Writing for The New Arab on June 10, Robert Bociaga details how this policy is viewed as a way to reshape Syria's power dynamics and ideological alignment. The integration marks a dramatic shift from years of conflict between these militant groups and state forces, raising alarms among Syrian minorities and drawing denunciations from rival jihadist factions like the Islamic State, which has launched a propaganda campaign against Al-Sharaa.
Experts offer varied perspectives. Dr. Joshua Landis views it as a "least bad option" for dealing with fighters who cannot easily be prosecuted. However, he acknowledges the fear it instills in many Syrians, particularly the Alawite minority. Mustafa Hasan, a researcher at the International Centre for Counter-Terrorism, terms it "pragmatic normalization" but warns that it prioritizes short-term political interests over long-term stability, with no solid guarantees of genuine ideological transformation among the fighters.
International reactions are also complex. China remains watchful over the fate of Uyghur fighters, while Israel has reportedly increased airstrikes in Syria. Secular opposition figures like Randa Kassis have condemned the move as "deeply alarming," fearing it could push Syria back towards civil war rather than build a professional, patriotic army. The policy's success in achieving stability versus institutionalizing extremism remains a critical, unfolding question for Syria's future.
Photo: Wikipedia Commons