Next March 1st could mark a historic moment for post-Assad Syria. Interim Foreign Minister Asaad Hassan al-Shibani announced at the Paris Conference—the third after Aqaba and Riyadh on Syria’s future—that a new government will be formed on that date. While officials have assured an inclusive transition for Kurds and other minority groups, some in civil society fear being left out of the process, raising concerns that the economic and political power dynamics of the former dictatorship could resurface.
Aziz Biro, a Kurdish-Syrian lawyer and activist, is a prominent critic of the transitional government formed after the opposition’s victory. Exiled in 2006 for protesting against the Assad regime in Damascus and Qamishli, he spent five years in Iraqi Kurdistan before returning to Syria at the start of the 2011 revolution. Since then, he has remained active in advocating for Kurdish and minority rights and, since 2017, has worked on international aid programs supporting communities affected by the civil war.
“When the regime fell, Syrians celebrated the end of a decades-long dictatorship,” Biro explains. “It was a moment of great enthusiasm, but the joy lasted only a few weeks. Soon, we realized that many citizens still risk being marginalized and excluded from institutional roles, just as they always have in our country’s history.”
What is the source of this concern?
First, we must remember that Assad’s fall was the result of military action, not a peaceful and civil transition. History shows that no government change achieved through force has led to lasting positive change or the creation of a true democracy. Just look at our Iraqi neighbors after the fall of the Baath regime – their experience turned into a cycle of escalating violence with long-term devastating consequences.
Could a federal system like Iraq’s be a model for Syria’s future, particularly in Rojava, which remains under the control of the Syrian Democratic Forces?
Syria is a multiethnic, multireligious, and multicultural country, so I believe federalism is the best approach to governance. Even though we share the same state, our regions have distinct identities, perspectives, and ways of life. A single central government would struggle to fairly represent and support them all. We cannot expect Damascus to govern effectively everywhere in the same way. A federal system would allow all minorities to participate in political and economic life, reducing inequality and preventing exploitation.
Can you give an example of serious exploitation between regions in Syria?
Take the Jazira region, the largest of the three that make up the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (Rojava). This area alone produces 65% of Syria’s resources, yet it has the highest poverty rate in the country. There are no industries or local production chains—agricultural products grown here have always been exported to regime-controlled areas. For example, cotton is cultivated in Jazira but processed elsewhere because spinning factories were never allowed to be built. The same applies to oil, which is extracted here but refined elsewhere. Jazira also has the weakest infrastructure – poor roads, no universities, and students who could afford it had to move to Damascus for an education. Now that the regime has fallen, we cannot return to these exploitative dynamics. What Syria needs is a fair distribution of power and resources.
Syria has one of the highest numbers of refugees and internally displaced people due to 13 years of war. What role could Syrians who fled abroad play in the country’s future?
Those forced to leave Syria have been exposed to new models of governance and ways of thinking, making them essential to the country’s future. Whether they return or remain abroad, they can play a key diplomatic role—serving as a bridge to the international community and advocating for human rights, equality, and democracy.
Interim President Al Sharaa recently stated that Syria will need four to five years to prepare for elections, allowing time for refugees to return and participate. However, I see this as an excuse to delay the country’s first true democratic test. There are established ways for citizens abroad to vote, and even an imperfect election is better than a government that is not elected at all.
Interim President Ahmed Hussein Al Sharaa made his first official trip abroad to Turkey, meeting with Recep Tayyip Erdoğan on February 4. How do you view this development in Ankara-Damascus relations?
Turkey has benefited from Assad’s fall, while Russia and Iran’s influence in Syria has diminished. Erdoğan sees an opportunity in strengthening ties with Damascus, but the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (Rojava) remains his ‘thorn in the side.’ He fears—even if unlikely—that Kurds across four countries could one day unite under a single Kurdistan.
Since 2011, Rojava has been a unique model in the region. Taking advantage of the power vacuum created by war, it established a Kurdish-led system of self-governance. For the first time, discussions on a multiethnic society, gender equality, and religious pluralism became part of Syria’s political landscape. If only Kurds were included in national institutions, they could become a unifying and stabilizing force for the entire region.
What role could the Kurds play in the new government?
Syria is a multiethnic country, and even the 2012 Constitution—introduced by the regime to restore order after the protests—recognized pluralism as a core principle. We want this principle to be firmly embedded in the new Constitution once the new government is formed.
Based on this, power should be shared among Arabs, Kurds, and Assyrians, ensuring fair representation in Damascus based on each group’s presence in the country. This is the only way to respect diversity and guarantee equal treatment for all citizens. At the same time, the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (Rojava) should retain its autonomy while remaining part of a unified Syria.
At the Paris Conference, we heard significant declarations of intent. How much influence can the international community have on this transition?
The international community – particularly the European Union – has a crucial role to play. European countries must pressure the interim government to provide real guarantees of equality for all Syrians and prevent new forms of exploitation or oppression that benefit some groups at the expense of others.
We cannot overlook President Al Sharaa’s background. Both he and his movement have a history of human rights violations. This is why I believe his government, born out of revolution, fears true democratic models and their implementation. The current Minister of Justice was previously involved in the execution of two women accused of illegal sexual relations, and the president himself has been implicated in civilian deaths. While they have distanced themselves from their past, I fear this is merely a façade to gain international legitimacy and improve foreign relations.
So far, Syria’s institutions remain dominated by Sunni Arabs, with other communities left out. We will have to wait until March 1 to see what lies behind this new moderate image, but we cannot ignore the risks of a radicalized government – especially in a country facing a severe economic crisis. I hope the international community prioritizes supporting the Syrian people over simply endorsing the new government. After all, Syria’s challenges are not just regional. As history has shown, crises in the Middle East – whether migration or terrorism – have direct consequences for Europe as well.
Cover photo: Syria’s interim president Ahmed al-Sharaa (L) and Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani (CR) perform the Umrah, or the minor pilgrimage, in Islam’s holiest city of Mecca in western Saudi Arabia on February 3, 2025. (Photo by AFP)
Follow us on Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn to see and interact with our latest contents.
If you like our stories, events, publications and dossiers, sign up for our newsletter (twice a month).