A significant divergence in Western foreign policy is becoming increasingly apparent as nations, including the United States, extend a welcoming hand to Syria's new president, Ahmed al-Sharaa, while maintaining a stance of deep isolation towards the Taliban-led government in Afghanistan. This contrast is vividly illustrated by Sharaa's recent high-profile diplomatic engagements, including meetings with French President Emmanuel Macron and praise from U.S. President Donald Trump, juxtaposed with Afghanistan's inclusion in an updated U.S. travel ban from which Syria has now been notably spared.
This dramatic shift in diplomatic fortunes is explored in a recent analysis by Adam Weinstein, Deputy Director of the Middle East Program at the Quincy Institute, titled "Why the West Embraced Syria and Ditched Afghanistan: From Diplomatic Visits to Travel Bans, Damascus is Getting a pass." Weinstein argues that "recognition hinges less on legal norms or territorial control than on history, optics, strategic choices, and how much you matter to the West." Indeed, President Trump has pledged to lift all sanctions on Syria and normalize relations following a meeting in Saudi Arabia, a stark turnaround for a leader once associated with an al Qaeda offshoot.
The reasons behind this disparity are multifaceted. Unlike in Afghanistan, where the U.S. and its allies suffered significant losses over two decades, the West had no such investment in the Assad regime that Sharaa's Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) overthrew; in fact, Assad was heavily sanctioned. Furthermore, Sharaa, formerly known as Abu Mohammed al-Jolani, has cultivated a remarkable image transformation, shifting from a jihadi figure with a U.S. bounty to a politician in suits and ties. He has also made different policy choices, publicly meeting with women's delegations. At the same time, secular life in Damascus shows signs of continuity, contrasting sharply with the Taliban's restrictions on women and girls in Afghanistan.
The enduring psychological trauma of 9/11 continues to shadow perceptions of the Taliban, a burden Sharaa and HTS do not carry to the same extent in Western minds. Moreover, the reactions of the diaspora have differed significantly. While many Syrians celebrated Assad's fall and have shown openness to engaging the new government, the Afghan diaspora has advocated mainly for isolating the Taliban.
Ultimately, Weinstein posits, the core reason for the differing approaches is perceived strategic importance: "In the West's view, Syria matters, and Afghanistan does not." Syria's location at the crossroads of the Middle East, bordering Turkey and Israel, and its potential to shift from Iranian influence gives it a geopolitical weight that post-withdrawal Afghanistan currently lacks in Western calculations. The U.S. administration, signaling a pragmatic turn, appears ready to engage with Syria as it is, with Thomas Barrack's dual appointment as ambassador to Turkey and special envoy to Syria underscoring this new direction.
While early engagement with Damascus aims to foster moderation and stability, the continued isolation of the Taliban offers a contrasting case study. The international community now watches to see if this pragmatic approach toward Syria will yield more positive outcomes than the arm's-length strategy applied to Afghanistan.
Photo: Wikipedia Commons