Does Syria’s transition decision-making need more transparency and accountability?
In March 2025, Ahmed Al-Shara’a signed a temporary constitution guaranteeing his party stays in power for the next five years (Source: NBC).
Every week across Syria, people wake up to announcements from the transitional government detailing sweeping decisions and policies intended to lead the country down a new path towards prosperity and opportunity. Agreements for international investment in transport and energy, the re-opening of the Syrian stock market, as well as initiatives to professionalize the security services, are signs of a pragmatic approach to rapidly secure the stability, recovery and opportunity that Syrians have fought – or endured unimaginable suffering – to realize.
This rapid pragmatism is justified by the need to improve living standards as quickly as possible and return – or establish – basic and essential services. However, some Syrians are concerned about not only how decisions are being made and who benefits from high value government contracts, but also the long-lasting implications of some policy decisions which have the potential to reshape Syria’s physical and cultural landscape without any popular consultation.
The transitional government announced the signing of a $7 billion energy deal to build, repair and expand electricity infrastructure with Qatari, Turkish and US companies. Previously, a deal with Turkey was announced to provide two billion cubic metres of gas a year. However, Syrian observers voice concerns that there is no transparency around what Syria – and thus Syrians – are providing in return for these deals, nor are the details or agreements and contracts made public to understand the personal, political and professional interests or relationships behind them. The rumour mill abounds with comments that even the Minister of Energy knows little more than what is available in public forums since decision-making and international negotiations are held firmly in the hands of the President and the Minister of Foreign Affairs. What appears to be a lack of transparency could be a lack of communications.
Ahmed Al-Shara’a applauds a new energy deal between Qatar, Turkey, and the US. (Source: The Electricity Hub)
When the transitional government announced its plans to withdraw subsidies for wheat farmers, debate emerged on social media around the potential effects and harms of the decision. Much of Syria’s rural culture and social fabric hinge on agriculture and the cycles of crops such as wheat. Some fear that removing subsidies would drive migration from rural to urban areas, further straining cities’ beleaguered infrastructure and protracting displacement dynamics. Some suggest that the transitional government has chosen to pursue dependence on wheat imports rather than invest in water management. This is a trend Syria has witnessed before: a significant political and socio-economic stressor prior to 2011 was the migration from rural (particularly the northeast) to urban areas as a result of the regime’s refusal to address drought, water management and climate change in socially marginalized communities.
Farmers in Syria have had their funding cut. (Source: Enab Baladi)
Separately, news spread last week of the possible absorption of Uyghur fighters into the 86th Division of the new army, following a seal of approval from the US who had previously called for the expulsion of foreign fighters. Some Syrians noted the lack of clarity around whether Uyghur fighters would become citizens or just have residency, and how they would be integrated into both the army and Syria more widely. The announcement triggered emotionally charged exchanges highlighting divisions between communities and the lack of consensus on what it means to be Syrian or agree common qualities of national identity, including the meaning and role of religion in the country.
“We as Syrians are only just trying to understand what a Syrian identity is. It would be difficult to integrate foreigners into Syria, especially those who came to establish an extreme form of Islamic governance which I worry the transitional government is trying to implement by stealth. We cannot even agree what they should integrate into.”
Syrian army personnel travel in a military vehicle as they head towards Latakia to join the fight against the fighters linked to Syria's ousted leader Bashar al-Assad, in Aleppo, Syria, March 7, 2025. (Photo credit: REUTERS/MAHMOUD HASSANO)
The responses to these announcements highlight the political nature of transition decision-making, even around infrastructure or resource management. There is currently no citizen feedback mechanism for a political debate which connects to the transitional government, itself inherently unrepresentative of the population given its non-elected status. Talk in Damascus of the formation of a Parliament of appointed “representatives” and technical specialists faces obvious criticism that those appointed would not sincerely uphold transparency and accountability functions, even if granted some ability to do so. At the same time, Syrians understand how complicated the road to elections is to secure representation, with questions around the status of diaspora and challenges in recording displaced or deceased populations.
“There needs to be actual, public debate of decisions. They should not make the mistake of trying to remove politics from governance like the regime.”
There is a space in the middle of the current decision-making model and full electoral democracy where transparency and accountability can be strengthened, especially on topics which have the potential to undermine attempts to stitch together a new social fabric. Especially before – rather than after - the drafting of a new constitution, ensuring plural debate of options will be vital to ensuring transition decision-making doesn’t become a driver of conflict or tension by excluding the full variety of Syrian opinions and aspirations. Furthermore, greater accountability and transparency will strengthen trust in the current government, as well as ensure better outcomes if those beyond the current government’s inner circle are able to meaningfully input into decision-making.
A farmer harvests wheat in Deir Khabiyeh, near Damascus – June 17, 2021 (Reuters)