Europe's response to Syria has been disappointing — to say the least

On New Year's Day, Tamara, a well-known Syrian activist, posted a picture of her in Damascus with the caption, "Finally back home".

It has then been almost a month since the fall of the Assad regime in Syria. For most Syrians and people who follow Syria closely, the thought occurs to them at least once every day that surely it is unlikely how the country has completely changed in a few days after 13 years of war.

It remains hard to believe. I see countless reports like Tamara's passing from Damascus. Syrians with tears in their eyes. Even after a month, optimism remains the prevailing feeling.

That is not to say it lacks realism. Activists watch the doings of new leader Ahmed al-Sharaa with suspicion. Every misstep or wrong appointment is harshly criticised. Others, on the other hand, call for patience. Some particularly highlight the former al-Qaeda leader's efforts to protect minorities, while others give little credence to the new policies of his militia HTS. 

There is also a noticeable difference between the many Syrians who have fled the country in the past for political reasons and those who have remained there out of necessity.

The latter are mostly happy that they are finally free and can talk about whatever they want, without fear of being arrested and tortured. The returned refugees want above all to be sure that Syria will be a democratic country for all Syrians. It is a classic divide between those who have been exiled and those who have stayed. 

It is a classic divide between those who have been exiled and those who have stayed

However, the main question is how long will the state of grace last for al-Sharaa and his HTS? Every revolution, from the French to the Sudanese revolution, is followed by a kind of honeymoon. Everyone is mostly happy and feels a great bond with each other. It is a period when hardships and shortcomings are forgotten.

In Damascus today, for instance, there are no complaints that there is only electricity for a few hours a day and that HTS has failed to drastically change this for the time being.

Similarly, hunger in the country is still tolerated with patience. But there comes a time when annoyance grows, and people demand improvement. If this does not materialise, the legitimacy of al-Sharaa and HTS will quickly diminish, and the likelihood of new conflicts grows. 

The European Union should know this.

Our continent has seen many revolutions and democratic transitions. After the fall of the Iron Curtain in 1989, the situation was no different. For two decades, every government of central and eastern Europe was mercilessly punished in the ballot box for not living up to the ideal image and high expectations.

We would also have learned from democratic transitions in Latin America, Africa and the Middle East that without support from the international community, fledgling democracies often revert to chaos and dictatorship. 

This is precisely why Europe's response since the fall of Assad on 8 December 2024 has been disappointing. In an initial reaction on 9 December, several European countries announced that the asylum procedure for Syrians would be stopped.

At the same time, sanctions against Syria were not suspended and HTS was not removed from the list of terrorist organisations. Isn't that strange? If the country is believed to be run by terrorists, why stop procedures for those fleeing terrorism? 

In the end, the EU decided to send the foreign ministers of the two largest member states, Germany and France, to Syria to talk to the new leader.

The European message from both ministers could have been better, to say the least.

They indicated that European policy towards Syria, for instance on sanctions, will only change if there are guarantees on the protection of religious minorities, women and Kurds, and if there is no conservative Islamist rule. The question then becomes when exactly will Europe find that those guarantees are met? In a few months or a few years, and on the basis of what report?

A Syrian cynically asked me why Germany does not want to support Islamist governance in Syria but trades with Saudi Arabia, or worse is silent about a genocide in Gaza?

In short, what are these 'European values' now? The sanctions were introduced against Bashar al-Assad because he killed his people, not because Syria was not a Scandinavian-style social democracy. The US has already understood this and (partially) removed the sanctions. Why can't Europe manage this? 

Libya 2.0?

Europe made exactly the same mistake in Libya, waiting far too long to engage. As a result, militias and political groups were supported each time by other countries. This was the recipe that led to the civil war that started in 2013 and is still ongoing.

France and Italy do not go unpunished in this, by the way. We also saw in Sudan how international restraint contributed to the flare-up of a new conflict. Hasn't the time come to learn lessons from these catastrophes? 

Nevertheless, the European Union has an important lever in its hands.

In 2012, at the initiative of France, it established the "Friends of Syria" group. In December that year, no fewer than 114 countries' representatives attended the meeting in Marrakech. The best thing the European Union could do now would be to reconvene those "Friends of Syria" and together devise and fund a reconstruction plan for Syria.

The advantage of that approach is that it is joint and therefore does not favour any groups or militias. It will also make Syria a liveable country again faster than otherwise. After all, if one wants Syrian refugees to return, the offer of a house or flat will certainly help. Today, on the other hand, the country is in havoc. 

Even if the signals from Syria today are positive, the situation remains very fragile.

We can choose to wait and see if everything goes according to so-called 'European values'. And if things go wrong, we can shake our heads, shrug and say that things could never have worked out with those former jihadists anyway.

Another option now is to participate in the political and material construction of the country and guarantee ourselves that all groups are included in this process. That is no guarantee that it will succeed.

But after all the misery of recent years, isn't it worth trying?