have received training from foreign elements in East Asia and have acquired suicide drones. Notably, their media narrative has shifted, with members adopting modern appearances and portraying themselves as defenders of religious minorities, as demonstrated by reopening a church in the village of Al-Yacoubiyah.

A report by the International Crisis Group underscores the pivot of Abu Mohammad al-Julani toward a political project framed within a national context to ensure continuity and survival. This strategy, embodied in the creation of the Salvation Government, aligns with the political rise of the Taliban in Afghanistan and aligns with Western agendas skilled in manufacturing proxies under the "governing militias" model.

In this context, international affairs researcher Dr. Ahmed Al-Baz has raised concerns about the potential dominance of jihadist movements in shaping or influencing Syria’s political future.

Writing on his Facebook page, he urged civil movements to recognize these dangers early to reduce ideological polarization and classifications, which are likely to escalate in Syrian society. He also stressed the importance of preserving the core structure of the Syrian army as the historical backbone of the national military and emphasized learning from Iraq’s experience.