The fragile calm in Syria’s southern Suwayda province was shattered once again this week, as political tensions and humanitarian threats converged in a region still reeling from the aftershocks of civil conflict and the ouster of Bashar al-Assad. On Friday, August 8, a Syrian Arab Red Crescent (SARC) aid convoy came under direct fire during a relief mission in southern Syria, an incident that underscores the persistent dangers facing both civilians and those trying to help them. Although no injuries or damage were reported, the attack has prompted the aid agency to reassess its safety protocols, even as it pledges to continue its work amid mounting instability.
According to Omar Al-Malki, SARC’s media chief, the convoy was targeted while delivering humanitarian assistance to conflict-hit communities in the south, including Suwayda province. “The priority remains the safety of staff and the uninterrupted delivery of humanitarian assistance to those in need,” Malki told the state news agency SANA. Relief convoys, he explained, enter Suwayda daily via the Busra al-Sham crossing, with temporary evacuations of vulnerable residents continuing to shelters in neighboring Daraa. Despite the risks, SARC vowed to maintain operations, but also announced a review and tightening of their safety procedures “to ensure teams can reach targeted sites safely.”
This latest incident comes at a time of heightened tension and suspicion in Suwayda. The province, home to a significant Druze population, has been under a ceasefire since July 19, 2025, after a week of armed clashes between Druze groups and Bedouin tribes left 426 dead, according to the London-based Syrian Network for Human Rights. The violence, which erupted amid the broader transition following Assad’s removal in late 2024, has left deep scars and fueled a climate of mistrust and blame.
Syrian authorities, for their part, have accused armed groups in Suwayda of looting aid supplies and exploiting violations of the truce to mask arbitrary detentions and other abuses. These allegations, coming from a transitional administration still finding its footing after nearly 25 years of authoritarian rule, reflect the complex power dynamics at play in the region. The government’s efforts to restore stability are hampered not only by lingering hostilities but also by the challenge of balancing local demands for autonomy with the imperative of national unity.
Against this backdrop, a new political controversy erupted on Saturday, August 9, when Syria’s Foreign Ministry responded forcefully to recent remarks by Druze Spiritual Leader Hikmat Salman al-Hijri. In a public statement, Qutaiba Idlibi, head of the Ministry’s US Affairs Department, expressed support for administrative decentralization, a move seemingly aimed at addressing some local grievances. Yet, he simultaneously dismissed al-Hijri’s comments about the violence in Suwayda, accusing the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) of amplifying figures “who do not represent the communities they claim to speak for.”
Idlibi’s statement, as reported by Shafaq News, condemned calls for Israeli intervention that surfaced in the wake of the recent clashes. He argued that both al-Hijri’s and the SDF’s positions were symptomatic of “dependence on foreign powers,” insisting that any meaningful dialogue about Syria’s future must remain strictly “Syrian–Syrian.” The Ministry’s warning was blunt: Damascus would not tolerate “a repeat of Hezbollah-like models” on its territory, a clear reference to concerns about non-state actors establishing autonomous zones or parallel power structures within Syria’s borders.
Al-Hijri’s remarks, which triggered the government’s response, were no less dramatic. On the same day, the Druze leader called for an international investigation into the violence in Suwayda and urged that perpetrators be referred to the International Criminal Court. He leveled grave accusations against armed groups and pro-government forces, alleging “systematic genocide” that included executions of children and the elderly, burning of homes with residents still inside, kidnappings, sieges, and indiscriminate shelling of villages. These charges, broadcast widely in regional and international media, have heightened the sense of urgency and crisis in the province.
“What we have witnessed is not just a breakdown of order, but a deliberate campaign to destroy our community,” al-Hijri declared, according to Shafaq News. His call for outside intervention and international justice struck a nerve, both among his followers and within the halls of power in Damascus. For many in Suwayda, the violence of recent weeks has revived old fears of marginalization and abandonment, while also fueling demands for greater autonomy and protection.
The government’s response to al-Hijri has been to double down on the narrative of national sovereignty and internal resolution. Idlibi’s insistence on “Syrian–Syrian” dialogue is not just a rhetorical flourish; it reflects deep anxieties within the transitional administration about the risks of foreign meddling and the precedent set by other regional conflicts. The reference to “Hezbollah-like models” is especially pointed, recalling the way external actors have, in the past, leveraged local grievances to carve out spheres of influence within Syria and its neighbors.
At the same time, the government’s professed support for administrative decentralization signals a recognition that the old model of centralized control is no longer tenable. After nearly a quarter-century of authoritarian rule under Assad, the new leadership faces the daunting task of crafting a system that can accommodate local identities and aspirations without fracturing the country further. Whether this balancing act can succeed remains an open question, especially as violence and mistrust linger in places like Suwayda.
Meanwhile, the humanitarian crisis shows no sign of abating. The daily arrival of SARC convoys and the continued flow of evacuees to Daraa shelters are stark reminders of the ongoing vulnerability of civilians caught between warring factions and shifting political winds. Aid workers, too, are under constant threat, as Friday’s attack on the relief convoy made clear. The fact that no one was hurt this time offers little reassurance for the future.
For the people of Suwayda, the events of the past month have laid bare the persistent dangers and dilemmas facing Syria as a whole. The province’s experience—marked by deadly clashes, contested leadership, and humanitarian peril—serves as a microcosm of the larger challenges confronting the country in its post-Assad era. As calls for justice and autonomy grow louder, and as the government seeks to reassert control while accommodating local demands, the path forward remains fraught with uncertainty.
In the end, the fate of Suwayda may well hinge on the ability of Syria’s new leaders to reconcile competing visions for the country’s future, while ensuring the safety and dignity of its most vulnerable citizens. The coming weeks will test not only the resolve of aid agencies and local communities, but also the capacity of the transitional administration to deliver on its promises of stability and reform. One thing is certain: the eyes of Syria—and the world—are watching closely.
