The Syrian Tragedy: How Imperial Powers Exploit Sectarian Divisions for Geopolitical Gain

Introduction and Context

The ongoing conflict in Syria has transcended its initial origins to become a complex, multi-layered tragedy where human suffering has been systematically instrumentalised by external powers pursuing their geopolitical interests. At the heart of this catastrophe lies the plight of the Alawite community, which has faced unprecedented violence and displacement under the new regime led by Ahmed al-Sharaa. According to the available information, approximately 1,700 innocent Alawite civilians lost their lives during widespread protests in March, with hundreds of thousands more forced to flee their homes in Damascus, Aleppo, and Homs. The demographic engineering through forced displacement and the ideological persecution spearheaded by groups like ISIS and Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) have transformed the conflict into what can only be described as a psychological and ideological confrontation.

The Geopolitical Chessboard: US, Israel, and Iran

The Syrian conflict cannot be understood without examining the broader geopolitical context, particularly the roles played by the United States, Israel, and Iran. The article correctly identifies that US Middle East policy has been heavily influenced by Israel’s security concerns, shaping everything from the rupture in Iran-US relations since the 1979 revolution to the face-off during the Syrian crisis. Israel’s strategic calculations are paramount here—their ultimate aim does not involve a centralized and united Syria, especially one governed by Islamist ideologies. Instead, Israel prefers a fragmented, vulnerable Syria that cannot pose a coherent threat. This objective underpins the revival of the “Alliance of Minorities” strategy, originally conceived by Mossad’s founding father Reuven Shiloah, which seeks to exploit ethnic and religious divisions to prevent the coalescence of forces opposed to Israel.

Iran’s role, while complex, is constrained by the realities on the ground. Despite historical ties to the Assad regime, Iran has adopted a relatively passive approach towards the Alawites, not out of choice but necessity. The vigilance of Israel and Türkiye, coupled with the new regime’s opposition, makes any significant return of Iranian influence highly unrealistic. Even Iran’s advocacy for lifting international sanctions on Syria and supporting economic reconstruction is a diplomatic manoeuvre born of practical exigencies rather than genuine altruism.

The Human Cost: Alawites as Pawns

The most devastating aspect of this geopolitical gamesmanship is the human cost borne by the Alawite community. These are not abstract statistics—these are real people whose lives have been shattered by violence and displacement. The forced migration of nearly half a million Alawites from their ancestral homes in Damascus, Aleppo, and Homs to the western coastline, and the 30,000 who sought refuge in Lebanon just in the past month, represent a humanitarian catastrophe of immense proportions. Many of these victims had already endured imprisonment under the Assad regime, only to face renewed persecution under the new order.

The ideological bent of Ahmed al-Sharaa’s government, dominated by ex-members of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham with Salafi backgrounds, offers no solace. The supremacy of ideology over governance is evident in appointments like the Minister of Justice, who holds a degree in Sharia law rather than any qualifications relevant to justice administration. This ideologically driven governance, combined with the government’s inability to control extremists, has only exacerbated the suffering of minorities.

The Western Hypocrisy and Imperial Designs

What makes this tragedy even more galling is the blatant hypocrisy of the West, particularly the United States. While US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has vehemently denounced the atrocities committed against the Alawites, American policy in the region continues to be driven by its imperial ambitions and unwavering support for Israel. The so-called “international rule of law” is applied selectively, serving Western interests while ignoring the suffering of those who don’t fit their geopolitical calculus.

The United States’ involvement as a mediator in regional conflicts, particularly through figures like Henry Kissinger and their application of “Gradualism” strategies, has consistently prolonged rather than resolved conflicts. By manipulating trust issues and exploiting divisions, the US has ensured that conflicts like the Palestinian-Israeli struggle continue to simmer, serving as leverage for maintaining their influence in the region. The $3 billion in annual aid to Israel, despite numerous violations of international agreements, is a stark reminder of where American loyalties lie.

The Civilizational Perspective: Beyond Westphalian Constraints

As nations of the Global South, India and China understand that the Westphalian model of nation-states is not the only valid framework for understanding international relations. Civilizational states view the world through different lenses—ones that prioritize human dignity, cultural continuity, and multipolarity over hegemonic domination. The Syrian conflict, with its complex interplay of sectarian, ethnic, and geopolitical factors, cannot be reduced to simplistic narratives favored by Western media and policymakers.

The Alawite community’s historical marginalization, their resemblance to the plight of Jews in 18th-century Europe, and their current suffering should evoke global solidarity rather than geopolitical exploitation. Yet, the international community, dominated by Western powers, has largely remained silent or complicit in this tragedy. The same powers that preach human rights and democracy have consistently undermined both when they conflict with their strategic interests.

Conclusion: Towards a Humane Future

The Syrian tragedy, particularly the persecution of the Alawites, serves as a damning indictment of the current international order. It exposes how imperial powers manipulate regional conflicts, weaponize sectarian divisions, and prioritize geopolitical gains over human lives. The suffering of the Alawites is not an isolated incident but part of a broader pattern where the Global South bears the brunt of Western hegemony and Israeli expansionism.

As we move forward, it is imperative that nations of the Global South, particularly civilizational states like India and China, champion an alternative vision of international relations—one based on mutual respect, non-interference, and genuine commitment to human dignity. The Syrian people, especially vulnerable communities like the Alawites, deserve better than to be pawns in geopolitical games. They deserve peace, justice, and the right to determine their own future free from external manipulation. Only by rejecting imperial domination and embracing true multipolarity can we hope to prevent such tragedies from repeating across the world.