º£½ÇÖ±²¥

Following the fall of the Assad regime, Syria’s transitional period, under the leadership of President Ahmad Al-Sharaa, is working toward reconstruction and the building of a new Syria. Earlier this month, the country held its first elections. However, not every Syrian voted, and there were no political parties. Instead, Damascus organized indirect parliamentary elections to select members of the People’s Assembly, the country’s legislative body, for a 30-month extendable term. This move is part of a broader effort to create national unity and political stability in a country where regional fragmentation remains deeply apparent.

This electoral system is an unusual process for the country. There has been no public campaigning, and most citizens were not given the opportunity to vote for their representatives. Elections were postponed in Sweida, Raqqa, and Hasakah due to what government officials described as security concerns.

Electors voted for two-thirds of the 210-member People’s Assembly from a list of 1,578 candidates, while the president will directly appoint the remaining 70 members. Nineteen seats, reserved for Sweida, Raqqa, and Hasakah, are yet to be filled. Across 49 electoral districts in 11 governorates, members of the electoral colleges cast their votes for candidates who were themselves members of these colleges and had submitted their candidacies in late September.

However, none of the candidates was affiliated with political parties, which were dissolved earlier this year and are expected to be reestablished in the next phase. As such, the new deputies have no formal political affiliation, and include only six women and few representing the country’s ethnic or religious minorities.

For now, the results have triggered a wave of public debate and criticism, with many questioning the representativeness and fairness of the process. Analysts argue that the system favors well-connected figures and risks keeping power concentrated in the hands of Syria’s new rulers, rather than opening the path toward genuine democratic change.

In the pursuit of stability and fair elections, the exclusion of representatives from parts of Syrian territory, justified in the name of maintaining stability and security,  will only deepen existing divisions. Without an agreement on the integration of the Syrian Democratic Forces into the new political order, there is a real risk of even a wider conflict between the SDF and Damascus.

Al-Sharaa’s decision to personally appoint the remaining 70 members of parliament was officially intended to maintain balance within the People’s Assembly. However, public engagement in the recent elections remained limited due to the indirect nature of the process and the country’s weakened political environment. One-third of the assembly was directly appointed by the president, while the rest were chosen through an opaque process managed by a committee he himself selected, raising serious questions about how genuinely representative these elections were.

Syria is undergoing a profound transformation in its regional and international positioning. After years of being seen as a hub of instability under the previous regime, the country is increasingly being perceived as a contributor to regional stability.

Syria’s transitional journey is far from over. The elections have opened a fragile door to political reconstruction.

Zaid M. Belbagi

During the transitional period, Al-Sharaa’s leadership has launched notable initiatives aimed at rebuilding a more stable Syria. Almost every week, Damascus hosts high-level diplomatic visits. Al-Sharaa also became the first Syrian head of state in decades to address the UN on behalf of his country. Meaningful progress has been made toward easing US and international sanctions, and many Syrians who fled the country have begun to return. Perhaps most significantly, the transition has so far avoided any major political or security breakdowns.

Although the recent elections were far from ideal in terms of inclusivity or transparency, they nevertheless represent a step toward state reconstruction and political transition. The indirect voting system and the overall design of the process limited participation, particularly among women and minority groups. But such challenges are not uncommon in the transitional or post-conflict state-building process.

Until now, the electoral process remains incomplete. Al-Sharaa was expected to announce his 70 appointed members immediately after the vote, but unforeseen developments delayed the decision. The day following the elections, tensions erupted in Aleppo’s Kurdish neighborhoods of Ashrafiyeh and Sheikh Maqsoud, controlled by the SDF, after Syrian forces destroyed a tunnel.

Looking ahead, the 70 members that Al-Sharaa is expected to appoint will play a determining role in shaping the balance of Syria’s political landscape. To foster genuine national reconciliation and lasting stability, these appointments will need to reflect the country’s diversity, ensuring fair representation for ethnic and religious minorities, and building a more inclusive foundation for a new, unified Syria.

History shows that a transitional period is never an easy path for any nation. It is a time marked by fragmentation and requires careful political calculation to build stable institutions. Iraq’s experience after the fall of Saddam Hussein illustrates this well. In Tunisia, following the 2011 revolution that ended Zine El Abidine Ben Ali’s rule, the transitional phase was fraught with constitutionally wrangling and correcting power imbalances. The state of the revolution to create democratic institutions remains elusive.

For Syria, however, the challenge is even greater. After decades of civil war, internal divisions and authoritarian rule, while the country faces complex layers of tension among ethnic and religious groups, between militias and the state, and across its borders with neighboring conflict zones. Syria’s electoral history has been marked by instability. Thirteen coups in 76 years, including the December 2024 overthrow of Bashar Assad, averaging nearly one every six years — the country’s politics have always been challenging. Historically, Syria’s elections had become a byword for corruption and dictatorship. In 2021, Assad claimed a fourth seven-year term with 95.1 percent of the vote, and before him, his father won his last elections in 1999 with 99.9 percent support in a referendum designed as an election.

What remains of decades of dictatorship presents a massive challenge to political transition, social reconciliation, economic reconstruction, refugee crises, and long-term security. Against this backdrop, the electoral process, however flawed, marks a concrete departure from the past. Syria’s transitional journey is far from over. The elections have opened a fragile door to political reconstruction. However, real stability will require genuine inclusion, institutional reform, and reconciliation among communities long divided by conflict. Only then can this transition evolve into lasting peace.

• Zaid M. Belbagi is a political commentator and an adviser to private clients between London and the Gulf Cooperation Council. X: @Moulay_Zaid