In a region already brimming with tension, the past week has seen a dramatic escalation in both rhetoric and maneuvering among key Middle Eastern powers. As Syria faces pivotal questions about its future governance and regional alliances, neighboring states are locked in a high-stakes contest for influence—one that now openly involves the United States, Russia, Iran, Turkey, Israel, and Qatar. The recent Israeli strike in Doha, the capital of Qatar, which killed a Qatari security officer and several Hamas members on September 11, 2025, has sent shockwaves through the region, prompting sharp reactions and bold proposals from Iran and its allies, according to reports from The Syrian Observer and Al Jazeera.
At the heart of this complex web sits Syria, a nation grappling with the aftermath of more than a decade of war and the daunting task of state reconstruction. Marwan Qabalan, a researcher and professor of international politics, recently spoke to Syria TV about the urgent need for Syria to recalibrate its foreign relations, especially with Russia. Qabalan stressed that “state governance requires far more than managing a faction, group or institution, as it involves complex responsibilities tied to national interests and international representation.” He went on to argue that rebuilding ties with Russia should be a top priority, noting that “Russia, as a major global power, cannot be overlooked.”
Qabalan pointed out that Russia’s practical steps towards rapprochement with Damascus—particularly following major developments in Syria in late 2024—have set the stage for a new chapter in bilateral relations. He cited Russia’s capacity to support Syria at the UN Security Council, especially regarding sanctions against Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) and its leadership, as a critical advantage. Unlike China, Qabalan noted, Russia has demonstrated a willingness to engage directly with Syria, which could prove decisive in shaping the country’s international posture.
Mutual interests abound. Russia supplies arms to the Syrian military, operates the Tartus naval base, and is a key source of wheat imports for Syria. Qabalan described renewed relations as “a logical and beneficial step for both parties,” especially as the Syrian administration seeks to de-escalate foreign entanglements and focus on internal affairs. He emphasized that “laying a firm foundation for these relationships is vital to shaping Syria’s future.”
But Syria’s challenges are not limited to its external alliances. Qabalan identified internal sectarian divisions as the most pressing obstacle, describing them as “an open door for external intervention—particularly by Israel.” He pointed to recent events in Suweida as evidence of Israel exploiting crises to entrench new dynamics in southern Syria. According to Qabalan, Israeli policymakers, including Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar, have advocated for plans to fragment Syria into sectarian cantons—Sunni, Alawite, Druze, Kurdish, and others. If that failed, he said, an alternative proposal envisions a demilitarised zone extending 80–90 kilometers south of Damascus, echoing the 2018 Russian-American agreement on southern Syria.
Qabalan warned that Israel may believe Syria’s new government, given its fragility, could accept such proposals in exchange for a halt to attacks and a chance to reassert sovereignty. He also referenced the impact of the Al-Aqsa Flood operation, which, by targeting the Syrian regime’s key allies—particularly Hezbollah and Iranian-backed militias—“weakened Iranian influence in Syria and cleared the way for growing Turkish dominance.” This shift, he explained, has sparked concern among Israel and other regional actors wary of Turkey’s rising profile. Israel, Qabalan observed, sees Turkey as a more complex rival than Iran, due to its Western alliances and strategic positioning.
These shifting alliances were thrown into sharp relief by the recent Israeli strike in Doha. In response, Iranian lawmaker Mojtaba Zarei proposed that Qatar expel US forces and allow Iran’s Revolutionary Guards to deploy Fattah hypersonic missiles on its territory to counter Israel. Addressing Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani via posts on X, Zarei wrote, “I propose that the US army, accomplice of Israel, be expelled from Qatar, and that the Revolutionary Guard aerospace force deploy Fattah hypersonic missiles on your soil to defend your sovereignty.” In a separate post, he added, “The respected emir of Qatar should request support from the Revolutionary Guard aerospace force to station in Qatar.”
The Iranian military accused the US of complicity in the Israeli strike, stating, “The US government is complicit in these crimes,” and accusing Washington of backing “the Zionist regime’s crimes.” US President Donald Trump countered that Israel acted on its own, while Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu took full responsibility for the strike. Iranian leaders, including President Masoud Pezeshkian, condemned the attack as “illegal, inhumane and anti-peace,” and national security chief Ali Larijani warned regional countries to “prepare yourselves for my upcoming dominance.” Hardline activists in Tehran described the strike as a “lesson” for US allies, with commentator Reza Ghobeishavi stating that it “benefits Iran’s camp and Israel’s opponents, while harming the camp that supports normalizing relations with Israel.”
Qatar’s unique position as host to the US Al Udeid Air Base—the largest American facility in the Middle East—adds further complexity. While Iranian officials have voiced strong support for Qatar since the Israeli strike, it’s worth recalling that Tehran itself targeted Al Udeid in June 2025 during a confrontation with the United States. At the time, Iran said Doha had been notified in advance, while Qatar condemned the attack but sought to avoid escalation.
Back in Syria, Qabalan contended that the only way to counter external threats—especially from Israel—is through genuine national unity. He argued for the formation of real political parties to shift citizen loyalty from sectarian or tribal lines to civic, policy-based platforms. “Only a united national front can counter external threats,” he said, while “deepening internal fractures empowers foreign actors and risks renewed international supervision.” He emphasized that achieving national unity requires more than disarmament; it demands a credible political path forward, a state that upholds the rule of law, and equality for all citizens.
Qabalan also criticized Syria’s current political framework as superficial, describing it as a “top-down process marked by conferences, constitutional declarations, and a government that resembles appointments more than elections.” He recommended a two-year transitional phase culminating in free elections, modeled after Iraq’s post-2003 experience. A democratically elected constituent assembly should, he said, draft a new constitution through consensus among political stakeholders, with the final version reviewed by legal experts. Such a process would “ensure broad Syrian involvement in constructing a new state and shift the conflict from a military to a political one.”
As the region stands at a crossroads—caught between the ambitions of external powers and the internal demands for reform—Syria’s path forward will depend on its ability to foster genuine dialogue, build inclusive institutions, and navigate a landscape where every misstep can invite fresh interference. Whether the country can rise to this challenge remains to be seen, but the stakes have rarely been higher.
