The Syrian civil war has transformed from a purely domestic power struggle into a multi-layered geopolitical arena of competition involving the direct and indirect involvement of regional and global powers. In this process, actors such as the US, Russia, Iran, and Israel have waged a struggle for influence in the Syrian arena through various means and proxy structures. Recent developments indicate a significant shift in the balance of power in this struggle, with Türkiye emerging as a decisive actor.
While the US pursued a fluctuating policy in Syria during the early years of the Arab Spring, it has since sought a new balance and forged new alliances with the new Damascus administration in the post-Assad period. Throughout this process, Türkiye has unconditionally supported the Ahmed Shara administration within the framework of Syria’s territorial integrity, political unity, and stability. This approach by Türkiye reflects a clear stance against scenarios aimed at the fragmentation of Syria. Because Türkiye’s security depends on the security of its own sphere of influence within its hinterland.
While supporting the Ahmed Shara administration, the US simultaneously attempted to maintain its relations with the SDF, aiming to pursue a so-called “balancing act” between these two actors. However, this policy was explicitly rejected by Türkiye. Türkiye viewed the continued presence of the SDF as a military and political actor in Syria as a direct threat to its national security. In this context, Türkiye pursued strategic policies that conditioned its support for the Shara administration on the neutralization of the SDF. At this point, the US pursued a contradictory strategy, both to avoid losing Türkiye’s support and to maintain its influence in the region through the SDF. In other words, the US lost the “Syria gamble” it had been playing for years through SDF terrorists. Parallel to this, the SDF also lost the “gamble” it played through the US.
The US support for the SDF stems from its goal of gaining political and military influence in Syria through this group, and securing control over Syria’s oil and natural gas resources. However, this strategy has not been consistent with the military and social realities on the ground. Indeed, the military successes achieved by the Damascus administration under Ahmed Shara, with Ankara’s resolute support, have made this US balancing act unsustainable. The swift liberation of the Sheikh Maqsoud and Sheikh Ashrafiyeh neighborhoods in Aleppo from SDF and YPG terrorists marked the beginning of these turning points.
The fact that these neighborhoods, which had been under the control of the SDF for approximately fourteen years, fell under the control of the Damascus government in a very short time, reveals a fundamental shift in the balance of power on the ground. The simultaneous use of diplomacy, negotiation, and military elements in this process increased the strategic capacity of the Damascus government. Faced with these developments, the US, seeing that the SDF could not achieve military superiority on the ground and that the Damascus government had become the decisive actor, was forced to provide more political support to the Damascus government. According to experts, this situation is interpreted as the US losing its “strategic gamble” in Syria.
The military successes of Ahmed Shara’s administration have not only expanded its areas of control on the ground but have also strengthened its “political legitimacy and leadership capacity.” Taking control of the Sheikh Maqsoud and Sheikh Ashrafiyeh neighborhoods in Aleppo, as well as the Deir Hafir, Tabqa, Maskanah, Deir ez-Zor regions and the Tishrin Dam, has given Shara’s administration a “success story” and solidified its leadership. This success has led to a gradual reduction in US support for the SDF.
Türkiye’s role in this process has not been limited solely to military and security aspects. Steps taken in the energy and infrastructure sectors demonstrate Türkiye’s constructive role in the reconstruction of Syria. Türkiye’s supply of electricity to Syria and the transit of Azerbaijani gas through Türkiye to Syria have reinforced Türkiye’s position as a central country in regional energy security. These steps have played a major role in the stabilization of Syria and the strengthening of the Damascus government.
However, the Shara administration’s granting of oil and natural gas exploration licenses to the US-based Chevron company off the western coast of Syria stands out as a noteworthy development for Türkiye. This situation has brought about a more cautious and sensitive process for Türkiye in terms of its interests. In particular, the signing of an agreement between Türkiye and Syria regarding maritime jurisdiction areas has gained even more importance. This agreement undoubtedly holds great strategic significance for the geopolitics of the Eastern Mediterranean.
Israel views this transformation in Syria as an opportunity for its own security and expansionist policies. In recent months, Israel has attempted to expand its occupation of the Golan Heights. Israel is also trying to expand its sphere of influence in Syria through the Druze population in the Suweida region. In this context, Israel appears to be acting hastily. However, these and similar initiatives are seriously harming the process of Syria’s consolidation under a unified structure.
The weakening of the SDF has been influenced not only by military failures but also by a loss of social legitimacy. The withdrawal of support from Kurdish and Arab tribes has severely restricted the SDF’s room for maneuver on the ground. The Syrian army’s ability to gain control of many areas east of the Euphrates without engaging in combat demonstrates the extent to which the SDF’s social base has eroded. The SDF has lost its social legitimacy, particularly as a result of the Arab tribes ceasing their support. The SDF’s failure to abide by the March 10th agreement has also deprived them of any limited gains they could have achieved.
The Syrian government’s liberation of the Sheikh Maqsoud and Sheikh Ashrafiyeh neighborhoods in Aleppo from terrorist elements has given the Ahmed Shara administration significant confidence and political courage in its efforts to clear the area east of the Euphrates River from terrorism. For Ahmed Shara to consolidate his leadership across Syria, concrete successes and military gains on the ground are necessary. In this context, the liberation of the Sheikh Maqsoud and Sheikh Ashrafiyeh neighborhoods in Aleppo, as well as the Deir Hafir and Tamka regions, from terrorist organizations are among the critical developments that strengthen the leadership capacity and legitimacy of the Shara administration.
The SDF’s inability to resist the Shara regime and its subsequent forced retreat stems from multiple structural reasons. Firstly, the SDF failed to properly analyze the changes and transformations occurring at the global and regional levels. In this context, the SDF pursued maximalist and expansionist policies that exceeded its capacity. Furthermore, the SDF adopted an unrealistic and fanciful strategy, placing excessive reliance on US support and acting on the assumption that Washington would continue to support it unconditionally in the long term. However, it ignored past examples where the US had instrumentalized similar structures and organizations for its own interests before discarding them.
The steps taken by the Shara administration towards the Kurds are noteworthy in terms of preventing an ethnically based conflict in Syria. Recognizing Kurds as an integral part of Syria, granting Kurdish national language status, and declaring Nowruz a public holiday are concrete examples of this approach. These steps, when compared to the Bashar al-Assad regime which previously subjected Kurds to severe oppression, demonstrate that under the Shara administration, Kurds have achieved equal citizenship status in Syria.
Overall, recent developments in Syria clearly demonstrate Türkiye’s growing regional and global influence. Türkiye’s military capacity, advancements in its defense industry, diplomatic activity, and energy initiatives have made it a decisive actor in the Syrian crisis. The key message emerging from this context is that “a lasting and sustainable order in the Middle East cannot be established without Türkiye.” Consequently, the balance of winners and losers in Syria has been reshaped. This stage of the Syrian crisis marks a period in which regional power balances are being redefined and Türkiye’s central role has become more visible.
