As pressure mounts on Ahmed al-Sharaa’s government following massacres over the weekend, Syrian authorities announce the formation of a national investigation committee. However, the international community remains sceptical about its independence.
As pressure mounts on Ahmed al-Sharaa’s government following massacres over the weekend, Syrian authorities announce the formation of a national investigation committee. However, the international community remains sceptical about its independence.
In response to the reportedly violent repression of an uprising on the Syrian coast and in anticipation of the possible increase of Western sanctions against his country, interim President Ahmad al-Sharaa confirmed in a recent interview that sanctions already imposed on Syria are hindering his government’s ability to restore stability and security.
The interim Syrian leader added that the escalation of violence in his country is linked to attacks behind the loyalists of the Bashar al-Assad regime and a foreign state, without providing supporting evidence.
Syrian authorities have announced a committee to investigate and hold accountable those involved in the violence against Alawites and minorities in the coast.
On the formation of this body, al-Sharaa stressed that those involved will be brought to justice “even if they are close to us,” before highlighting his government’s commitment to achieving justice and not allowing the current situation to turn into “an opportunity for revenge” for past grievances.
However, the Syrian president also refused to disclose the identity of those involved in the recent killings, saying only that the security authorities are working to uncover the truth and bring those responsible to justice.
His recent comments are a far cry from his rhetoric of pursuing “remnants of the al-Assad regime” when violence broke out last Thursday.
This seismic shift begs the question of whether this a genuine commitment to the pursuit of justice, or just a ploy to stop further sanctions?
A ‘necessary battle’ or ‘sectarian massacres?’
At the end of the first week of March, Syria’s two coastal governorates of Latakia and Tartus witnessed horrific violence that resulted in over 1,000 deaths, including a large number of civilians, according to the independent UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.
Initially, Syrian authorities focused on “eliminating armed groups affiliated with the former regime.”
In an official statement, al-Sharaa asserted that the security forces were “fighting a necessary battle against al-Assad’s remnants who seek to destabilise the country.”
However, field reports published by human rights organisations and international media gave a different account, describing “sectarian cleansing massacres” and confirming “mass executions and forced displacement of Alawite civilians,” a minority ethnic group making up around 15% of Syria’s population.
Syria’s former rulers, Bashar al-Assad and his father Hafez both hail from the group, which has led to accusations of “revenge killings,” after al-Sharaa and his Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) group toppled the al-Assad regime in December 2024.
US and European pressure
The violence in early March suggests the honeymoon period for the new authorities has worn off, as Syria enters a critical phase of renewed challenges to governmental authority with the potential for unrest to boil over.
What happened along Syria’s Mediterranean coast has turned into a political and humanitarian crisis, sparking widespread international criticism, especially after reports, videos and live testimonies of dozens of massacres against Alawite civilians spread across the internet.
Some of those most openly pressuring the al-Sharaa government to take concrete steps to ensure there is no impunity for perpetrators of the violence are the EU and US.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio described the events as “a massacre that cannot be condoned,” calling for “an independent international investigation to identify those responsible for these crimes”.
Washington also warned that “any failure to achieve justice could expose the Syrian government to US sanctions”.
For its part, the European Union issued a strongly worded statement emphasising that “failure to hold the perpetrators of the massacres accountable will lead to the suspension of political and economic support to the new government.”
Germany and France — of which the latter invited al-Sharaa for an official visit when he rose to power in December — also demanded the inclusion of international observers in any investigation committee to ensure its transparency, which was echoed by UN Secretary General António Guterres.
There is evidence that this criticism — especially from Western governments weighing up sanctions — has pressured al-Sharaa and his government into launching an investigation, which observers hope will be independent and transparent.
However, this has led some to view the move as “more a response to pressure than a real commitment to accountability,” especially as al-Sharaa concurrently tries to dodge internal accusations of being subservient to international demands.
A real step or just pressure response?
When launching the initiative, al-Sharaa announced his government “will not relent in holding accountable anyone proven to be involved in crimes against civilians”.
However, this was met with skepticism by international and human rights groups with some accusing it of being a cynical measure to absorb international outrage without actually holding those involved accountable.
Although tentatively welcoming the announcement, the US State Department stressed that it will “closely monitor the implementation of the commission’s work and its findings,” while French and German authorities claimed, “the Syrian transitional government has a direct interest in exonerating certain actors”.
At the same time, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International expressed serious doubts about the commission’s ability to work freely, stating that it “lacks impartiality, as it includes figures close to the security services.”
Not everyone was so pessimistic: Moscow and Beijing welcomed the formation of the committee, arguing that “Syria is capable of investigating the events without outside interference,” further dividing international positions on the issue.
Can al-Sharaa restore trust?
As the debate over the integrity of the investigation continues, al-Sharaa faces the real threat of greater international isolation of his transitional government, at a time when the economy remains dangerously weak and when 90% of the population live below the poverty line.
Yet he also has to please a panoply of conflicting internal alliances, many of whom have roots in Western-proscribed terrorist organisations — which the EU, US and UN considered HTS to be until December — who refuse to as they see it capitulate to Western powers.
This leaves the interim leader with few options. He could proceed with the internal committee without international oversight, which may increase international scepticism and expose Syria to greater political and economic pressure externally, but satiate some internal groups.
On the other hand, al-Sharaa could agree to involve UN monitors, which would help it gain international legitimacy, but open the door to internal criticism from hardliners in the government.
There is also the option to simply do as little as possible: procrastinating on providing tangible results, hoping that international interest in the issue will wane over time. It could play in his favour, but is a risky strategy which could equally anger all sides.
In many ways, al-Sharaa’s response to recent unrest reflects a common problem for governments born out of uprising and revolutions, the tension of trying to court skeptical global powers, while concurrently trying to combat internal factionalism.
As much as the EU, the US and allies want immediate results, the current situation has thrown up more questions than answers.
Meanwhile, al-Sharaa has reached a point where he will need to prove he is serious about fulfilling his promises to gain the trust of the international community, or Syria will find itself facing increasing isolation, analysts believe.
