Since the fall of the Syrian regime on December 8th, the term federalism has become a central topic of discussion among Syrians, both inside and outside the country. The former regime, in addition to its repression and authoritarianism, embodied the worst aspects of centralized governance. Its collapse has created an opportunity for Syrians to freely and rationally consider their future—especially given that Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham, an organization designated as a terrorist group by the United Nations and multiple countries, now controls the Syrian capital.
The growing discourse around federalism is further fueled by the new ruling authority’s failures. It has attempted to manipulate both the international community and local populations, while repeatedly failing to demonstrate goodwill toward Syria’s diverse social groups.
The de facto leadership has refused to establish a transitional government that ensures broad participation, instead restricting power to figures affiliated with Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham. This government includes individuals with a history of violent extremism, such as Justice Minister Shadi Al-Waisi, accused of carrying out extrajudicial executions while serving as a religious judge for Jabhat al-Nusra in Aleppo.
Moreover, this temporary administration has been unable to organize a meaningful national dialogue. Instead, it staged a superficial conference attended by figures who do not truly represent their communities. The Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), which controls a third of the country, were not invited. Druze leadership, represented by Sheikh Hikmat al-Hijri, criticized the dialogue’s organization and the performance of its preparatory committee. Meanwhile, Christian patriarchates refrained from commenting on the event. As a result, the event was widely viewed as a farce that disregarded and excluded nearly two-thirds of the Syrian population.
These political shortcomings have coincided with worsening security conditions, economic collapse, and a rise in violence that the new Damascus authorities dismiss as mere “individual mistakes.” As a result, federalism has gained traction as a political and economic alternative to the centralized system.
Federalism, defined as a political system that opposes centralization, is not an unfamiliar concept in the Middle East. Historically, Syria has alternated between forms of federated states and centralized rule. Today, the idea of federalism is most strongly advocated by politically organized groups such as the Kurds, whereas other communities—like the Druze and Alawites—are still in the process of structuring their political visions. However, the federalist debate has been largely absent among Syrian Christians, aside from a few recent, tentative efforts.
To contribute meaningfully to this discussion, it is crucial to examine the diverse perspectives within Syria’s Christian communities, which vary by social class, ethnicity, religious denomination, and political ideology.
For example, the Syriac community is divided into several sects, the most significant being Orthodox and Catholic. Politically, Syriacs in northeastern Syria are split between two major factions:
- The Syriac Union Party, which is aligned with the Autonomous Administration and supports federalism.
- The Assyrian Democratic Organization, which opposes federalism and was previously part of the Syrian National Coalition—a bloc with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and the Qatar-Turkey alliance.
In western Syria, where the largest Christian communities are concentrated in coastal cities and Wadi al-Nasara (Valley of the Christians), attitudes toward federalism vary primarily based on geographic location, with social class playing a secondary role.
Urban Christians in cities like Aleppo and Damascus largely reject federalism. They attribute this stance to their historical urban identity and their desire to remain integrated within their broader communities. At the same time, they recognize the importance of maintaining unity with other Christian groups, as this helps prevent local Islamic authorities from singling them out.
In contrast, Christians in Sweida and southern Syria are more inclined toward federalism. This is largely due to the Druze community’s relatively successful autonomy under the previous regime, which shielded the province and southern Damascus—where many Christians also reside—from the worst consequences of the war. Today, the Druze model continues to protect Christian lifestyles from the growing influence of Islamic restrictions, which are being increasingly imposed in different parts of the country.
The coastal regions and Wadi al-Nasara, home to Syria’s largest Christian population, also lean toward federalism. For them, federalism would provide greater religious and social liberties. The civil war also left deep scars on many Christian villages here, reinforcing the desire for a political system that could prevent future conflicts.
Syrian Christians in the diaspora—who form a significant portion of the community—are also divided on the issue. Meanwhile, the church’s official stance remains ambiguous across different denominations. Church leaders are treading cautiously, reassessing their relationship with the new authorities and their role within their communities in a post-Ba’athist Syria.
Syrian Christians are now more inclined toward federalism than toward a centralized system that would bind them to an extremist, religiously rigid authority. Many Middle Eastern Christians perceive such an authority as an existential threat. In this regard, Syrian Christians share common ground with federalist movements in Lebanon, often drawing inspiration from them. However, their demographic dispersion and lack of political organization reduce their chances of effectively advocating for federalism.
At the same time, a sizable segment of the Christian population views emigration as the only viable solution. Given Syria’s deteriorating economic and security conditions—and the ongoing migration of large Christian communities to Canada and Europe—many believe that leaving the country is the best way to ensure their survival.
