The fall of the Assad government marked a turning point in Syria’s long and turbulent history, but rather than ushering in a period of stability, it has plunged the country into a new phase of political strife. The transition has been marred by power struggles, ideological clashes, and deepening divisions among key factions. At the heart of these tensions is the controversial constitutional declaration, which has sparked widespread opposition from various segments of Syrian society, including influential religious and political leaders.
One of the most contentious issues following the fall of Assad has been the constitutional declaration issued by the transitional authorities. Sheikh Hikmat al-Hijri, the spiritual leader of the Druze community in Syria, has been a vocal critic of the declaration. He argues that it consolidates excessive powers in the hands of a single leader, mirroring the autocratic tendencies of the previous regime. His rejection of the declaration stems from a broader concern that Syria is moving from one form of authoritarianism to another, rather than transitioning into a truly democratic and inclusive governance system.
Al-Hijri has called for a fundamental revision of the constitutional framework to ensure the establishment of a participatory democratic system. He stresses the need to limit the “exclusive powers” of the presidency and to create a political structure that prevents a repeat of past authoritarian rule. This demand resonates with many Syrians who had hoped that the fall of Assad would lead to a more representative and just government.
The post-Assad period has also revealed deep fractures within Syria’s Druze community, particularly in the province of Sweida. Al-Hijri’s strong opposition to the constitutional declaration has placed him at odds with certain factions within the Druze leadership who have chosen to align with the new government. The main point of contention revolves around the perception that the transitional government is continuing to promote a governance model rooted in religious fundamentalism, which many Druze leaders view as a threat to the secular and pluralistic fabric of Syrian society.
The divide within the Druze leadership has become increasingly pronounced. While some leaders, like Sheikh Yusuf al-Jarbou and Sheikh Hammoud al-Hanawi, advocate for cautious engagement with the new government in Damascus to ensure the community’s security and stability, others, led by al-Hijri, are pushing for outright resistance to what they see as an emerging authoritarian regime. This internal schism has led to rising tensions in Sweida, with rival factions holding competing protests and demonstrations.
The crisis in post-Assad Syria is not unfolding in isolation. Regional and international players have also taken an interest in the country’s future. Reports suggest that al-Hijri has been in direct contact with international actors, including European nations and Druze leaders in Israel. This engagement has raised suspicions among his detractors, who accuse him of seeking foreign backing to strengthen his position against the transitional government.
Conversely, the new government in Damascus has been actively consolidating its power by recruiting and integrating Sunni Arab tribes into its security apparatus, a move perceived by some as an attempt to dilute the influence of minority groups like the Druze. The recruitment of Sunni tribal members into the military and security forces has only deepened fears of sectarian tensions and further division.
As Syria grapples with its post-Assad reality, the road ahead remains uncertain. The controversy surrounding the constitutional declaration, the divisions within the Druze community, and the broader sectarian and ideological conflicts all point to a nation struggling to define its future. The risk of further instability remains high, especially if the new government fails to address the concerns of marginalized groups and political opponents.
For many Syrians, the hope for a democratic and inclusive future is still alive, but it is increasingly being tested by the realities of power struggles and competing interests. Whether the country can move toward true stability and unity will depend on the ability of its leaders to embrace dialogue, compromise, and genuine democratic reforms.
