More than eight decades after the end of World War II, the Middle East continues to bear the scars of maps drawn without the consent of its peoples. The 1916 Sykes–Picot Agreement, a colonial pact between Britain and France, laid the foundations of an unjust regional order by arbitrarily dividing lands and peoples. Nations like the Kurds, Druze, Assyrians, and other ethnic and religious minorities were carved apart and spread across multiple new states. These borders reflected imperial interests—not historical realities or the will of the inhabitants.

In the decades that followed, the newly created states—with strong backing from Britain and France—launched aggressive nation-building projects. These efforts, in practice, meant forced assimilation, denial of minority identities, and often brutal suppression. In Syria, Iraq, Turkey, and Iran, authoritarian regimes attempted to forge homogenized identities—Arab, Turkish, or Persian—at the expense of the region’s rich diversity. The consequences of these exclusionary policies are still being felt today: cycles of resistance, repression, instability, and mass displacement.

Post-Assad Syria: Threat or Opportunity?

Today, with the effective collapse of Bashar al-Assad’s regime in large parts of Syria, a rare historical window has opened. What emerges in northern Syria and elsewhere is not chaos, but an attempt by long-suppressed communities—like the Kurds and the Druze—to build systems of democratic self-rule. These are not sectarian uprisings or separatist rebellions. Rather, they are rooted in long-standing demands for recognition, justice, and dignity.

Despite the regime’s propaganda—and that of some regional actors—these movements should not be dismissed as threats to national unity. On the contrary, they present an opportunity to build a new, inclusive Syria: a multi-ethnic, multi-religious republic where diverse identities coexist under a constitutional framework that guarantees equal rights. Such a Syria would be stronger, more stable, and more legitimate than any centralized regime based on Arab nationalism or religious authoritarianism.

The Role of Global Powers

This moment also carries responsibility for global actors—especially the United States, the European Union, and Israel. Their role must go beyond anti-terrorism campaigns or reconstruction aid. What Syria urgently needs is a fair political architecture—one that enshrines minority rights, recognizes the cultural and linguistic heritage of all groups, and prevents the return of authoritarianism under a different guise.

For Israel, a multi-ethnic, democratic, and secular Syria could mean a long-term buffer against Islamist extremism and Iranian expansionism. For the West, supporting pluralistic governance models would not only advance human rights but could also undermine the narratives of radicalism that exploit decades of injustice. It would set a precedent for other fractured states in the region, including Iraq, Lebanon, and even Iran.

Rethinking the “Taboo” of Partition

Opponents of federalism or minority self-governance—such as Ahmed Shariat and pro-regime figures—invoke the fear of “partition” as a threat to Syria’s sovereignty. But one must ask: Is a unity based on decades of forced Arabization, ethnic cleansing, and political exclusion truly worth preserving? Or is it time to imagine a new form of unity—based not on denial, but on justice, representation, and dignity for all?

The real threat to Syria’s future is not federalism or decentralization, but a return to the old order: the Arab Republic of Syria under Assad, which fused religious fascism with ethnic authoritarianism. Continuing the policy of forced Arabization of the Kurds, Druze, and others is not only unjust—it is unsustainable.

What has failed over the past century is not the desire of nations for self-determination—but the imposition of artificial statehood through violence and suppression. The path forward must be rooted in a bold and honest reckoning with the past. It is time to rethink the Sykes–Picot legacy—and finally center the rights of the peoples who live on these lands.