Syria at a Crossroads Between Internal Challenges and International Balances

What’s Happening in Syria Today: A Personal View Through Rational Eyes

What’s happening in Syria—I realize—is extremely dangerous. But allow me to share my perspective, one that may stir controversy, as it did more than a decade ago.

Why am I writing about Syria today?

I decided to write this piece to offer an idea of what’s happening in Syria and, at the same time, to clarify my stance on the issue—why I have been, and still am, in favor of Assad’s fall, regardless of the method, means, or consequences. Because no matter who comes after Assad, I’m convinced they will be less dangerous than Assad remaining in power.

This is not something I’m saying today for the first time—I said it over ten years ago, at the beginning of the Syrian revolution. Back then, I was insulted; some even cut ties with me completely and labeled me a hidden Islamist rather than an atheist—even though I had clearly stated I was against Islamists, regardless of their guise, even those who claim modernity or humanity. In fact, I reject Islamic thought at its root—and religious thought in general.

Politics is not emotion: A long-term perspective

In politics and decision-making, positions should not be based on love or hate. Political stances are not driven by emotion. Secondly, a politician does not only look at the present, but at the future as well. Politics is about long-term vision and calculated assessments. One misstep can lead to catastrophe.

At that time, I was on Paltalk and I said, openly and clearly, that the first and foremost priority should be to overthrow Assad as quickly as possible. That the Islamists—whoever they may be (I won’t mention names to avoid censorship)—are less dangerous and easier to topple later than keeping Assad in power.

I said this before Iraq fell, during its fall, and afterward. I even wrote an article in 2005 in which I stated:

“It would have been better for President George W. Bush, instead of invading Iraq, to impose a siege on the Assad regime in Syria and work toward dismantling the Alawite state. That would have been far more beneficial than toppling Iraq, which only opened the door for Iran’s expansionist project and enabled it to reach the Mediterranean directly, posing a serious threat to the entire Middle East.”

America’s mistakes in Iraq and Syria

It’s true that Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, but had Iran been left to move freely through Iraq, its threat would’ve spread to the entire region. Regardless of Saddam’s actions, he was a formidable barrier—a major obstacle in the face of the Iranian threat, which doesn’t just endanger the Middle East, but represents a global menace.

Therefore, curbing Iran’s power in Syria should have been a top priority to counter this worrying expansion. As for the cooperation between Shiite forces in Iraq and the U.S. against the Sunnis—this is a dangerous development that only deepens the complexity of the regional landscape.

What’s happening in Iraq truly frightens me. That’s why I raise this warning to every free mind: look at what America and its allies are doing now, and what they’re planning for the future of humanity.

If the world remained silent while the U.S. fueled the rise of al-Qaeda in the past, I now raise my voice loudly, warning against what America is doing—out of its ignorance of Islam and the Islamic world.

The Bush Administration: The dumbest government in history

I’ve never seen a government more foolish than that of George W. Bush. He was gravely mistaken if he thought he could gain the trust of the Shiites—even those within the Iraqi government. He forgot one very important fact: Shiites are a thousand times more cunning than they appear, far more organized than Sunnis, and they know exactly how to operate in the shadows without drawing attention.

They have long experience in secrecy and clandestine movements—history testifies to this. That’s why I advise everyone to keep their eyes wide open and never stop exposing American schemes, because they pose a real danger to our region and to the world.

Perfect. Here’s Part 2 of the English translation of your article:

History Repeats Itself: The Use of Local Forces in Syria

What’s happening in Syria today is nothing new—it’s an extension of previous political and military patterns we’ve seen throughout history.
Take the war in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union, for example. During that conflict, we witnessed the rise of groups like the Taliban and al-Qaeda, which were exploited within geopolitical contexts that served the interests of major powers.

The same can be said of the two World Wars: both saw local forces, including Sunni factions, recruited to serve the agendas of global actors.
And in the 18th century, religious movements in the Arabian Peninsula—like Wahhabism—were supported to weaken the Ottoman Empire.

Did you know that ever since the fall of the Abbasid Caliphate, Sunni powers have played a major role in regional and international conflicts?
Sometimes aligned with the Ottoman state, which used them to expand its influence in Europe, and other times as pawns in greater geopolitical struggles.

Sunni Forces: A Tool in the Hands of Global Powers

In modern times, Sunni-affiliated groups have been used in regional conflicts spanning:

• The partition of India

• Southeast Asia and China

• Former Soviet Muslim republics like Chechnya

• The war in Bosnia and Herzegovina

• Resource-rich African regions like Nigeria and the Sahel

• The Arab Spring uprisings

Time and again, these forces were manipulated to serve foreign interests—either to topple regimes hostile to the West, or to act as a convenient threat that justifies authoritarian allies (as seen in Egypt and Tunisia).

To this day, Sunni individuals and groups are still being used—by intelligence services—as instruments in terrorist operations meant to serve election goals or justify changes in security laws.
Even the Shiites used them to their advantage—the clearest example being Gaza.

Assad’s Fall: A Global Agreement, Not a Military Victory

When we deeply understand Syria’s political context, it becomes clear that Assad’s fall wasn’t the result of a divine victory or military triumph by the Islamic opposition. Rather, it resembled a coordinated international agreementamong all major players in the conflict.

That agreement included:

• The United States

• European countries

• Gulf states

• Turkey

• Russia

• Israel

• Iran (in a backdoor arrangement)

• And even Assad himself, to some extent

What happened in Syria wasn’t a win for any single faction—it was a well-executed political deal, in which Turkey played a central role. The operation was supported by political and military figures like Ahmad al-Shara, and was implemented on the ground using Sunni elements that were manipulated to serve very specific goals.

The use of such factions for political gains is nothing new. It’s a recurring historical tactic.
This is why we must approach these events with deep awareness, understanding that what appears on the surface is often far from the truth behind the scenes.

So no—it wasn’t divine victory, nor was it a military triumph for the opposition. It was an agreement. A convergence of interests.
Everyone stood to gain—except the Syrian people.

Why Did Some Celebrate Assad’s Fall?

Yes, many celebrated the fall of Bashar al-Assad—not necessarily because the regime was Alawite, but because the Alawites’ rise to power came within a Western-backed context, especially French support, aimed at protecting the Alawite minority and safeguarding certain Western interests in the region. For nearly half a century, the Assad regime fulfilled that role effectively—even with Iranian interference trying to shift the balance of power. In fact, Assad and his inner circle served as reliable sources of information regarding movements and developments in Syria and Lebanon. That’s what kept them relevant to Western strategic calculations, especially in relation to Iran and Palestinian resistance movements. Not because the regime was dictatorial—Assad’s father before him was also a dictator and committed atrocities, yet the international community barely condemned him.
Let’s be honest: most Middle Eastern and North African leaders are dictators, to varying degrees.

“Dictatorship”: A Western Tool for Regime Change

The banner of “dictatorship” is often raised by Western powers only when a leader no longer serves their interests—and only if they already have a solid backup plan to maintain influence after toppling him. History proves this:
No one stays in power without serving the needs of the major powers. And once those interests are gone, so is the ruler—at the time, and in the way, that best suits those powers. Our region is a giant chessboard. We are nothing but pawns moved by their hands.As Tunisians say: “Ṣaḥ lēhom” — “good for them.” They had every opportunity to control our destinies, and they took it.

It’s no surprise we’re in this situation. We acted, too often, like tools—without awareness or will—making ourselves easy prey for those who master the game.

The Gap Between Us and the West: Why Are We So Far Behind?

The West, and the great powers that run the world, have made leaps we can’t even begin to fathom—we’re millions of years behind, figuratively speaking. This isn’t exaggeration—it’s reality. The gap has become so vast that catching up using traditional methods is nearly impossible. Some might ask: Why such a harsh statement? Where’s your evidence?
My answer: it’s obvious. The West has successfully established a scientific methodology that leads to true knowledge—even eternal knowledge, you could say. For them, it’s like a well-defined race: they know the path, understand the destination, and possess all the tools to get there. Meanwhile, we don’t even know where we’re going, we lack a roadmap, and our tools are outdated or nonexistent.
We wander aimlessly between dreams and delusions, waiting for miracles.
As some religious invocations go:
“All we have is prayer, our capital is hope, and our weapon is weeping—do with us what You will…”

We forget that real progress requires method, structure, and a clear vision—not just prayers and wishful thinking.

Why Has the West Advanced? Lessons from History

The great powers studied history with scientific precision.
They learned how civilizations rise—and how they fall.
They drew lessons from the past and continuously worked to develop themselves.
Their plans for the future are deliberate, conscious, and strategic.

They’ve built advanced technologies, reached space, created the most powerful weapons, and made every move based on mathematical, logical, and scientific observation.
They’ve developed entire industries, achieved scientific supremacy—and some of their discoveries remain classified, hidden from the rest of the world.

This superiority gave them a monopoly over power and resources.
They now possess all the components needed to dominate—and to survive.
The world they’ve created is so strong, it’s nearly impossible to bring down—unless a force far greater than theirs emerges.

That scenario is closer to science fiction than to real life.
Perhaps the only possibility is an alien invasion of Earth.
In that case, Muslims’ so-called “suicidal jihad” might suddenly become a heroic act—and Islamists would be hailed as “saviors of humanity,”
as long as someone convinces them with a fatwa that aliens are soldiers of the Antichrist or agents of Satan.

A Realistic Solution: Three Essential Steps

The only rational, realistic path forward requires a radical shift in how we think and engage with reality.
It comes down to three essential points:

1. Let Go of the Idea of “Defeating the West”

The idea of defeating or destroying the West is not only impossible, given the immense gap between us and them—it’s also hostile and unproductive.
Trying to destroy the West will only provoke more hatred toward us.

And frankly, I understand the West. If I were in their place, I’d do even worse to us.

Think about it: if someone told you they want to wipe you out, wouldn’t you act to protect yourself?

When the West read Islamic books, they were shocked by the contents—and have since done everything possible to erase us from the face of the Earth.

As long as we think in Islamic terms, the West will see us as a perpetual threat, and they will exploit and undermine us at every opportunity, without ever treating us as equals.

2. Reject the Mentality of “Destroy Without Building”

You can’t overthrow a major power without having a strong, functional alternative ready to lead the world better.
The “if we burn, we all burn” mentality is a recipe for chaos—not progress.

Do we really think we can destroy civilization and replace it with backwardness and rubble?
No one would accept that.
This is why the world sees us as a source of destruction—and believes we must be contained, if not eliminated.

3. Choose Cooperation Over Confrontation

We must recognize our true scale in this world—and focus on what we can realistically accomplish.
Instead of fighting the West, we can choose to collaborate scientifically and economically, contributing to their progress and, in doing so, proving our value.

This is not submission—it’s an opportunity to show that we can innovate, create, and contribute to global prosperity.

So, we must let go of the fantasy of revenge and destruction, and reject the illusion that we can overpower the West through confrontation.

Instead, let’s pursue a realistic, constructive path—one in which we become partners, not enemies.

How Can We Be Civilizationally Accepted? Practical Steps

So how do we let go of these destructive ideas and become acceptable to civilization?

1. Abandon Religion

When I say “abandon religion,” I mean its laws, rulings, and rigid ideas.
We must free ourselves from the concept of sacred religion, from tribal beliefs, from the traditional idea of God, heaven, hell, and the obsession with the afterlife—and return to reality.

Yes—we must embrace pragmatism and the real world.
Let go of fantasies, empty dreams, and all that’s metaphysical.

These are the very things that terrify the West—and make them want to destroy us.

Imagine a world where our societies walk away from religion in droves—where religion becomes secondary, even irrelevant, to daily life.
Sure, let religion exist as a personal matter, as a form of spirituality and private belief. But it should have no role in governance, state-building, or public life.

Let it be personal, not political.

2. Reject Racism and Nationalism

We must abandon racial, nationalist, tribal, and chauvinistic thinking—especially the “us vs. them” mentality.

We should open our countries to the world: to our rich history, our beautiful landscapes, our cuisine, our cultural wealth—offering it all for tourism, residence, and investment.

Let go of toxic nationalism and blind traditionalism.
Preserve our social identity, generosity, and love of life—but let’s build open, welcoming nations.

3. Embrace Peace and Humanism

Let’s become peaceful states, not militaristic ones.
Move away from the obsession with weapons and warfare.
Reject violence—and become ambassadors of peace among humans.

Let us promote:

• Humanity

• Diversity

• Coexistence

• Compassion

Let us reshape our education systems to nurture respect for others, no matter their race, identity, or orientation.

Let us respect nature, protect animals, and create a culture of empathy, awareness, and shared humanity.

Why Does the West Reject Us? A Personal Experience

These three points—just those—are enough to make the West want to either keep us oppressed or erase us altogether.

But if we followed them sincerely, the West would have no reason to oppose us.
They’d accept us as equals, maybe even as partners.
Humanity could be unified, while preserving the diversity of each individual.
Competition would be about advancing civilization—not about who can destroy more.

This is the only viable path—if we take it seriously.

But I know—it won’t please everyone in the West at first.
Many still don’t trust us.
Some even hate us.

When I left Islam over 25 years ago and freed myself from its chains, I was dazzled by the West.
I believed the big lie: that the West is humanistic, moral, and devoted to spreading civilization and enlightenment.

And yes, that does exist in the West—but only for Westerners, and their animals.
As for the rest of the world?
No human rights.
No animal rights.
No equality.
No security.
No justice.

That’s the truth I discovered after years—when I faced bans, harassment, temptations, and even threats.
All in an effort to turn me into a tool for their agenda.

Why Was I Rejected by the West? Why I’m “More Dangerous” Than Islamists

I, who freed myself from Islam—the greatest enslaver of minds and people—could never accept being a slave to anything else, even the West with all its advancements.
I once believed that they would welcome my people’s awakening, that they would rejoice if we gained awareness and stood on our own.

But instead, I found myself more hated by them than even by the extremists they claim to oppose.

I realized they preferred Islamists over people like me—because with Islamists, they could find justification to fight them, to wage wars, to control populations.
With me? They had no justification. No pretext.
Nothing to hide behind.

One Western figure even told me—something I will never forget:
“You are more dangerous than the Islamists.”
Because I represented true liberation—without extremism, without servitude—just pure, rational freedom.

When I fully understood this, I faced a choice:
Give up—or continue, no matter the bans, the neglect, or the threats.

My Spirit: North African and Eastern

Despite the many times I felt defeated, exhausted, wanting to give up—
There was always something inside me that pulled me back:
My North African and Eastern soul.

The living, breathing spirit of the heart of the world.

It made me say to myself:
“If even one person awakens, that is better for me than everything upon which the sun has risen or set.”

When I say “awakens,” I mean someone who becomes:

• Conscious of themselves

• Aware of their being

• Understanding of what needs to be done

Someone who becomes mindful and thinks independently—who does not simply follow like livestock.
That’s what matters most.

It doesn’t matter if they agree with me or not.
It doesn’t matter if they stand with me or against me.

What matters is that they are free as individuals.

Syria: The Bleeding Wound of the Middle East

Returning to Syria—the subject that is so close to my heart—
It’s a piece of my homeland that bleeds, like every part of it.

Every inch of the Middle East and North Africa carries wounds—bleeding tears and blood every single day.
The sun never rises or sets without sorrow.

Every joy is fleeting—followed by grief.

The world’s nations rise, and we fall.
Everything else reaches higher summits—
And we dig deeper into our graves.

We, whose history is filled with movement, vitality, and brilliance—from Baghdad to Marrakech, from the scent of spices to the fragrance of perfumes, from songs and poetry to dance and joy—
Where is it all today?

All we smell now is the scent of bombs and ruin.
All we see are grim faces and shattered dreams.

I won’t linger on this description, because it hurts too much.
But I say: when Bashar Assad fell, some rejoiced, and others were angry.

But did each of you ask yourselves:
Why did I rejoice? Why was I angry?

Surely, everyone reacted according to their own position, their own benefit or harm from Assad’s fall.

I don’t blame those who rejoiced.
Nor do I blame those who grieved.
Because our emotions alone won’t solve anything.

We remain pawns, moved by others.
But at least, let us hope we find ourselves among the winning pawns—even if we are still just pawns.

Why Did I Celebrate or Mourn Assad’s Fall?

I leave it to you to ask yourselves:
Why did you rejoice or grieve when Assad fell?

But here’s what I know for certain:
Those who mourned his fall weren’t necessarily mourning Assad himself—they were mourning the fear of Islamists taking his place.
Because the reality is, almost everyone celebrated Assad’s fall, except for a very small minority whose interests were tied to his regime.

Let me tell you why I personally rejoiced—
Even though my joy brought me plenty of hatred, insults, and accusations.
But that didn’t, and still doesn’t, matter to me.

I have long been immune to their insults, curses, and condemnations.
Each time I was accused of being “with the Islamists” or a “fake atheist,”
mainly by many so-called atheists themselves—
because, sadly, many of them define “atheist” as someone blindly loyal to the West, serving under Western, evangelical, or similar agendas.

And anyone who dares step outside their dogmatic circle—who refuses to submit—
is automatically labeled as “not truly one of them.”

But as you know, none of that matters to me.
What I do, I do out of a love for humanity,
for the heart of the world—the part of humanity I want to see included in the march of progress.

My Predictions About Assad’s Fall: Since October 7

For me, Assad’s fall was expected ever since the events of October 7.
I always said the most important objective was the fall of Assad.
I didn’t know how or when it would happen—but I was sure there was a plan in place.

Still, I didn’t expect they would once again use the Islamists to do it.

I thought the West had grown tired of that tactic, especially after the so-called “Arab Spring” revolutions.
I believed they had lost patience with Islamist factions.

But like you, I was surprised to see that “another prostitute”—one of the West’s favorite tools—
was tasked with leading the new Islamist front in Syria.
At the head of this movement was Ahmad al-Shara.

Nonetheless, as you know—
I had wanted Assad’s fall for nearly twenty years,
so my joy was immense, and I don’t hide it from anyone.

Assad Has Fallen: Now Let’s Talk About the Future

Now that Assad has fallen, there is no need to speak of him anymore.
His page is closed—forever erased from Syria’s history.

The conversation now should be about who came after him.

And from the first day, I said:

I liked Ahmad al-Shara as an individual.
He played his role well.
I believe he is capable of leading Syria.

I know that Ahmad al-Shara is a loyal student of the West.
I don’t believe he will turn against them like others before him.

He’s tightly bound to Turkey on one side—
And he’s extremely intelligent and astute on the other.
He knows how to play the game.
He knows how to manage power effectively.

So far, he is performing his role very well.

What worries me isn’t that he will betray the West—
What worries me is those around him.

Because Ahmad al-Shara is leading a pack of wild, rabid wolves—
And he used to be one of them.
Which means he knows them well:
How they think.
How they act.
How to control them.

Supporting Ahmad al-Shara: Why Give Him a Chance?

That’s why I say:
Give Ahmad al-Shara a chance to work.
Don’t pile more on his shoulders than he already carries.

His mission is almost impossible.
At any moment, he could be taken down—either by those around him, or by those who put him in power in the first place.
He is in an incredibly precarious position.

I fully understand that Syria is in grave danger—
I don’t deny that.

I know:

• Many violations, crimes, and massacres will happen.

• Syria might head toward partition.

• Israel may end up fully controlling the south—and al-Shara won’t be able to say a word about it.

• The U.S. will strengthen its grip on eastern Syria, and so will Russia—especially after their latest understandings.

• The coastal regions might demand independence.

I know all of this.

Syria’s Future: Between Darkness and Hope

Today, Syria’s future is still shrouded in uncertainty.

We don’t yet know the full extent of Western plans.
But based on my insights—and my instincts—
I believe the major powers genuinely want the Syrian experiment to succeed.

And that, strangely enough, gives me some hope.

Because I know they are serious players.
They calculate every move.

And their primary concern right now is Iran and its proxies throughout the region—especially in Yemen and Iraq.

In order to contain Iran, the West must also reconcile with Russia to fully stabilize the region.

The events after October 7 forced the West to start thinking seriously about real solutions for the Middle East.

True—there are factions in the West who don’t want peace.
They prefer chaos.
But there are others—especially among Western elites—who genuinely want humanitarian, sustainable solutions.

Ahmad al-Shara knows this.
This is his chance to save Syria—and to turn it into a model of freedom and humanity.

The New Challenges for Syria: Can It Become a Model?

I know how difficult that sounds—especially with a population like ours.

But I still have strong hope, despite the horrors Syria is living through now.

Some in the West want to turn Syria into the “new Afghanistan”—a battleground against Iran.

Others want to repaint Syria with an Umayyad identity, to resist the new Abbasid (Iranian-backed) expansion.

Yet when I listen to Ahmad al-Shara and observe his behavior,
I see someone who understands these traps.
I see someone who is aware of what’s at stake.

That’s why I rejoiced.
And that’s why I support Ahmad al-Shara.

But let’s be clear:
I do not support the wolves around him.
I do not support any form of Islamic rule—no matter how “moderate.”

I hope Syria walks the right path:
To heal itself.
To focus on its own future.
And to avoid getting sucked into destructive regional games.

My Stance on Syria’s Recent Events

What’s happening in Syria—I denounce it. What happened in the coastal region—I denounce that too. There’s no debate about that. No ambiguity. But despite all of this, I continue to support the Syrian experience until the end—even if it has turned into a vast open-air prison, now with no ceiling after being completely sealed off before. I hope the point has been made clear. And I promise, I will return to discuss Syria in greater detail—especially when I begin my full analysis of the Middle East.

I hope this article has answered most of your questions—and clarified my position on what happened in Syria.

You can also read: Choose Your Camp Wisely