Damascus is no longer as it was during the first month after the fall of Assad's regime. The expressions of satisfaction and optimism that I described in my first letter are no longer visible on people's faces, as concerns about the future have begun to impose themselves on everyone amidst the rapid developments and unfolding events. The spirit of consensus and the acceptance of different viewpoints are no longer the hallmarks of discussions among Syrians, whether between civil society activists, politicians, or even human rights defenders. Behind the different grievances and interpretations of events, alignments and entrenchments have begun to emerge, turning social media into a real battleground.
A lot of serious developments have happened on the domestic political front over the past month that make it undeniably exhausting to keep up with, analyze, and try to understand their implications.
Despite all the developments, which I will highlight later, only the dire economic and living conditions have remained unchanged – or rather, continued their slow decline toward the worse. Three months after the fall of Assad’s regime, poverty is visible everywhere, and the people of Damascus still only have access to three sporadic and irregular hours of electricity per day, affecting all aspects of daily life.
The black week
On 6 March, remnants of Assad’s regime attempted a military coup in the Syrian coastal region, reportedly led by Maher al-Assad, the brother of the ousted president. The attack was systematically carried out against security forces' headquarters and patrols, killing large numbers of them. As the news spread, fear gripped Syrians – especially communities that had suffered from Assad’s repression, torture, killings, bombings, and displacement for the last 14 years. The fear that Assad’s regime might regain power led to a general mobilization, not only by the ruling authorities and their various armed groups, but also by the people themselves.
Tens of thousands, particularly from the Sunni majority, rushed to the conflict zones in their private cars and with their personal weapons. This resulted in complete chaos and a true catastrophe, as massacres were committed, and civilians, mostly members of the Alawite community, were killed simply for living in certain areas. Amid the chaos, looting, arson, and destruction of property took place – actions believed to have been carried out by criminal gangs exploiting the disorder for financial gain. In addition, sectarian violence escalated dramatically.
All of this has happened – and some violations are still ongoing, albeit at a lower intensity – in the absence of an official television station or state-run media channels. This means that verifying information and news is critical amid the flood of contradictory reports and rumors on social media, an exhausting task that drains one’s energy to the limit.
On 10 March, as reports of real massacres continued to emerge, the interim government announced a halt to the military operation. In a televised speech to the people, the president, Ahmad al-Sharaa, announced the formation of a fact-finding and investigation committee, which would submit its report within a month. He pledged to bring those responsible to justice and reveal the truth to the Syrian people. Additionally, he announced the establishment of a committee for civil peace, tasked with engaging with residents of the Syrian coast, listening to their concerns, and providing the necessary support to ensure their security and stability.
Until the committee issues its findings, our understanding of what happened relies on local documentation, testimonies from affected families, and some human rights reports, such as the preliminary report issued by the Syrian Network for Human Rights on 11 March 2025 – a highly credible organization both in Syria and internationally. It is also worth noting that reports from various local sources indicate that the General Security Forces made serious efforts to protect civilians and prevent atrocities, but in many areas, events spiraled out of their control.
Historic agreement with the SDF
Amid the grief and mourning for the innocent civilians killed in the coastal events and the disappointment over the public’s divided stance on these incidents, there was an announcement on the evening of 10 March: an agreement had been signed between the Syrian state and the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). It is an agreement between the central government and the Kurdish-Arab autonomous administration in the north and east of Syria, the aim of which is to strengthen the unity of the country, demonstrate the equality and recognition of the Kurds in Syria and, at the same time, to integrate the SDF into the new Syrian army through a lengthy process of negotiation. It is an agreement which should not be underestimated, as it favors the return of all internally displaced persons (IDPs) and refugees to their original homes. This news rekindled hope among Syrians regarding the country’s unity and future, shifting the prevailing mood from despair to optimism.
However, the joy and optimism were short-lived. On 13 March, the constitutional declaration was issued. Although it contains several positive provisions regarding rights and freedoms – affirming that all human rights and freedoms enshrined in international treaties ratified by Syria are an integral part of the declaration – it fails to address the crucial questions about the democratic transition. Also, its failure to include any reference to implementing the agreement with the Kurds raises questions about the government’s seriousness in honoring the deal. Additionally, the declaration grants the president sweeping powers over the executive, legislative, and judicial branches, and it extends the transitional period to five years instead of three, contradicting the government’s earlier statements. These provisions sparked real concerns among significant parts of the population, who then rejected the declaration. They expressed fears for civil peace, Syria’s unity, and the exclusionary approach of the new government, which seemed unwilling to share power beyond its inner circles.
Dangerous Crossroads
Syria remains at a dangerous crossroads – more perilous than at any point in the past three months – during which the government has been racing against time to gain external legitimacy, consolidate its rule domestically, and maintain security amid serious challenges, most notably the attempts by remnants of Assad’s regime, backed by Iran and possibly Russia, to reclaim power.
Faced with this looming threat and terrifying possibility, a large segment of Syrians has rallied behind the new government and President Al-Sharaa, fiercely defending and justifying every decision and step taken, regardless of its exclusionary nature or its negative implications for democracy – and all this despite the fact that Syrians have paid a heavy price for democracy and for the future coexistence of all.
This polarization, which has extended even to civil society, intellectuals, and academics – alongside the rise in hate speech – has deepened existing fractures, further complicating efforts to achieve civil peace. It is well known that political transitions are among the most difficult and sensitive phases in any country’s history. But in Syria, after more than 50 years of rule by a dictatorial family that committed crimes, massacres, and sectarian incitement, the situation is extraordinarily complex and will require considerable time and patience to build a new political system.
Syria’s transition – What lies ahead?
Based on this reality, many – including myself – believe that a five-year transitional period, as stipulated in the constitutional declaration, is not necessarily the wrong decision. However, the real problem lies in the fact that all political steps taken so far have been rushed and poorly considered, lacking the necessary attention to detail, despite their critical role in shaping the future – our shared future as Syrians. This applies to the preparatory committee for the dialogue conference and its hastily conducted discussions, the dialogue conference itself (held in Damascus on 25 February, in which I participated in the Transitional Justice group and the Constitutional Declaration drafting committee), and the constitutional declaration itself, which lacks guarantees against the emergence of a new form of authoritarianism.
Today, despite all the mistakes and criticisms, I still see a chance for reform and a shift toward democracy – if the new government, and President Ahmad Al-Sharaa in particular, have the will to make it happen. Many Syrians are counting on him. The ball is in his court now, and he has the opportunity to form an inclusive government that represents all Syrians and to establish a legislative council that ensures broad participation without exclusion.
Syria has a historic opportunity that will not come easily again. The responsibility now lies with the government, which I hope will recognize the urgent need for reform – by amending the constitutional declaration, opening up to all Syrians, and initiating a calm and inclusive national dialogue. This could pave the way for civil peace, stability, and the building of a democratic Syrian state that respects the rights and dignity of all its citizens.
On a personal level, I remain committed to contributing to my country’s future and working on transitional justice from my office in Damascus, which has made notable progress in its rehabilitation. The same applies to the Democratic Dialogue Forum, founded by my father Riad Seif, whose headquarters will soon be ready. Its administrative committee has been formed after extensive consultations, and preparations are underway for its official opening, along with the launch of its first season’s agenda and topics.
With warm wishes, Joumana Seif
P.S. If you like the Letter from Damascus, please feel free to forward it. If you have received it as a forward, you can easily subscribe via this link. |
