By Fatemeh Kavand
Syria after Bashar al-Assad was supposed to be “free.” But what is visible today from Damascus to Aleppo is not freedom – it is destruction, fragmentation, and chronic insecurity. “Free Syria” has become the name of a project that turned an entire country into a testing ground for occupation, terror, and plunder.
When Bashar al-Assad stepped aside, images of celebration, dancing crowds, and raised flags in the streets of Damascus dominated media headlines. The prevailing narrative claimed Syria had entered a new chapter—one defined by freedom, reconstruction, and peace. Yet almost simultaneously, something else was unfolding—largely unseen or deliberately ignored.
Israeli airstrikes on Syrian territory not only failed to stop, but they also entered a new phase. This time, the targets were no longer limited to military bases. Economic infrastructure, logistics hubs, airports, energy depots, and even facilities vital to rebuilding the country were systematically bombed. These attacks were neither sporadic nor reactive; they were organized, deliberate, and continuous.
What made this even more striking was that the new rulers in Damascus repeatedly announced they had no hostility toward Israel, sought no confrontation, and were even open to agreements. Yet these signals were met not with restraint, but with expanded attacks. Syria, barely emerging from political transition, was denied even a moment to breathe.
If one looks honestly at Syria’s map today, it is no longer a unified country. Field assessments indicate that only around 30 percent of Syrian territory is under the control of the government based in Damascus—led by al-Jolani, a figure with a clear history of terrorist activity, heading armed groups lacking cohesion, social legitimacy, and the capacity to govern.
Even this 30 percent is far from stable. Internal assassinations, armed score-settling, clashes among rival factions, and widespread insecurity have disrupted daily life. Ordinary Syrians feel neither safe nor hopeful about the future.
The rest of the country has effectively slipped from central control. Various regions are divided among separatist groups, ethnic militias, U.S.-backed forces, Druze factions, and areas under direct or indirect Israeli occupation. This is not the outcome of a conventional war, but the result of a multilayered project—one designed to keep Syria weak, fragmented, and dependent.
One of the most serious miscalculations of the new Damascus leadership was the belief that security could be purchased through concessions. From the beginning, al-Jolani and his circle sought to send a clear message to the West and Israel: we have no problem, we are open to engagement, we are ready for compromise.
From public media statements to behind-the-scenes negotiations—and even direct encounters with figures like Donald Trump—everything followed this logic. Yet Syria once again proved an old truth: concessions to an occupier do not bring security; they increase appetite.
The more Damascus retreated, the heavier the blows became. Military bases that could have provided minimal deterrence were destroyed. Infrastructure essential to economic recovery was targeted. Even industries with no direct military role were not spared. The result is clear: a Syria stripped of defensive capability and deprived of the means to stand on its own feet.
What we see in Syria today is not an exception—it is a pattern. A pattern long designed and implemented in Western–Israeli think tanks. It begins with attractive words: freedom, human rights, democracy. But in practice, it ends in instability, fragmentation, and looting.
In this model, the central government must be weakened, the army neutralized, infrastructure destroyed, and society kept entangled in internal conflict. The final outcome is a country incapable of independent decision-making or reconstruction. Syria now stands exactly at this point.
This project is not limited to Syria. Iraq, Libya, and other cases show the same scenario repeated and again, with nearly identical outcomes. Only the names and details change—the essence remains the same.
Naturally, what is promoted today as “Free Iran” or “the day after the Islamic Republic,” once stripped of its packaging, also bears an unsettling resemblance to Syria today. In this polished image, there is no real prosperity, stability, or independence—only a blueprint for internal collapse.
Activating separatist movements, empowering monarchist currents, reviving terrorist networks along borders, and weakening central authority are merely the opening stages. Next comes either the installation of a puppet government or the complete erosion of state capacity to the point where governance itself becomes irrelevant.
Then comes the destruction of infrastructure—the same process now unfolding in Syria. Refineries, power plants, strategic industries, and anything that enables independence must be dismantled. A country without infrastructure is only a consumer, and consumers remain permanently dependent.
In the end, Syria today is a living warning—not an abstract analysis. Freedom imposed from outside, delivered with bombs and sanctions, leads only to ruin. What the West and Israel market as freedom is, in reality, a project of containment, weakening, and exploitation.
If Iran is to have a future, it must look closely at Syria today—not out of fear, but to understand reality. Because the freedom that devoured Syria is the same freedom, repackaged, that has long been sold to other nations.
No comments:
Post a Comment