Israel’s totally unjustified malicious intervention is concerning. Rather, these interventions are an insidious attempt by Israel and Netanyahu to aggravate and inflame the situation in Syria, to create chaos.

 

Another concern is the regime remnants now being backed by certain regional states, not necessarily by the states as such but by particular factions within them: Hezbollah in Lebanon and the militias backed by Tehran in Iraq.

 

As for Iran, it has not hidden its distress over Assad’s downfall, as he had been the linchpin of its project to export the revolution in the region. His regime protected the supply and financing line of Iranian influence, from Lebanon to Gaza, all the way to the Mediterranean. Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) Commander Hossein Salami has openly spoken of Iran’s disconcertion, saying that Syria was a "bitter lesson for Iran." He also quoted remarks by the Supreme Leader: "Syria will be liberated by its heroic youth,and requires time, immense perseverance, unwavering determination, and sublime faith." The conspiracies against Syria are ongoing.

 

Some may argue that concern is justified, especially since Assad's fall and the rise of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham. However, I believe that only a few of those who voice this sentiment do so genuinely, a larger number have ulterior motives, especially those who had consistently flattered Hezbollah and defended its actions, or those who continue to defend Hamas to this day.

 

Moreover, concern for Syria can be summed up in a few key points. The first is the new regime’s hesitation to make swift and serious domestic decisions to push things along: most notably, the formation of a genuinely competent government that makes use of all the talents available to it.

 

The second is a lack of commitment to transparency. Syrians, as well as partners in the Arab region, are not being adequately informed of developments through regular media briefings, which is particularly crucial given the rapid pace at which developments are unfolding. That encompasses updating Syrians on living conditions statistics and the challenges they face.

 

The third is the slowdown in the momentum that the regime built in the first two months, both regionally and internationally. Visits to Arab, regional, and international actors must be made to raise the alarm about the threats being posed by Israel and Iran. A simple example of the need to engage with significant developments is the case of Walid Jumblatt. When he expressed his desire to visit Syria following Israeli statements about the Druze, Damascus should have immediately welcomed the initiative and extended an open invitation. Doing so would have highlighted the dangers of Israel’s actions and reinforced Syria’s unity.

 

The fourth is that Damascus should have reminded the international community, through an official statement, of the statement Sharaa had sent Trump, as well as reiterating his past remarks about how Syria has been exhausted by futile wars. It should also have stressed the peril of Israel’s actions, as well as those of Iran and its proxies.

 

Highlighting the risks of maintaining or failing to lift sanctions on Syria is also crucial, as is implementing reforms more quickly, as doing so would leave foreign actors in an awkward position and prove that the new government is serious about making Syria a proactive Arab and international player - that is, to take the opposite approach that Assad and his Iran-backed supporters had pursued.

 

This is the advice of someone who cares and is genuinely concerned.