Syria: Assad gone but independent workers’ organisation to struggle for socialist democracy now essential

Judy Beishon

Millions of Syrian people reacted with astonishment and joy at news that the Assad family’s five-decade long despotic regime had collapsed. President Bashir al-Assad, and his father Hafez al-Assad before him, pillaged the country for the enrichment of themselves and those around them, and ruled by inflicting terror and repression. 

The world looked on in disbelief as Aleppo fell out of the regime’s hands, followed in the space of just a week by Hama,  Homs, and the grand finale, Damascus. The military offensive that brought down the regime was carried out by a number of militias on three major fronts: from the north, the south and in the east. There were poignant scenes of the jails being forced open and dazed, long-incarcerated prisoners emerging from hellish conditions onto the streets, epitomising the fall of the detested regime.

Although Assad’s downfall was delivered by an armed offensive, the success of that offensive was ensured by lack of support for the regime from the section of the population it had mainly rested on, the minority  Alawite Muslim population, as well as long standing outright opposition to it from Syria’s Sunni Muslim majority and many others. Elements of a popular uprising were seen on the streets as it became clear that the regime was losing major cities and especially when it could no longer survive.  Statues and pictures of Assad were destroyed and the presidential palace was broken into, among other displays of relief and new freedom.

Morale and the will to fight had collapsed in Assad’s army, which included conscripts. Rank and file soldiers were worn down by the years of fighting and had been driven to despair by poverty levels of pay and by the financial plight of their families and home communities.  A last minute doubling of their pay ordered by Assad was too little, too late.

Syria’s economy, devastated by civil war and worsened by western sanctions, plunged into an even greater crisis last year, and the Syrian pound fell 80% against the US dollar to its lowest ever level. Inflation reached 60% with the result that most people couldn’t afford necessities – 42% were unemployed and 90% below the poverty line –  while the likes of the Assad family were dollar billionaires living in great luxury, as shown in the presidential palace’s collection of expensive cars. The Alawite minority had been told by Assad’s ruling elite during the civil war that their existence depended on that elite, but they, as well as other sections of society in regime-held areas, had suffered huge losses of men in the civil war, and for what? Deprivation and the struggle to get by was only worsening.

Alawite anger against the Assad regime had drawn closer to the anger in the Sunni Muslim majority of the population that had suffered by far the most during the civil war that arose following the uprising of 2011.  That was the year of the ‘Arab Spring’ uprisings that swept the Middle East, and which inspired many Syrians to move against the ruling autocracy in their own country.  Bashir al-Assad used the full force of the state military apparatus, including  chemical weapons, against  the centres of the uprising, and stepped up mass detentions, torture and murders. The civil war ebbed and flowed throughout the 13 years since then, causing an estimated half a million deaths, many from barbaric onslaughts inflicted on residential areas by Assad’s forces and his foreign allies – particularly the air support provided by Putin’s Russia from 2015. Over half the population became displaced, 13 million people, with six million of them fleeing abroad.

Final offensive

The leading militia in the offensive that finished off the regime was that of Islamist organisation Hayat Tahrir-al Shams (HTS), in coordination with Turkish-sponsored militias in the Syrian National Army (SNA), and a push towards Damascus from the south by a newly formed coordinating body called “Southern Operations room”. The latter encompassed fighters from what was the Free Syrian Army (FSA), including  from Druze communities.

Both HTS and SNA have controlled areas in Syria’s north for a number of years, and a driving factor for their offensive was that Assad’s forces were brutally shelling parts of those areas in the weeks before it. That, and an influx of around half a million refugees from the Israel-Hezbollah war in Lebanon was enormously worsening already bad conditions for the millions of people in north Syria.   

Another likely factor regarding the timing of the offensive, and a very major factor regarding its success, was the weakening of Assad’s foreign allies due to the other wars that have been taking place: Hezbollah in Lebanon and its sponsor Iran at the hands of Israel, and Putin’s Russia by its primary use of military resources in the Ukraine war. Assad only survived in power during the last 13 years because of substantial military help from Russia, Iran and Hezbollah, and those other wars had led to those backers being unable to deliver sufficient support this time. With the aim of saving the Syrian regime, Putin’s Russia did carry out some last-ditch brutal bombing in and around Idlib and Aleppo along with the Syrian air force, but the use of military resources in Ukraine limited what Putin was willing to do. So overall, the recent 14 months of war between Israel and Hezbollah, triggered by the war on Gaza, together with the Ukraine war, created a window of opportunity for HTS to lead an offensive against Assad.

Capitalist interests

After initial shock at the speed of events and unexpected turn, the world and regional capitalist powers rushed to hypocritically call for a new democratic future for Syrians. But they were all, without exception, considering how best to further their own interests. Some moved quickly to make use of the upheaval and transition period to step up military intervention: Israel seized more of the occupied Golan Heights and bombed military sites across Syria; US forces stepped up bombing of areas where Islamic State (ISIS) forces dominate; and Turkey, with the SNA, carried out a further wave of military attacks against Kurds in Syria’s north. 

There is no outside power that can be trusted by ordinary Syrians except solidarity from working-class people internationally, who face the same class-based struggle against the interests of the capitalist and imperialist ruling elites, as workers and the poor in Syria do too. The talk of hopes for ‘democracy’ in Syria by those elites is simply lies, given their continuing support for their allies ruling Egypt, Saudi Arabia and other dictatorial regimes. 

The sudden fall of Assad marks the start of a new period in Syria, in which Syrian workers will need to organise in their own interests, across the ethnic and religious components of the population, to secure a future free from oppression and exploitation. They cannot place trust in any of the pro-capitalist militias, including HTS, an organisation based on right-wing political Sunni Islam that has ruled Syria’s Idlib province in an authoritarian manner since 2017 with its ‘Salvation Government’. 

HTS was originally Jabhat al-Nusra, a branch of Al Qaeda, but its founders split from Al Qaeda in 2016 and renounced Al Qaeda’s ideology, global orientation and out-and-out terror methods. Keen to be accepted by the western powers, HTS’s leader, Ahmed al-Sharaa (also known as Abu Mohammad al-Jolani), has tried to reassure western imperialism that he is no longer ‘anti-western’. But for the Syrian masses HTS offers no alternative to rotting, exploitative capitalism. While the ideology and terrible methods of Al Qaeda are certainly no way forward for Syrians, neither is looking towards the western powers a path to a decent future. The powers  will only take care of their own interests, as all their interventions in the Middle East and elsewhere have shown.

Nor is there any solution to the massive level of poverty on the basis of the decaying capitalist system at home in Syria.  Yet as soon as Assad had departed, HTS asked Assad’s appointed prime minister to ensure continued functioning of the capitalist state apparatus and institutions, and a few days later HTS named the head of its own mini-state in Idlib, Mohammad al-Bashir, to be the new national prime minister; and the first ministers appointed for al-Bashir’s government were all from HTS. Meanwhile, business leaders were assured that the new regime would be based on a free-market economy and competition, and would seek to integrate in the world economy in a way that Assad had resisted (Reuters 10.12.24). 

The exact nature of a regime headed by HTS is uncertain at this early stage, including whether it will lurch in the direction of strongly imposing hardline, conservative Islamist rule.  Overall, it is overseeing a transition to a different line-up of unelected people at the top, to change the way society is managed but not to sweep away the horrors of capitalism, as only a socialist transformation could do.  

This is no surprise, as Syria’s workers haven’t yet built a mass party of their own that can take power, remove capitalism and bring in democratic socialism, which is the vital process that is needed. In the meantime there will no doubt be some illusions in the likes of HTS and other pro-capitalist organisations that opposed the Assad dynasty, on the basis that they spearheaded the removal of Assad and promised change.  Many among the minorities in Syria welcomed HTS’s promise to respect their existence and rights, and conscripts who had fought in Assad’s military apparatus welcomed HTS’s declaration of an amnesty for them. HTS and the other victorious militias have learnt from the debacle in Iraq, where US-led invasion forces, after toppling Saddam Hussein, sacked around 50,000 ‘Baathist civil servants’ and many Iraqi army officers, provoking enormous resentment. This led to many of those dismissed joining, and bringing military expertise, to what became powerful opposition militias. 

HTS’s reassurances to minorities, civil servants and army conscripts were important in ensuring an almost bloodless removal of the Assad regime, but on the basis of capitalist economic crisis, tensions will inevitably rise between the many different ethnic and religious sections of the population over how resources are shared out. Such tensions can be whipped up further and exploited by both aspiring warlords and foreign interventions, indicating the danger of a spiral into further sectarian based conflict. The training camps of Islamic State (ISIS) will also still be a danger – until the time when a mass workers’ movement is built that can pose a powerful alternative to its reactionary ideology. 

No to foreign intervention!

Foreign powers would seek to sponsor the various participants in those conflicts as they have done during Syria’s civil war, as well as elsewhere in the region. Turkey, led by president Erdogan, has been fighting a war on the autonomous, currently US-backed Kurdish areas in north Syria and the Kurdish-led military umbrella organisation there, the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), as an extension of the military operations against the Kurds within Turkey. As part of that war, Turkey has effectively occupied two strips of territory in Syria’s north, through its proxy SNA. 

Erdogan has manoeuvred at times to seek deals with Assad, but on this occasion he saw it as in the interests of Turkey’s capitalists and his regime to approve of HTS’s offensive. While Turkey doesn’t control HTS – like the US, UK and EU it labels HTS as ‘terrorist’ – the supply channels for HTS have had to come via Turkey. Erdogan’s regime probably didn’t initially expect the Assad regime to completely collapse, but will now be hoping that through siding with the successful side, Turkey is emerging as the strongest foreign player with boots on the ground in Syria politically and economically, and that Turkey’s influence in the region as a whole will be boosted. 

That scenario is understandably viewed by Syria’s Kurds as a big threat, but it is far from certain. A commentator from the International Crisis Group pointed out that HTS will be less reliant on help from Turkey now that it has access to all-Syria state power, and that in the interests of stability HTS might tolerate, for the time being at least, continued autonomy for Syria’s Kurds in the north east – territory which the Kurds extended as Assad’s regime collapsed – against Turkey’s wishes. 

In any case Erdogan will be hoping that some of the 3.7 million Syrian refugees in Turkey  return to their home country, though it’s possible that many will want to wait, worried about whether a new phase of civil war will break out. Incidentally, a number of European governments acted with outrageous haste in suspending the processing of asylum claims from Syrians, leaving those asylum seekers in further distressing limbo. Even if a layer of Syrian refugees believe it is safe to return home, that doesn’t mean they have homes to go to and a means of livelihood that haven’t been destroyed in the war. Furthermore, while already a number of Syrian refugees have returned, a stream of new refugees are leaving, both from minorities who fear what is to come, and from among people who fear being too associated with the fallen Assad regime. 

The US has 900 troops in Syria based in the Kurdish north east, who remained after being sent to fight the spread of ISIS, but who US president Trump blurted out in 2019 were in reality being kept there for the purpose of “keeping the oil” for US benefit that is produced in that area. Now, soon to be inaugurated into his second term of office, Trump will face immediate dilemmas regarding Syria, on the one hand wanting to stick by his utterance that the Syrian conflict “is not our fight”, said on the day that Damascus fell, but on the other hand needing to make decisions regarding the US troops stationed there.

Following the weakening of the Iran-led ‘axis of resistance’ due to the damage inflicted on Hamas and Hezbollah by Israel, the loss of Iran’s ally in Syria, the Assad regime, is a further great blow to the Iranian ruling theocracy. As the demise of that ally became clear, Iran hastily and humiliatingly ordered its personnel out of Syria, drawing a line under the failure of not just its direct military input but also the other Shia Muslim fighting units it had encouraged to go there from neighbouring countries, including Iraq. Hezbollah in Lebanon had suffered the major setback of being significantly damaged by Israel’s war on it, especially in October and November 2024. Its subsequent inability to prop up Assad’s regime only added to its reverses.

The fall of Assad is also a blow to Russia’s interests, not least because Putin and Co see their naval base and airbase that are located in Syria as very important.  Syria is in a pivotal position geographically in the Middle East, having borders with Turkey, Israel, Jordan, Iraq and Lebanon. Both Iran and Russia will be looking at what groups they can seek links with in Syria in order to maintain some influence there. 

Neither is the fall of Assad particularly welcome to the Sunni Arab Gulf states. They had just last year brought Assad’s Syria back into the Arab League, and they now fear the possibility of an unpredictable government in Syria, as do the Western powers. Reflecting this, a Financial Times editorial urged: “To seize the opportunity of a more hopeful Syria, those who can influence Jolani — Turkey and perhaps also Qatar — must ensure that he leaves the governing of the country to a civilian administration that reflects Syria’s myriad of religious communities. That should allow Arab and western governments that designate HTS as a terrorist organisation to engage with the government” (9.12.24). The “more hopeful Syria” referred to, is one that would be more hopeful for western imperialist interests, not the Syrian people.

The Israeli government regarded Assad’s regime as a foe and part of the ‘axis of resistance’ but, at the same time, Israeli prime minister Netanyahu saw it as ‘the devil you know rather than the devil you don’t’. The replacement of a relatively predictable Assad regime with an unpredictable Islamist-led government is a major concern for Israel’s leaders.

Socialist view

Some left organisations internationally lament the loss of the Assad regime, viewing it as a lesser evil compared to one that might be led by the likes of HTS, based on right-wing political Islam. This largely stems from seeing the Assad regime as anti-imperialist and now fearing that its overthrow will benefit western imperialism. It is true that in the early 1960s the Baath regime, using socialist phraseology, nationalised the banks and main industries and asserted state control over the economy. However, Bashar Assad’s father led the 1970 military coup that marked the end of that era, while continuing to lean on the Stalinist bureaucracy in the Soviet Union for aid and trade in the period before the collapse of Stalinism. 

Marxists oppose imperialism but do not advise workers to abandon struggle against repressive and pro-capitalist regimes just because those regimes are in conflict with some imperialist powers. In fact, a socialist revolution is the most effective way of opposing imperialism.

Also, no support should have been given to the one-party Baathist rule in Syria –increasingly under the control of one family – on the basis of a defence of secularism. The Assads’ regime formally maintained a secular veneer while at the same time resting on sections of the population. Socialists call for secular states that allow freedom of thought and religious belief, but under the Assads’ rule any views or beliefs considered a threat to the regime were met with heavy repression by the military apparatus and intelligence service. Syria never had socialist democracy, which would have been vital if the gains that can be made from having nationalised industry were to be used for the full benefit of the entire population. When the economy eventually descended into crisis (partly due to western sanctions that mainly hit the poorest) the regime resorted to cutting subsidies for basic goods, holding public sector wages down, slashing public services, and privatising state companies – handing them to the rich elite at the top and its foreign backers.

Syria is now facing the question posed whenever a government or regime is overthrown, namely what should replace it? While condemning the Assad regime, neither can socialists support any future regime led by right-wing political Islam or any other form of capitalist government. No confidence should be placed in any of the local or regional capitalist or aspiring capitalist leaders who want to pursue a path of profiteering for those at the top, or a political career serving capitalist interests – often on the basis of ‘divide and rule’, posing as defenders and promoters of one or other section of the population.

The years of civil war have created massive displacement, but millions of Syrians want to return to their home areas, most of which have historically been mixed ethnically and religiously. Christians, Muslims, Kurds, Alawites, Druze, Turkmen, Ismailis and many others – ordinary people across Syria have had enough of war, have no vested interest in war, and long for security and peace. Organising democratically at grassroots level, independently of all pro-capitalist interests, is crucial for achieving that. 

Lessons will have been learnt from the 2011 Arab Spring and the protests that have taken place in Syria since then – including some in regime-held areas against the Assad regime and some in Idlib province against HTC’s ‘Salvation government’. Following a cut in fuel subsidies by Assad’s government, at the end of August last year a wave of protests broke out, particularly in the southern province of Suwayda where the Druze minority is concentrated, demanding the fall of the government. Thousands of protesters blocked the road to Damascus and stormed a local office of the Baath party. A general strike broke out and spread to Deraa, the town where the 2011 uprising had begun (FT, 28.8.23).

Opposition political networks were being organised too, mainly online to try to evade repression, such as the “10th of August movement” set up in  August 2023, with demands such as a higher minimum wage and the release of political prisoners, and promoting the idea of peaceful, non-sectarian resistance  against Assad’s regime.  

Non-sectarian organising is definitely essential. While socialists defend the right to self-determination for oppressed nationalities and minorities, a break-up of Syria carried out on the basis of ethnic conflict and ‘cleansing’ would be a disaster for the whole population. Regarding the word ‘peaceful’, if it means an all-circumstances pacifist position, it would be a mistake. Working class people need to urgently build democratically-controlled defence organisations which need to be armed in order to have practical means of defence in a country in which there will be attempts by local militia leaders to carry out aggressions, and a newly formed capitalist government will seek to rebuild a state military force that can suppress opposition and dissent. 

Syria is at the start of a journey in which new formations will develop and existing groups can weaken. However, experience has shown that without the working class organising itself and being prepared to struggle against capitalism and for a workers’ democracy, a new dictatorship can arise, as we saw in Egypt a decade ago, or great instability and disarray can dominate for a period, as in Iraq and Libya.

Workers’ organisations will need to discuss and debate a political programme, insisting on full democratic rights, including the right to demonstrate, to strike, and to organise; and guarantees over women’s rights and minority rights. They will need to reject any prospect of state power being in the hands of any particular pro-capitalist denomination or ethnicity in society – whether HTS or other – or a pro-capitalist government of so-called ‘experts’ or technocrats, or one of so-called ‘national unity’.

The only acceptable government is one made up of representatives of working class people in every locality – representatives who are elected and can be recalled and replaced at any time by those who elect them. Only in that way can policies in the interests of the overwhelming majority in society be carried out, rather than policies aimed hopelessly at building a successful capitalist economy – in a world where capitalism is in putrid decay as a system – and with the mistaken belief that capitalist profits will trickle down to the masses.

In parallel with workers and the poor in Syria discussing and debating their demands, they will need to build their own mass party that can see those demands delivered. Only a programme based on removing the system that causes poverty, inequality and war, and replacing it with a democratic socialist society based on public ownership of natural resources, industry and services and socialist economic planning, will enable all people to have what they need for a decent life. Baathism once exemplified a hideous, distorted form of a planned economy, and with a cynical veneer of anti-imperialist and leftist rhetoric it sullied the word socialism. The task ahead in Syria is the raising of consciousness on what genuine socialism means, and building the class-based force that can deliver it.