Recreating Syria through elections is an unenviable challenge

The country faces a tough test with the first post-Assad elections

Normally, elections are a legitimising exercise, especially for authoritarian leaders who seek to exhibit their domestic popularity. For over five decades, Syrian leaders had mastered this art, and the periodic façade was necessary to present their seeming acceptance by a wide section of the heterogeneous Syrian population.

In less than a month — between 15 and 20 September — Syrians will choose the next parliament. This will be the first election since the end of the Assad rule on 8 December last year. In all the presidential elections held since March 1971, the Assads were the only candidates on the ballot and secured over 95 per cent of the votes polled, with two exceptions.

In February 1999, Hafiz secured 100 per cent of the votes, and in June 2014, amidst the Arab Spring protests, Bashar’s vote share slightly fell to 92 per cent.

Elections to the parliament were different. The ornamental and toothless body primarily existed to accommodate and placate various sections of the Syrian population and offer the semblance of diverse representation. The official Ba’ath party always won the majority, with token representation given to allied groups and prominent individuals. Thus, presidential elections were more closely watched than the parliamentary ones, as the latter merely endorsed the decisions of the Assads.

Ahmed al-Sharaa, who took over as president in January following the fall of the Bashar regime, has undertaken a great gamble in calling for parliamentary elections next month. The Riyadh meeting between al-Sharaa and President Trump last May provided the former with the much-needed international legitimacy.

Political pragmatism and regional dynamics compelled the US to erase the terrorism tag of the Syrian leader, with President Trump embracing and calling him an “attractive, tough guy” and removing years of sanctions on Syria. This was followed by other regional leaders consolidating his international status. These steps were critical to ending Syria’s international isolation.

Syria is one of the most diverse countries in the Middle East, with ethnic, religious and sectoral groups such as Alawites, Bedouins, Christians, Druze, Shias and Sunnis. For a long time, the heterogeneous society was dominated and even controlled by the small Alawite population to which the Assads belonged.

The Assads survived by carefully crafting a coalition of minority groups. Preserving domestic political stability, often through brutal actions against different groups, was the hallmark of Hafiz al-Assad’s legacy. His son, who succeeded him in July 2000, could not build on that legacy and exposed the fractured and diverse nature of Syrian society.

Having won international legitimacy, al-Sharaa is now shifting his focus to the volatile domestic arena. He is, however, careful to avoid putting himself on the ballot and has instead opted for parliamentary elections. Al-Sharaa’s electoral gamble faces four main hurdles.

First, the civil war that lasted for over two decades fractured Syrian society and exposed its social, sectarian and ideological divisions. Within days of the Assad regime’s fall, Alawites became targets of violence from forces aligned with the new regime. Besides anger against the Assads, there is an ideological dimension, with puritan Islamists questioning the Islamic credentials of the Alawites.

Moreover, clashes in the Druze province of Sweida last July, in which nearly a thousand Druze and Bedouins were killed, symbolised the deep tensions among various groups over their status and influence in the post-Assad political setup. Thus, far from presenting unity, the forthcoming election could deepen divisions and contribute to further violence. Should there be an escalation, the elections may have to be postponed.

Second, the civil war has caused enormous displacement, affecting nearly half the population. Estimates suggest that over 14 million Syrians have fled their homes since 2011, with over 7.5 million becoming internally displaced.

The rest are in neighbouring Lebanon, Jordan and Türkiye. With conditions in the country still unconducive for the return of refugees and the internally displaced, how will their rights and concerns be accommodated? With this in mind, parliamentary seats have been modified; the September elections will be held for only 140 out of 210 seats, with the remaining 70 members to be nominated by the president himself.

He will have to use them to accommodate and placate different minority groups that may not otherwise gain adequate representation in the new parliament.

Third, Syria has no democratic role model to emulate. Prolonged authoritarian rule has been the norm in the Middle East. Strong personalities enjoyed the cloak of stability that concealed several internal social maladies, splits and tensions. The euphoria of the Arab Spring was not sustained; several Arab countries either experienced democratic backsliding or were plunged into civil war.

The consociational Lebanese model was hijacked and paralysed by Hezbollah. The internal divisions in Syria were compounded by the civil war, which once saw the active involvement of over a hundred externally supported militant groups. Political instability in Syria became further complicated by the involvement of external powers such as Iran, Israel, Russia, Türkiye and others.

Fourth, the perceived political stability provided by the Assads could not mask the deep-seated faultlines in the Syrian nation-building process. Over the past hundred years, Syria has undergone periodic turmoil, with its national flag altered as many as eight times and governance carried out under six different constitutions, including the temporary one that came into force last March.

President Al-Sharaa is seeking to rebuild the country as the world understood it since the end of

World War I. The forthcoming elections are a critical step in that direction. Given the internal divisions and prolonged civil war, recreating that Syria is easier said than done.

(The writer teaches contemporary Middle East at Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi)