It is business as usual for the global powers, where the interests of smaller nations find no room in the grand chessboard of geopolitics. These smaller states are often reduced to mere pawns, manipulated and sacrificed to achieve larger strategic objectives. In this ruthless pursuit, terrorism—once condemned universally—seems to have found a revival as a covert instrument to serve political ends.
Syria is the latest example. On Sunday, Islamist militant rebel groups, backed by external powers and led by Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS)—originally tied to Syria's Al-Qaeda branch—toppled President Bashar al-Assad's regime, ending five decades of Baath Party rule.
This resurgence is not coincidental. It stems from a calculated effort to destabilize regions, weaken adversaries, and maintain influence in contested areas. The cost, as always, is borne by the innocent, with nations caught in the crossfire struggling to secure their sovereignty and peace in an increasingly volatile world.
As this trend gains momentum, it raises critical questions about accountability, morality, and the long-term consequences of weaponising terror in the name of strategic gains. Who truly benefits from this game of destruction, and what does it mean for global security?
Terrorism as tool for political objectives
The rise of jihadist culture in Afghanistan was no accident; it was a deliberate construct born out of geopolitical maneuvering during the Cold War. In the late 1970s and 1980s, this ideology was fostered as a means to resist the Soviet invasion. Armed and funded primarily by global powers like the United States, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan, the movement was initially framed as a fight for freedom and sovereignty. However, its deeper implications soon became apparent.
The nurturing of jihadist factions created a fertile ground for the spread of fundamentalism. This strategic move, aimed at toppling the USSR, had unintended—or perhaps ignored—long-term consequences. The extremist groups that emerged did not dissolve with the Soviet withdrawal; instead, they evolved, multiplied, and expanded their reach globally.
The ideological and logistical support provided during that era laid the foundation for movements that would later fuel global terrorism. Beyond their immediate objectives, these groups contributed to the creation of Islamophobia, as their actions were often used to stereotype entire communities and paint Islam as a religion of violence. This narrative continues to impact global relations, fostering division and fear, while the very powers that cultivated these groups step back, leaving a legacy of chaos and mistrust.
The Afghan jihad was not just a regional conflict; it became the epicenter of a chain reaction that reshaped global geopolitics, leaving scars that the world continues to grapple with today.
Redefinition of extremist networks in Syria
The prolonged conflict in Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon has set the stage for a broader strategic shift in the Middle East. After Israel’s war on Gaza and its failure to achieve the complete annihilation of historic Palestine, and following its military incursions in Lebanon aimed at weakening Hezbollah, attention has now shifted to Syria. The objective appears to be the disintegration of the Syrian state, transforming it into a hub for global terrorist networks, thereby providing justification for the continued US military presence in Syria and Iraq.
This strategy serves multiple purposes. It offers a pretext for Israel to occupy Syrian territories near the Golan Heights, an area where significant oil reserves have been discovered. By controlling these resources and leveraging the rise of sectarian violence and jihadist enclaves, Israel could further consolidate its position and strengthen its claim to being a "Jewish state" while diminishing hopes for a viable Palestinian state.
Figures like Abu Mohammad Al-Jolani, once a key Al-Qaeda leader, formed AL Nusra front operative and later an ISIS loyalist, illustrate the complex rebranding of extremist actors in this evolving landscape. Jolani, now leading the HTS, has been recast as a more "moderate" opposition figure to the Syrian government, with the tacit support of entities like Turkey and the White Helmets. Despite this transformation, the US officially continues to offer a $10 million reward for his capture due to his past affiliations.
The intersection of resource control, sectarian manipulation, and the legitimization of certain extremist groups highlights the intricate and often contradictory nature of global power dynamics in the region. These maneuvers aim to perpetuate instability, ensuring long-term foreign influence while undermining the sovereignty and unity of Middle Eastern states.
Evolution of extremist networks
The dismantling of Al-Qaeda’s core leadership led to the death of many of its operatives, while others managed to escape and establish new extremist networks in their homelands. These networks, dormant for a time, were later activated as the geopolitical landscape evolved.
The US invasion of Iraq in 2003 provided fertile ground for these groups to regroup and rally supporters under the guise of resisting occupation. By invoking the rhetoric of jihad, extremists gained traction among those disillusioned by foreign intervention and the chaos it created.
Syria played a critical role as a training hub for fighters destined to battle US forces in Iraq. The porous borders allowed the free flow of Salafists, Takfiris, and other extremist elements who used the region to prepare for their operations. Over the years, Al-Qaeda sympathizers found fertile ground in the Levant, leveraging local grievances and sectarian divides to expand their influence.
The formation of ISIS (the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) marked a turning point in the history of global terrorism. Emerging from the remnants of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, ISIS capitalized on the instability created by the US occupation and the power vacuum in post-Saddam Iraq. With US policies inadvertently enabling its rise, ISIS expanded its reach, spreading terror across the region.
The group exploited the chaos of the Arab Spring to gain footholds in Syria, Libya, and beyond, creating a transnational terror network that left devastating impacts across the Middle East and North Africa. These developments underscore the unintended consequences of foreign interventions and highlight how extremist ideologies exploit political instability to thrive. The legacy of these movements remains a critical challenge for global security today.
The fall of Syrian cities
The prolonged instability in Syria has been exacerbated by the actions of regional players like Turkey, whose policies have significantly influenced the dynamics of the conflict. For over 13 years, Turkey has provided military and logistical support to jihadist groups, sheltering them in the northern regions of Syria, particularly in Idlib province.
This area has become a de facto Turkish enclave, with the imposition of Turkish schools, currency, and language on the local population, drawing parallels to Turkey's annexation of Iskenderun province during the French occupation of Syria.
Currently, over 30 jihadist factions, well-armed and trained under Turkish supervision, maintain control over northeastern of Syria. This deliberate strategy of fostering and harboring extremist elements has further fragmented Syria, undermining its sovereignty and paving the way for prolonged chaos.
The involvement of other actors has added fuel to the fire.
Following the ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu issued a stark warning to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, accusing him of "playing with fire."
This rhetoric was soon followed by covert coordination between Israeli and Turkish intelligence services, culminating in attacks on key Syrian cities. This strategic collaboration underscores a shared interest in weakening Syria's central government and preventing it from reclaiming its territorial integrity.
The implications of these developments extend beyond Syria's borders. The systematic erosion of Syrian sovereignty, coupled with the empowerment of jihadist factions, threatens regional stability and creates a haven for extremist networks. Moreover, the parallels with historical annexations signal a troubling trend of exploiting conflict to pursue territorial and political ambitions.
Syria in eye of the storm
Syria stands at a critical juncture, fighting a lonely and relentless battle against a mosaic of terrorist factions comprising Uzbek, Uyghur, Turk, and Arab mercenaries. These groups are sustained and supported by nations with vested interests, using Syria as a battleground for their geopolitical agendas. The stakes of this conflict extend far beyond Syria’s borders, threatening the security and stability of regions like South Asia and the West if left unchecked.
The fall of the Syrian government to rebel forces supported by external powers will have profound implications for the country's future. This pivotal moment raises questions about whether Syria will emerge as a unified nation or succumb to the "clean and break" policy outlined by US strategists in 1995, which proposed the fragmentation of certain Middle Eastern states to serve geopolitical interests.
This strategy, rooted in reshaping the region’s political landscape, envisions the disintegration of strong states like Syria into smaller, fragmented entities. By weakening centralized authority, external actors can establish zones of influence, exploit resources, and diminish the region's ability to resist foreign intervention.
For Syria, this could mean the division of its territories along ethnic, sectarian, and ideological lines—Kurdish autonomy in the northeast, jihadist strongholds in the north and northwest, and fragmented Arab territories across the center and south.
Such a scenario would not only undermine Syria’s sovereignty but also destabilize the broader Middle East. The fallout from this disintegration would likely include the proliferation of extremist groups, increased regional rivalries, and humanitarian crises on an unprecedented scale.
A Syrian solution by Syrians
In contrast to externally imposed fragmentation, a solution led by Syrians themselves offers the only hope for preserving Syria’s territorial integrity and rebuilding national harmony. This approach requires inclusive dialogue among all stakeholders—government representatives, opposition groups, ethnic minorities, and civil society organizations. Only through such a process can Syrians address the root causes of the conflict and chart a path forward that reflects the aspirations of the entire population.
Allowing the Syrian people to resolve their issues independently is not just a matter of sovereignty but a necessity for long-term stability. The imposition of foreign solutions often exacerbates divisions and fuels resentment, making lasting peace impossible.
What next for Syria’s sovereignty?
The current conflict is about more than just the survival of the Syrian government. It is about the survival of Syria as a cohesive nation-state. The external support for rebel forces—whether through direct military aid, logistical support, or political backing—has not only prolonged the conflict but also laid the groundwork for possible partition.
The international community’s role should be to support Syria’s sovereignty, facilitate peace negotiations, and address the humanitarian needs of its people. Interventions aimed at disintegration or domination only serve to perpetuate the cycle of violence and instability.
The coming years will reveal whether the Syrian government and people can resist the forces of disintegration and reclaim their country from the brink of collapse. Will Syria emerge as a unified state, guided by the will of its people? Or will it be divided, its fate dictated by external powers?
The answer lies in the balance between external intervention and internal resilience. Syria’s future will depend on the ability of its people to unite against the odds and reject attempts to fragment their nation. The stakes are high, and the world is watching.
Dr. Waiel Awwad
Senior journalist and West Asia Strategist
(@abunouman on X)
