Syria After Assad – Analysis with Realism and Game Theory

Post-Assad Syria: A Realist and Game Theory Analysis of a Shifting Geopolitical Landscape

The recent overthrow of Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria marks a seismic shift in the Middle East’s geopolitical dynamics. After more than a decade of civil war, the fall of Assad has sent ripples through the strategic calculations of key international and regional actors. In this analysis, we use Realism and Game Theory to unpack the motivations, actions, and potential outcomes shaping the post-Assad era, while applying an international relations framework that considers multiple levels of analysis.

Key Actors in the Post-Assad Scenario

• Individuals:
  • Bashar al-Assad (deposed president)
  • Benjamin Netanyahu (Israeli Prime Minister)
  • Vladimir Putin (Russian President)
  • Recep Tayyip Erdoğan (Turkish President)
• State Level:
  • Syria (now controlled by opposition forces)
  • Israel
  • Turkey
  • Russia
  • Iran
  • The United States
• Regional Level:
  • The broader Middle East, including Lebanon and the Gulf States, affected by proxy conflicts and shifting alliances.
• International Level:
  • The involvement of global powers like Russia and the U.S., whose strategic interests intersect in Syria.

Realism and Strategic Interests In Syria

From a Realist perspective, the actions of key players in Syria are driven by the pursuit of power, national security, and regional dominance. In an anarchic international system where no central authority exists, each state’s primary goal is to secure its position and influence.

For Russia, Syria represented a strategic ally and a foothold in the Mediterranean through its naval and air bases in Tartus and Latakia. By supporting Assad for years, Russia secured its military presence in the region, counterbalancing NATO’s influence. However, Russia’s preoccupation with the war in Ukraine likely weakened its commitment in Syria, contributing to Assad’s downfall. Despite this, Russia’s granting of asylum to Assad shows its continued investment in maintaining some level of influence in Syria.

Iran, another staunch ally of the Assad regime, viewed Syria as a critical part of its “Shia Crescent” strategy, connecting Tehran to Hezbollah in Lebanon. Iran’s support included financing, training, and deploying fighters. The collapse of Assad’s regime undermines Iran’s regional ambitions and weakens its leverage over Israel and Saudi Arabia. As a result, Iran may need to rethink its regional strategy, either doubling down on proxy forces or seeking new alliances.

For Israel, the fall of Assad presents both risks and opportunities. While Assad’s regime was a consistent adversary, Israel’s primary concern has always been the presence of Iranian proxies, such as Hezbollah, within Syrian territory. Israel’s recent strikes on Syria’s naval fleet and military infrastructure demonstrate a strategic move to neutralize threats before they can solidify in the power vacuum left by Assad. This is a classic Realist maneuver: preemptive action to safeguard national security.

Turkey has played a dual role throughout the Syrian conflict, supporting opposition forces while also pursuing its own interests against Kurdish militias. The overthrow of Assad provides Turkey with an opportunity to push for a stronger buffer zone along its border, reducing the influence of Kurdish groups. However, Turkey must now navigate a complex relationship with the new rebel leadership, ensuring that its interests are protected without overextending its military involvement.

Finally, the United States remains cautiously engaged. Having limited its involvement to combating ISIS, the U.S. now faces the challenge of preventing extremist groups from exploiting the chaos. President-elect Donald Trump’s previous reluctance to engage in Syria reflects a Realist skepticism about entanglements in foreign conflicts. However, the U.S. must balance this reluctance with its strategic interests in containing both Russian and Iranian influence.

Game Theory: Strategic Calculations and Interdependence

The fall of Assad has reset the strategic board, forcing each actor to reconsider their moves in a complex, interdependent environment. Game Theory helps explain the interactions and decision-making processes of these players, where each action depends on the anticipated responses of others.

Russia and Iran, once partners in propping up Assad, now face a dilemma. Should they cooperate to maintain some influence in Syria, or will their competing interests lead to defection and a scramble for control? This scenario resembles a Prisoner’s Dilemma, where mutual cooperation would benefit both, but mistrust could lead to suboptimal outcomes for each.

Israel’s preemptive strikes can be viewed through the lens of a Zero-Sum Game. For Israel, any gains by Iran or extremist groups in Syria are perceived as direct threats. Consequently, Israel’s strategy is to weaken all potential adversaries before they can consolidate power.

Turkey must decide how to balance its support for opposition forces with its campaign against Kurdish militias. This creates a classic Nash Equilibrium scenario, where Turkey’s best strategy is to maintain its current position without overcommitting, as any drastic change could destabilize its security situation.

The United States, meanwhile, faces a Sequential Game, where its decisions must anticipate future moves by Russia, Iran, and extremist groups. Limited engagement now may lead to greater instability later, forcing the U.S. to weigh the long-term consequences of its actions.

Regional Security Complex Dynamics

The fall of Assad significantly impacts the Middle East Security Complex, a region where security dynamics are deeply interconnected. The Syrian conflict has long been a proxy battlefield for larger regional and international rivalries. With Assad gone, new fault lines are emerging.

Iran may seek to consolidate its influence through proxies, while Israel will intensify efforts to prevent this. Turkey’s role as a regional power broker will expand, but it must balance its ambitions with the threat of Kurdish separatism. The United States and Russia will continue their strategic dance, each attempting to limit the other’s influence.

The fluidity of alliances and enmities in this complex reflects the Realist notion that power and security are constantly in flux. The post-Assad era will likely see temporary alignments that shift based on immediate interests, rather than lasting partnerships.

Conclusion: Realism and Game Theory in Action

So the overthrow of Bashar al-Assad marks a pivotal moment in Syria’s history, but the aftermath is far from settled. Through the combined lenses of Realism and Game Theory, we see a geopolitical chessboard where each actor’s moves are driven by power, survival, and strategic calculation. As regional and international players reposition themselves, the future of Syria—and the broader Middle East—will be shaped by a series of high-stakes decisions, mistrust, and calculated risks. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for anticipating the next chapter in this ever-evolving conflict.

References

1. Ozturk, F. (2024, 10 diciembre). Turkey’s 3m Syrian refugees face big decision on going home or staying. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvg6eeg87lqo
2. Moench, M. (2024, 10 diciembre). Syria: Which countries have been involved in the war and why?https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cd75e8gdy9jo
3. Howard, J. (2024, 10 diciembre). Syria: Israel confirms attack on naval fleet in Latakia. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cqx808q7lrno
4. ChatGPT. (n.d.). OpenAI. https://chat.openai.com/# ‎