Syria (International Christian Concern) — News broke early Thursday that several of the seniormost U.S. diplomatic officials working on Syria were abruptly removed from their posts in recent days.  

Speaking to Reuters, one diplomat said the ouster was partially due to disagreements between the diplomats and Tom Barrack, the U.S. ambassador to Türkiye (Turkey) and Special Envoy for Syria. Another diplomatic source, however, told Reuters the removals were not based on policy differences. 

One key policy question in Syria is how ethnoreligious minority communities should be integrated into the new government being formed by Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa, an Islamist militant who deposed longtime despot Bashar al-Assad in December 2024. 

Barrack publicly favors complete integration, under which these minority communities — currently semiautonomous — would be fully administered by the Sharaa government in Damascus. He further argues that regional security forces should be integrated into the national security forces, a move that would amount to a significant shift in power within the country. 

In contrast, Middle East Eye reports that the dismissed senior diplomats serving at the Syria Regional Platform (SRP) — which has overseen U.S. diplomatic efforts on Syria since the closure of the U.S. embassy in Damascus in 2012 — were supporters of the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) and opposed Barrack’s efforts to integrate the SDF into the Syrian Army. 

“These diplomats were holdovers from former U.S. national security coordinator for the Middle East Brett McGurk,” one source told Middle East Eye. “They often found themselves at odds with Barrack over the Syrian Democratic Forces.” 

According to Middle East Eye, McGurk was a longstanding supporter of the SDF, and the dismissed diplomats had begun clashing with Barrack in recent months over the best path forward for the group. 

Ongoing Religious Freedom Concerns 

Despite early efforts to reassure minority communities, several high-profile incidents in recent months have shaken observers and suggested that the preservation of minorities may not be a high priority in the Sharaa administration. 

Forces aligned with Sharaa’s new government recently killed more than 1,000 members of the minority Alawite community, including hundreds of civilians and disarmed Alawite fighters, after members of the Alawite community launched a surprise attack on security forces. 

In another series of attacks, government forces and militias affiliated with the government carried out widespread massacres in the southern town of Suwayda, killing dozens of Druze. 

In June, a suicide bomber attacked a Christian church, killing at least 25 and wounding more than 60 others. 

Despite a peace agreement between Sharaa’s government and a semi-autonomous Kurdish region in the north, Türkiye — Sharaa’s strongest foreign backer — has continued to bomb Kurdish-held areas. Türkiye has long opposed the semi-autonomous Kurdish region, where the acting government has made efforts to protect religious minorities from persecution despite decades of pressure from Türkiye to the north, militias to the west, and the Syrian national government to the south. 

The new government announced an interim constitution in March that presented mixed prospects for human rights in the country. Analysis of the constitutional declaration suggests that earlier rhetoric about respecting the rights of women and religious minorities has remained an important pillar of the new government. In addition to provisions protecting religious freedom, other articles protect a variety of human rights, including the right of women to obtain an education and work. 

Still, the document concentrates power in the presidency and is explicit in its deference to Islamic law. 

“The religion of the President of the Republic is Islam,” Article III declares, and “Islamic jurisprudence is the principal source of legislation.” This language is slightly starker than Syria’s previous constitution, which cited Islamic law as simply one source among others. 

Pressure on SDF to Integrate 

The SDF, which has long received U.S. backing, is under particular pressure to integrate, according to recent reports and public comments by Barrack in both Syria and Türkiye. The SDF and the semiautonomous Kurdish government in northeast Syria have operated with significant independence for many years, carving out an area of relative freedom and safety despite constant threats from Türkiye, terrorist groups, and Damascus. 

While the SDF signed a deal in March to integrate with Syrian forces, the accord did not specify how the merger would be implemented. Analysts at the time suggested it may have been little more than a hedge against the possibility of a sudden U.S. withdrawal. 

Integration with government forces was originally scheduled to take place by the end of the year, but the process has seemingly stalled since July. High-level negotiations collapsed, and Kurdish authorities indicated an unwillingness to adhere to decisions made by the Sharaa government, citing a lack of diversity in the transitional government. 

For his part, Sharaa has consistently rejected SDF demands for a decentralized form of government, insisting that all of Syria must operate under the control of Damascus. In this stance, Sharaa has the backing of the U.S. through Barrack and, critically, of regional powerhouse Türkiye. Türkiye views the SDF as an extension of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, which has long been designated a terrorist organization by both the U.S. and Türkiye. 

Türkiye is actively working to strengthen the Sharaa government, signing a defense agreement in August, launching training programs for the Syrian Army, and threatening military action against the SDF. Influential Turkish officials have warned of strikes if the SDF does not fully integrate, while the Turkish foreign minister traveled to Damascus urging the government to back out of talks with the SDF, citing concerns that France — helping to mediate the talks — may have pro-Kurdish leanings. 

Calls for Decentralization 

Among leaders in the international religious freedom community, the idea of full integration is met with deep skepticism. Civil society leaders and minority communities instead advocate for a federalized system in which administrative authority and military powers are shared between Damascus and local authorities. Such a structure allows minority communities to protect themselves against attacks — including from forces tied to the central government itself. 

At a recent event on Capitol Hill titled Fortifying Religious Freedom in Syria, civil society groups gathered in support of decentralization. Speakers included Nadine Maenza, Ambassador Sam Brownback, Representative Frank Wolf, and representatives of the Druze, Alawite, Kurdish, and Christian communities. 

A central theme of the event was the successful model established in the semiautonomous Kurdish region in the northeast. Panelists and keynote speakers urged U.S. policymakers and the Syrian government to safeguard this model and extend it to other minority communities. 

“Their inclusion in the Syrian Government would strengthen all of Syria,” event organizer Nadine Maenza said afterward, referring to the Kurdish region in the northeast. “A united Syria, with decentralization or federalism, gives this beautiful country its best chance at peace and stability.” 

In an op-ed published Thursday in The Hill, Ambassador Brownback likewise urged the international community to support decentralization in Syria. “The transitional government’s response has been woefully inadequate,” he wrote. “Despite promises of protection, investigations have been superficial, many if not most perpetrators remain free, and in some cases government forces have themselves been implicated.” 

Explaining his vision for a federal Syria, Brownback called for a system in which “Alawite, Christian, Druze, Kurdish, and Sunni-majority regions could maintain their own accountable security forces, while a central government would oversee foreign policy, the economy, and national defense.” 

“This would not be easy,” he admitted, “but it could help prevent sectarian cleansing, deter extremist recruitment, and restore trust that no group will be abandoned to its enemies.” 

To read more news stories, visit the ICC Newsroom. For interviews, please email press@persecution.org. To support ICC’s work around the world, please give to our Where Most Needed Fund.