- I think we need to listen to Syrians and we need to give them the space.

We need to trust that they can come together and support this transition, and make sure that regional players, that they're not all going to fight out their power games on Syrian territory.

(upbeat music) - Hello and welcome to "GZERO World."

I'm Ian Bremmer and regime change has come to Syria.

In just two weeks, anti-government rebels shattered a mostly frozen conflict that began in the Arab Spring of 2011 and never really ended.

And in just two weeks, an autocratic regime that had ruled Syria with an iron fist for five decades collapsed like a house of cards.

The war against Assad is over, but the fight for Syria's future might just have begun.

So how did rebel forces break through years of stalemate to do what many well-funded anti-Assad groups never could?

And in a world where it seems like pretty much everyone wants a piece of Syria, what are the implications of this upheaval?

Middle East expert and Beirut-based journalist, Kim Ghattas, joins the show.

And later, "GZERO" heads to Lebanon where the country's cultural landmarks are under threat from Israeli attacks.

But first, a word from the folks who help us keep the lights on.

- [Narrator] Funding for "GZERO World" is provided by our lead sponsor, Prologis.

- [Narrator] Every day, all over the world, Prologis helps businesses of all sizes lower their carbon footprint and scale their supply chains with a portfolio of logistics and real estate and an end-to-end solutions platform addressing the critical initiatives of global logistics today.

Learn more at prologis.com.

- [Narrator] And by: Cox Enterprises is proud to support GZERO.

Cox is working to create an impact in areas like sustainable agriculture, clean tech, healthcare, and more.

Cox, a family of businesses.

Additional funding provided by Jerre and Mary Joy Stead, Carnegie Corporation of New York, and.

(upbeat music) (air whooshes) (contemplative music) - The Assad family no longer rules Syria.

For five decades, such a thought was inconceivable.

In fact, when Syrians did conceive it in 2011, the ensuing crackdown sparked a 14-year-long civil war that killed more than 500,000 Syrians, including 200,000 civilians.

It created nearly 6 million Syrian refugees.

So why did things change this time?

Let's go back to the Arab Spring.

(crowd speaking in foreign language) - In 2011, pro-democracy protesters flooded the streets of Syria calling for the ouster of its dictator, President Bashar al-Assad.

After Assad's brutal crackdown, various armed opposition groups cropped up with the backing of Turkey, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and the United States.

Assad then turned to his own backers, Russia and Iran, for critical military support.

On the ground, Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps joined Iran-backed proxy group Hezbollah to help push back advancing opposition forces.

From the air, Russian warplanes did the rest.

By late 2018, with stronghold after stronghold falling, rebel groups retreated into the northwestern Idlib region.

By that point, Western backers like the US and Turkey found that their common enemy had shifted from Assad to ISIS, which was threatening to turn swaths of Syria and Iraq into a terrorist caliphate.

This is getting complicated.

So suffice to say that ISIS lost, Assad consolidated his grip on most, the key word being most, of Syria.

And in 2020, Turkey and Russia brokered a ceasefire in opposition-controlled Idlib.

That brings us to two weeks ago and to HTS.

HTS stands for Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, a former al-Qaeda affiliate in Syria that has since cut ties with the famous terrorist group.

Though it's still labeled a "terrorist" organization by the West, HTS is now the de facto governing body over Syria.

Meanwhile, things haven't been going so well for Assad's trusty backers.

Russia has become bogged down in a costly war with Ukraine, some three years in now.

Iran is stretched thin with a weak economy and facing the risk of more direct attacks by Israel.

And Iran's top proxy force in the region, Hezbollah, is a shell of its former self and its military capabilities after a year-long war with Israel in Lebanon.

And because nothing in life happens in a vacuum, the regime change in Syria will reverberate well beyond its borders.

Here to help me untangle all of that, geopolitically, is Middle East expert and Beirut-based journalist, Kim Ghattas.

(air whooshes) Kim Ghattas, welcome back to "GZERO World."

- Great to be with you, Ian.

Thanks for having me.

- 50 years we had an Assad dictatorship, and now two weeks after HTS begins rebel opposition, we don't.

How surprised were you by the implosion?

- I was surprised by how quickly it all ended.

First of all, of course, we were surprised by the sudden takeover of Aleppo last week, but there was a confluence of events and we can go into those details.

There was a confluence of events in the region which led to a decision by HTS, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, to seize this moment of weakness of various supporters of Bashar al-Assad in the region and try to push for the takeover of Aleppo.

What I did not expect after that is the rapid progress that they made and the fact that there was no last stand by the regime in Damascus.

But thank God there wasn't because I think that would have been very bloody.

- So when you talk about the weakness of various actors, really we're talking about three, right?

I mean, it's the Iranians who've been very distracted by other wars and stretched.

It's the Russians who have been very distracted by other wars and stretched.

But it's also Bashar al-Assad's own forces.

So maybe we start with the latter.

Why, in 2024, were his forces so incapable and/or unwilling to fight?

- Hmm.

It's a very good question, Ian.

I think the Syrian Army was really depleted by a 13-year-long war trying to repress this uprising, civilian, but also armed uprising that started in 2011.

The country is exhausted, the economy is wrecked.

The corruption of the Assad regime means that, or meant that the aftermath of the battle to recapture Aleppo or to hang on to Damascus did not bring an improvement to people's lives, who stood by the regime, did not bring an improvement to the lives of these soldiers.

And so I think there was a decrepitude that installed itself within the regime's ranks and just a general exhaustion.

Life was not getting better for those who stood by the regime.

And so I think there was a feeling that it was time to abandon him.

- Now, over the course of this most recent uprising, successful overthrow, in the initial days, we did see some willingness of the Russians to provide military support.

We also saw the Iranians saying that they were going to send proxy forces over from Iraq, for example.

And then they cut, and they cut and ran very quickly.

Were these the same calculations that were being made by the Russians and the Iranians in real time, or were they different?

- You know, there are some who claim that the Iranians and the Russians just didn't feel like it was worth fighting for Bashar al-Assad anymore.

I disagree with that.

I think that they would have fought if they had the capability.

This is a key ally of both Iran, the Islamic Republic of Iran, and of the Russians since the Soviet time, right?

So you don't give up so easily on the crown jewel of your influence in the Mediterranean, for the Iranians and for the Russians.

But as we've been saying, this comes at a time when Russia is occupied with the war in Ukraine, and has had to shift some of its resources there from Syria to Ukraine, and is not able to assist Bashar al-Assad the way it did in 2015.

And when Aleppo fell, you know, Aleppo was a huge battle back when it fell first to the rebels, and then the regime retook it.

It just demands a huge amount of military hardware, and planning, and battle, and blood.

So I just don't think the Russians were able to get together and organize as quickly anymore.

And then on the Iranian side, again, I don't think they were ready to give up on Bashar al-Assad and said, "Okay, sure, yeah, we'll walk away."

They're spinning it now as though they thought that it was the best thing for the Syrian people, that no more blood should be shed and that Bashar al-Assad should withdraw and accede to the will of the people.

Very magnanimous of them to say that when that's not how they rule in their own country.

But I think it's a reflection of Iran's current vulnerability.

The fact that it has stretched itself too thin over the last decade or so from Yemen, to Iraq, to Lebanon, to Syria.

That its investments in this "Axis of Resistance," as they like to call it, are crumbling.

But they would have preferred, I'm sure, to keep their relationship with Syria under Bashar al-Assad, which a relationship that goes back to 1979 and the foundation of the Islamic Republic and the rule of Hafez al-Assad.

So the Iranians and the Russians have lost a key element of their Middle East strategy.

That's not to say they won't find a way to come back, but right now it's not looking good for both of them.

- Another major player on the other side of this conflict is Turkey.

And, I mean, HTS had been talking to the Turks and trying to get them to support, proactively support, these strikes for months.

And the Turkish government said, "No."

There was a lot of skittishness on the part of Erdogan.

So how do you think the Turks misplayed this?

- Hmm, I think they were too slow.

I think events, you know, outpaced everyone, and I think that that means that we should give credit to the Syrian people for having made that happen.

They have agency.

They've been through 13 years of a terrible civil war and 54 years of a terrible, murderous dictatorship.

- You've talked about the joy that the Syrians are feeling, and I think we can all say it's a great thing that Assad is gone, but of course, you know, everyone has trepidation.

How do you think the Syrian people are responding to this new government, right now?

- I was listening to a young Syrian woman being interviewed on television, in English, broadcasting to the world.

You know, a lovely young lady from Damascus.

No veil, lots of makeup, nice clothes, with, you know, armed men behind her chanting different things.

And some were rebels, and some were civilians from Damascus.

And she was asked that question.

Are you afraid of chaos, or are you afraid of, you know, Islamist rule?

And I just loved her answer, and I just love the Syrian people, and their bravery, and their courage, and their determination, and their wit.

She said, "We'll take it.

We'll take the rebels.

We'll take this Islamic nonsense."

She used a different word, but I'll spare your viewers.

"We'll take it because what can be worse than what this regime has done to us over the last 50 years?"

And I think we should listen to the Syrian people because they've seen the horrors, they've lived through the horrors.

And beyond that, let's say that, you know, we don't care about the Syrian people and the Lebanese people.

We care only about Western interests.

Let's assume that.

How exactly did Bashar al-Assad serve Western interests?

The stability of this dictatorship was just, you know, an illusion.

Bashar al-Assad is the man who encouraged jihadis from around the world to travel through Syria, into Iraq, to make life difficult for American troops there after the US invasion of 2003, and that led to the insurgency.

Bashar al-Assad is the man whose murderous regime and violent clampdown on his people who were demanding freedom and reforms caused a massive exodus of millions of Syrians leaving the country after 2014, heading to Europe.

So America's interests and Europe's interests are clearly not served by a man like Bashar al-Assad.

Now, yes, there are going to be a lot of problems down the road for Syria, but I think we need to listen to Syrians and we need to give them the space.

We need to trust that they can come together and support this transition, and make sure that regional players, the Turks, the Emiratis, the Saudis, the Israelis, and we should talk about what the Israelis are doing at the moment in Syria, that they're not all going to fight out their power games on Syrian territory again.

I know that sounds like a, you know, naive request for a geopolitical analyst, but it is not impossible to consider that countries around Syria should give these people some space, and look towards a better future, and enable them to look towards a better future by supporting this transition.

- You mentioned Israel.

There's also the United States.

I mean, you know, in the aftermath of Assad falling, the Americans engaged in a number of bombing sorties against assets that they say were under the control of ISIS affiliates.

The Israelis have also engaged in striking a lot of military capabilities that Assad had control over.

They've also expanded, they say temporarily, border controls around the occupied Golan Heights.

So I mean, definitely a power vacuum brings opportunity for other actors outside of Syria to take care of things that they'd like to take care of in their own national interest.

Tell me how you respond to both of those and others.

- When it comes to Israel, for the longest time, the assumption in Israel was, "better the devil we know than the devil we don't."

And the Assad regime served Israel's interests pretty well.

There was barely a shot fired across that border on the Golan Heights since 1973.

Except that over the last decade, Bashar al-Assad also enabled the rise of Iranian power inside Syria, and the rise of Hezbollah as a massive fighting force.

And that was on Israel's eastern flank.

And so my information, going back to October, speaking to European diplomats, was that Israel had come to the conclusion that Assad was no longer useful to them.

And that started, if I want to go back to your first question, hindsight is 20/20, but that sort of alerted me to the fact that Assad, you know, was in an even more precarious position than we thought.

Now Israel is bombing all these targets preemptively, to try to destroy the arsenal of the Syrian Army, or what was left of it, because it doesn't want these weapons, especially fighter jets and, you know, anti-artillery, anti-aircraft missiles to land in the hands of the rebels.

I mean, the Syrian Army barely had anything that was of any use to fight Israel at this point, but, you know, we can take the argument that better to be safe than sorry in the case of Israel.

But this is not a good way to support also the Syrian people as they reassert, you know, their grip over their own country and reclaim their own country.

And although we've heard from some of them saying, you know, "Our fight is not with Israel, we just wanted to remove Bashar al-Assad."

But if you're being bombed by Israel every day, you may change your mind.

- Now the Americans have elected a new president, will be coming into power within weeks.

And his public response to Assad falling is this is not the fight of the Americans.

Stay clear of it.

- There's a difference between supporting a country and having a military intervention.

So I think, yes, military intervention, you know, really should be off the table in any sort of way.

There's no need for it.

The Syrians are going to do this, hopefully, by themselves.

We've heard already from the Biden administration, and President Biden is still president until January the 20th.

We've heard from his administration and Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, specifically, saying that the US would be willing to recognize the new government of Syria, the transitional government of Syria, if they abided by certain rules, including respect of freedoms and minorities.

And I think that's a good step.

You know, HTS is a designated terrorist group.

They have come a long way.

You know, they're doing their best to at least advertise a new image.

They are saying all the right things, and they are what's available at the moment.

And I think we should also trust the Syrians to push back against HTS if it thinks it can impose Islamic rule on Damascus.

That's not going to go down well.

As it relates to President-elect Trump when he comes in power, yes, absolutely, he said, "This is not our fight."

Although he said that before Assad fell, and I think that what he meant was the US shouldn't do anything to sway this either way, and that, you know, this was something that Syrians should do on themselves, and they have.

And I think that he has a lot of people in his circle who are very interested in supporting Syria's transition going forward.

So it's not our fight, yes, but it is of national security interest to the United States to make sure this transition goes forward as smoothly as possible, and no one comes in as a spoiler.

- Kim Ghattas, thanks so much.

- Thanks for having me.

(air whooshing) (resonating synth music) - Now from Syria to Lebanon, where despite a fragile ceasefire, Israel's offensive has endangered not just lives, but cultural heritage.

"GZERO" brings us this on-the-ground report from eastern Lebanon.

(tense music) - My house is very close to the place.

I felt, in that moment, that earthquake happened in Baalbek.

- When the airstrike hit?

- Yes.

Fahmi Sharif has worked as a tour guide in Baalbek for almost 20 years.

- Let's continue there, please.

- This city in eastern Lebanon is home to one of the world's most important archeological sites.

So I'm currently in the city of Baalbek in the Beqaa Valley, and I'm standing next to the city's ancient Roman ruins.

Now, these are some of the best preserved Roman ruins anywhere in the world.

They include the temples of Bacchus and Jupiter.

The Beqaa Valley is Lebanon's agricultural heartland, but it's also dominated by Hezbollah, which has used the region as a smuggling route to Syria.

So when Israel began its Lebanon offensive, Baalbek became a critical target.

(bomb explodes) And on November 6th, an Israeli airstrike hit just meters away from where I'm standing, right across the street and in this parking lot area.

Israel's offensive in Lebanon has displaced 1.2 million people and killed almost 4,000, according to the UN and Lebanese Health Ministry.

But striking next to the Roman ruins has outraged people across Lebanese society, who see the site as a source of national pride and unity in a country torn apart by sectarian divisions.

(Ali speaking in foreign language) (Ali continues speaking in foreign language) - My name is Joanne Farchakh Bajjaly.

I'm a Lebanese specialist in heritage in times of conflict and emergencies.

In this war, we had two major World Heritage Sites that were threatened.

One is Baalbek, and the other one is Tyre.

And this destruction means the destruction of the social fabric and the history of the place.

- [Fin] In November, UNESCO placed 34 cultural sites in Lebanon under enhanced protection, meaning any attack on them could be prosecuted under international law.

- You can see the gray color on the columns.

It's very clear.

And you see the gate destroyed.

This here, it make the tears go down from your eyes when you look and you see this bomb, how close, around 20 meters only, from the ruins.

- [Fin] Some Baalbek residents tried to shelter in the ruins during the airstrikes, believing Israel might value the UNESCO site more than their own lives.

(Ali speaking in foreign language) - [Fin] In a statement, the IDF said it only strikes out of military necessity and tries to minimize damage to civilian areas, accusing Hezbollah of purposely hiding military assets in cultural heritage sites.

On November 26th, Israel and Hezbollah agreed to a ceasefire.

So far, it's tentatively holding, allowing time for experts to assess the ruins for damage.

- I can't describe what's happened.

It's unbelievable, man.

The noise, the vibration, the pressure.

From one year, we don't have any tourists here, and I am- - [Fin] So sad.

- I am looking how to feed my family.

- [Fin] For now, Baalbek's ancient temples are still standing, but covered in debris.

The parking lot, where tourists once entered, is now completely destroyed.

- Baalbek has received all types of legal protection that the world can give to any archeological site.

And if this is not enough to protect it, and the history of humanity is not enough to protect the site, then I don't know what is.

- The owner of these sites, it's not Lebanon.

The owner of these sites, it is for all humanity all over the world.

(hopeful music) (resonating synth music) - That's our show this week.

Come back next week.

And if you like what you've seen or even if you didn't, but you think, "Hey, I'd like to topple my own authoritarian ruler," check us out at gzeromedia.com.

(upbeat music) (upbeat music continues) (upbeat music continues) (upbeat music) - [Narrator] Funding for "GZERO World" is provided by our lead sponsor, Prologis.

- [Narrator] Every day, all over the world, Prologis helps businesses of all sizes lower their carbon footprint and scale their supply chains with a portfolio of logistics and real estate and an end-to-end solutions platform addressing the critical initiatives of global logistics today.

Learn more at prologis.com - [Narrator] And by: Cox Enterprises is proud to support "GZERO."

Cox is working to create an impact in areas like sustainable agriculture, clean tech, healthcare, and more.

Cox, a family of businesses.

Additional funding provided by Jerre and Mary Joy Stead, Carnegie Corporation of New York, and.

(upbeat music) (upbeat music)