The Anthem of Change in Syria’s Unstable Skies

In a world caught between waves of hope and darkness, the Arab Sunnis of Syria stand at a historic crossroads, one that carries within it the essence of responsibility and the core of identity. The pressing question looms: Will Syria become a paradise of equal citizenship,´-or-will it remain a battlefield of endless civil wars? At the heart of this dilemma, pragmatic voices emerge, rejecting the deceptive illusion of an Islamic state while simultaneously opening the door to peace for those who do not wish to replicate Ahmad al-Shar’a’s battles against the Kurds—wars waged in the shadows of the Syrian Democratic Forces’ rule.

This struggle manifests in an idea that may seem impossible at first: the establishment of an ethnographic decentralized administration in northeastern Syria. This would allow local forces to become part of a national defense system under the supervision of the Ministry of Defense, operating in regions where the term “federalism” has long been distorted with outdated meanings. It is an attempt to reshape governance based on a decade of experience in fighting terrorism and the bitter lessons of past trials.

Ahmad al-Shar’a’s diplomatic tour, balancing between Riyadh and Ankara, served as a profound political message—one signaling his intent to rectify the errors of the previous regime and regain the trust of the Arab base, embodied by Saudi Arabia.

These visits were not mere formal pleasantries but an effort to build a bridge of Arab support, backed by promises of significant financial aid needed to achieve both economic and political stability in Damascus. Meanwhile, Egypt and the UAE demonstrated political flexibility that positioned Syria back within the Arab fold, whereas Ankara pursued its own agenda inside Syria, albeit with a mix of caution and contradictions that undermined the values of freedom and justice so dearly sought by the Syrian people.

Here, the paradox of the emerging regional order, led by Saudi Arabia, stands in stark contrast to the old order represented by Iran and Turkey. Saudi Arabia’s influence in shaping Syria’s future is growing, while Ankara faces mounting challenges in securing a foothold in the Syrian arena, particularly in light of Kurdish aspirations and the rights claimed by northern populations. Turkey, keen on redrawing the map of influence from the Mediterranean to Malikiya (Derik), imposes strict conditions despite the contradictions in its rhetoric—calling for negotiations with the Syrian Democratic Forces while simultaneously continuing bombardments that disrupt daily life in these war-torn areas.

At the heart of this regional divide lie fundamental questions about the legitimacy of governance and the nature of sovereignty. The prevailing notion is that legitimacy is not a gift bestowed from the outside but a principle rooted in a government’s responsiveness to its people s aspirations. This underscores the necessity of rebuilding the Syrian state on a civilized democratic foundation that respects its diverse social fabric. Whether the goal is to establish an Islamic state´-or-a constitution based on Sharia, every citizen must have a stake in defining Syria’s national identity—an identity that, at its core, is a mosaic of ethnic and religious groups, including Christians, Muslims, Druze, Alawites, Yazidis, and others who have long been exploited for narrow political interests.

A political solution that satisfies all components of Syrian society does not lie in further fragmentation but in mutual recognition of diversity. Negotiations must develop mechanisms that grant regions a degree of self-governance without turning them into stepping stones for the disintegration of national unity. Only through such an approach can Syria reclaim its nature as a unified homeland strengthened by its differences. History has shown that regimes built on absolute authority, no matter how seemingly legitimate on the surface, do not endure when faced with the ambitions of peoples who reject marginalization and monopolization—just as corrupt regimes of the past have fallen.

As discussions continue over a constitutional framework that accommodates all factions, the need for a national conference emerges—one that would serve as a guiding document to -restore- Syria’s true political context, away from external impositions that fail to address the real concerns of its citizens. These citizens are still searching for their missing loved ones in the dungeons of oppression and yearning for justice for the mass graves left behind by the Assad era. Conducting a comprehensive demographic survey of Syria’s fractured population is a crucial first step toward redefining the governance equation—where parliament, not mosques´-or-tribal councils, serves as the real center of authority.

The challenges, however, are not solely internal-;- they extend to regional geopolitics. Arab neighbors and Israel alike fear a repeat of the failed state experiments caused by radical religious models. This is precisely why Syrian leadership must exercise extreme prudence in balancing external pressures with the fundamental needs of its people, who have suffered through years of war and hardship.

Amid these complexities, Ahmad al-Shar’a emerges as a symbol of political pragmatism—markedly different from the traditional rhetoric that glorified military defiance and suicidal wars. His discourse has shifted toward economics and cooperation, though the economic vision of the current system remains blurry. The suffering of the Syrian people reflects a complex reality that requires a balanced external hand to aid in stabilization. In this regard, Saudi Arabia represents the warm embrace that could help recalibrate Syria’s trajectory, while Turkey continues to seek clear distinctions between supporting its military and safeguarding its national security against Kurdish aspirations that are deeply intertwined with the broader regional identity.

Ultimately, amid these challenges and contradictions, the call to redefine Syria’s future persists—built on mutual recognition and inclusive dialogue rather than sectarian and political divisions that have led many Middle Eastern nations to ruin. The true solution lies in establishing a civil state, liberated from the chains of military rule and absolute power, which have doomed previous regimes. A Syria where citizens regain their right to self-determination under a constitution that guarantees equality and justice—without imposing a religious model´-or-a factional system that restricts freedom of expression and belonging.

Today’s political discourse, with all its contradictions and dimensions, calls for a new awareness—one that spans beyond the fleeting cycles of four-´-or-five-year terms and instead demands long-term efforts to build a comprehensive state that unites all Syrians under one cohesive framework, restoring Syria’s rightful place in its deep-rooted history. While the stakes remain wide open, the choice between comprehensive peace and devastating fragmentation lies in the hands of the Syrian people, who dream of a homeland where equality, dignity, and justice prevail—free from being a playground for foreign agendas´-or-an eternal battleground for unending conflicts.

Rate the article
Bad	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	Very good
Result : 100%							Participated in the vote : 1