Syrians marked the anniversary of the regime’s fall not with a clear sense of having reached a common destination, but with a dispute over horizons. More than a decade of revolt, war, foreign intervention and institutional collapse has not produced a shared language for politics so much as a clash of grand narratives about what Syria is and where it must go. In that sense, Syrian politics today looks like a frontline of totalising projects, competing to own the future in the name of the nation, the revolution, or the country.

Grand narratives after the fall

Jean-François Lyotard notably defined postmodernity as incredulity towards metanarratives, driven by a loss of trust in large, all-encompassing narratives promising progress and emancipation, or defining a nation and its subjects (Lyotard 1994). The term signified the systematic interrogation and suspicion of grand narratives after the Second World War in Europe, where competing metanarratives defined modern politics and led to the war. Although metanarratives have not lost their appeal to the masses, postmodern criticism has opened horizons for new political opportunities in Europe and, more generally, in the Western world. In Syria, however, since the fall of the regime, politics has been moving in the opposite direction despite a similar tragedy. In the vacuum left by Ba’athist rule, actors have rushed to establish new master frames(McGowan 2018), which promise a brighter future and a final solution for all.

The anniversary celebrations showcased various and competitive horizons for the country. In Damascus and other cities under the transitional administration, official rallies, mosque sermons, and media coverage blended a language of Islamic moral renewal and Arab nationalism with discussions of institutional democratisation, portraying the fall of Assad as the start of a five-year journey towards a just, representative state that ‘befits the sacrifices’ of the people. The crowds, flags, and carefully curated chants were not just catharsis; they were a way to show that their synthesis of Islam, nation and ballot box now anchors Syrian political legitimacy.

In the northeast, where the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (AANES) has its own institutions and history of struggle, smaller, more controlled events and official statements frame the anniversary as another milestone in a longer fight for a ‘unified, democratic and decentralised Syria’ that recognises all its peoples and honours the battles against ISIS. Even when the administration restricted large public gatherings in the name of security, the leadership used speeches and written messages to emphasise that any true liberation must include radical democracy, gender equality, and recognition of Kurdish and other minority rights.

For the Druze in Suwayda, the regime’s collapse removed long-standing repression, yet it also opened the gates to new security risks from the transitional government, especially after the alarming attacks on the region in July 2025, when the central government sought to control the region by force. Therefore, the commemorations emphasised community protection and local autonomy, framing ‘liberation’ not as a finished story with the fall of the regime but as a new phase for the struggle to achieve security and recognition for autonomy within any future Syria.

In the Alawite-populated coastal region, the anniversary was more ambivalent. Although people quietly welcomed the end of a war that had consumed their community, they also saw the date as the moment their own world became more precarious. Reports of deadly clashes in March 2025 between former regime loyalists and forces of the transitional government, which later evolved into the securitisation of the Alawite community, left many Alawites fearful of marginalisation. Therefore, local people tended to emphasise calls for coexistence, guarantees of minority rights, and protection........

© E-International