In the file ‘Year Zero After Assad’, SyriaUntold takes a look back at this past year, with steps forward punctuated by painful setbacks. We look at how elements of the former regime experienced the unimaginable collapse of a system they believed would last forever. We observe the positive spaces opened up by the fall of the security state, the role of writers at this stage, and attempts to rise from the rubble, both civically and culturally, without overlooking the massacres on the Coast and in Sweida, the faltering transitional justice process, and concerns about the country's changing identity.
(Qamishli) A year after the fall of the former Syrian regime, a new civil path is beginning to emerge. Communication between Damascus and north-eastern Syria has resumed for the first time in many years, and areas that were completely closed to civil society have become more open, but the situation remains fragile and unstable.
Damascus's openness has paved the way for visits and meetings between civil society actors across Syria, raising a fundamental question: can civil society bridges help overcome the divisions entrenched by 14 years of isolation?
The experiences of activists from northeast Syria during a year of engagement in events and meetings in Damascus reveal a complex mix of cautious openness, structural challenges, and unprecedented opportunities. While organisations are demonstrating greater capacity for movement and partnership building, knowledge gaps, differing legal frameworks, hate speech and politicisation continue to hinder networking between the two sides, at a time when cross-regional cooperation seems an unavoidable necessity in a transitional phase.
The nature of civil work changed
Shireen Ibrahim, project manager at the Association for Victims of Forced Displacement, confirms that cooperation with civil activists before the fall of the regime was almost non-existent. She adds that the post-2011 landscape has expanded the scope for cooperation between civil initiatives: “We did not reach an agreement to cover a specific need in the meetings. However, there are promises between us and ongoing virtual communication. We are now preparing for a group of lawyers to visit north-eastern Syria to work on some governance issues, election mechanisms and other matters”.
Shireen considers what happened after the fall to be a “qualitative shift”, as organisations became able to operate across most of Syria and “build physical partnerships that were previously impossible”. Nevertheless, she points out that this new openness has also been accompanied by emerging challenges, including competition for resources, disparities between regions, and attempts by political actors to influence civil society.
Civil activist Moriab Hado offers a different description, but reaches a similar conclusion: “Most of the work before was done without media coverage for fear of security crackdowns. Today, it is possible to move more freely within areas previously under the regime's control and to appear at meetings and forums”.
Civil Society Spotlight: Episode II
29 April 2025
Moriab believes that contact between Damascus-based organisations and those in north-eastern Syria “would not have been possible a few years ago” and that the fall of the regime has opened the door to new communication. Still, in his opinion, “it is difficult to determine the exact level of cooperation” because the organisations are still in the process of restructuring their work and geographical distribution.
For Simav Hassan, communications and advocacy officer at Syrians for Truth and Justice, “theoretical knowledge is the same among activists, but its application was subject to the complexities of each region”. He points out that the margin for discussion on constitutional issues and local governance in northeast Syria has been wider in recent years, while this has not been possible in regime-controlled areas.
Attempts to unify efforts are ongoing, Simav notes, pointing to a series of meetings held in several Syrian regions over the past year, attended by representatives of human rights organisations from all the country, on “transitional justice in the Syrian context”, which revealed different priorities and visions among the participants.In north-eastern Syria, the talk was about the victims of Turkish-backed military operations. In Damascus and its countryside, the talk was about Russian intervention and violations. In the south, it was about Israeli intervention. This conclusion prompted us to hold more sessions, in an effort to gain a broader understanding of Syrians' perceptions of justice and injustice", says Simav.
Damascus-based journalist Ammar Diop believes that civil society in north-eastern Syria is more open to Western society and enjoys a degree of independence from the Damascus regime, carrying out clear and public projects, whereas organisations in Damascus and other areas operate secretly under strict censorship.
“There is a degree of politicisation in north-eastern Syria, while the work of organisations has remained closer to that of civil society and far from politics in Damascus. In both cases, no significant results have been achieved in changing the structure of awareness and the value of women, issues related to citizenship, education and others”, Ammar says.
On the other hand, Bilind Mella, executive director of the non-governmental organisation HDC, believes that the differences between the two regions before the fall were not only related to security surveillance, but also to the funding process: “The government had authority over projects and services, as well as funding, coupled with a lack of impartiality in assessing needs, especially with regard to OCHA (the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs). Despite this, the north-eastern regions witnessed civil activity on issues of governance and public policy”.
A wave of reverse displacement towards regime-controlled areas in northern Syria
07 July 2018
Moving across the whole country has allowed for the exchange of views and the building of a common knowledge base, although this “has not yet reached the level of bold and serious openness on issues in north-eastern Syria”, as Mella describes it.
On the Syrian Coast, with a different perspective, Mariam Atallah, a training expert and researcher in the field of civil peace, finds that today civil space has shrunk for various reasons, including security restrictions, political fragmentation, lack of funding, and the narrowing of the space for civil work. Movement has become controlled by funders and donors, and parallel civil societies have been created along lines of control, rather than building a single civil body.
“Civil society work in the Coast is low-key and subject to approvals, so activists are forced to operate within small and changing margins. There is a high level of expertise in the field of humanitarian response, weaker in the areas of governance and political work”, says Mariam.
Mariam considers that the areas outside the control of the former regime are “more mature” and better able to understand and analyse reality, and that “my conclusion is based on meetings I had with activists from different areas of north-eastern Syria, Idlib and other areas where the margin for action was better”.
Challenges and opportunities for cooperation
Most opinions agree that what has been achieved over the past year is important but fragile, and the concerns of those we spoke to vary, reflecting the multiple layers that hinder the building of solid bridges between Damascus and north-eastern Syria. For Shireen Ibrahim, the challenges begin with the heavy legacy of separation between the regions over the past years.
“The political and geographical isolation after 2011 created a gap in understanding between Syrians, as well as the spread of inflammatory rhetoric after Assad's escape and the lack of reliable information about north-eastern Syria were obstacles”, Shireen says, adding that differences in legal and administrative frameworks make it even more difficult to build sustainable cooperation.
Another layer of challenges pointed out by Moriab Hado relates to the impact of the conflict on social relations themselves, an obstacle that should not be overlooked: “There is a psychological and social barrier formed over the years of war, not only between Damascus and the north-east, but between almost all Syrians”.
Nevertheless, Moriab emphasises that opportunities are greater than ever before: there is more room for manoeuvre, an institutional desire for rapprochement, and common issues that can be worked on.
Simav Hassan takes a more critical view of the current situation, arguing that the biggest challenge today is the continued marginalisation of north-eastern Syria in national affairs: "There is no real difference in the prioritisation of issues, the region is still excluded. Victims from north-eastern Syria were not invited to the sessions held by the National Commission for Transitional Justice or the Commission for Missing Persons".
Syrians in Gaza are displaced, killed, and missing under the rubble
14 March 2024
Simav warns of the danger of reproducing the previous centralisation through “concentrating activities in the capital” at a time when Syrians need to get to know each other on the ground, not through virtual meetings. She believes that hate speech and stereotyping are among the most serious challenges to building bridges.
For his part, Bilind Mella considers the most prominent challenge to be the politicisation of humanitarian issues. “We have not seen a significant and bold openness to the issues of north-eastern Syria because many of them have been politicised, and issues such as water, camps, rights, housing and property are often dealt with with caution”, he says. Bilind believes that the lack of freedom of movement, the lack of guarantees for the protection of workers, and the changing governance structure across the country prevent the establishment of effective cooperation. Nevertheless, he believes that there are opportunities, including “civil spaces that support negotiation, mutual visits, and the ability to work on common issues such as water, energy, governance, transitional justice, and economic recovery”.
“There is an unbalanced interest in Syrian issues in the civil society, with everyone concerned with their own immediate issues, while interaction between regions remains limited as a result of political and media polarisation and weak geographical and communication channels”, says Mariam.
She describes civil society in Damascus as “disciplined and monitored”, so its ability to interact with other regions is “very limited”. Mariam summarises the challenges to building bridges of communication between Syrian civil society as political and geographical polarisation, a lack of mutual trust, security restrictions from all sides, dependence on funders, and the absence of a unifying national framework.
As for opportunities, Mariam says: “Many issues can bring Syrian civil society together, including transitional justice, support for youth and educational initiatives, women's empowerment, joint international advocacy, local peacebuilding programmes, among others”.
Activists agree that the first year after the fall saw a real opening up, but it remains constrained by political complexities, social divisions, and lines of influence. While some believe that cooperation can gradually develop if the focus remains on shared human rights and humanitarian issues, others warn that the space could shrink if the transitional government moves towards a more authoritarian centralisation. The sustainability of the path of openness depends on the ability of activists to overcome geographical and political divisions.
Despite differing perspectives, there is one point of agreement: a shared civil future cannot be built unless Syrians get to know one another, overcome their legacy of isolation, and establish permanent channels for dialogue and joint action.
