Is Damascus using drug crackdown as a pretext to reassert control?

Larger strategy

All of these reported incidents unfolded within a short span of time, hinting at potential coordination or a larger strategy at play. The first town to face a threat was Om Elmiathin in eastern Dara'a.

The military intelligence demanded that individuals wanted by the regime either undergo a new reconciliation process or be forcibly displaced to northern Syria.

Following negotiations between local leaders and the security agency, the 25 individuals on the wanted list agreed to comply with the regime's demands. As part of the agreement, 12 rifles were handed over at the military intelligence's request.

Similarly, security forces held a meeting with influential figures from Talbiseh town in northern Homs on 19 May, presenting them with several demands. These conditions included surrendering weapons and wanted individuals to the regime, under the threat of a potential military operation if noncompliance ensued.

While the regime claimed that the wanted individuals were involved in drug trafficking, local sources suggested that the true motive behind these demands was to exert full control over the area.

They further stated that those responsible for drug production in Homs, as well as other locations, maintain financial ties with the regime and operate under its protection.

Read more: Air strikes alone won't end Syria's drug trade

While negotiations in Homs appear to be ongoing, the military intelligence convened a meeting on 20 May with prominent figures from the Al-Naima town in Dara'a.

During this meeting, the security forces demanded the surrender of 50 automatic rifles and 15 pistols, in addition to initiating a new reconciliation process for 48 individuals from the town.

While the pretext for these demands was to improve the security situation, the security forces directly warned of an imminent assault on the town should their demands remain unmet, potentially exacerbating the already fragile stability in the area.

It is worth noting that the regime has deliberately focused its efforts on areas that were retaken from opposition groups through surrender agreements several years ago.

These agreements granted the al-Assad regime a military or security presence in these regions, but without the ability to establish complete control or pacify them.

While this compromise initially served al-Assad's interest, he has grown dissatisfied with the arrangement due to its limitations and the regime's growing power and political influence.

Obstacles remain

Nevertheless, the regime faces obstacles in carrying out raids on these towns. These regions harbour a significant number of former fighters, defectors, and individuals sought for military service. Consequently, any military operations launched against these areas are likely to face resolute resistance from local inhabitants.

Such resistance could have implications for the national security of neighbouring countries, particularly Jordan.

Therefore, rather than choosing a full-scale assault that would demand significant resources and potentially disrupt ongoing reconciliation efforts, the regime is using a combination of threats of violence, and negotiations to regain control with minimal effort and without attracting undesirable attention. 

Financial motives

In addition to expanding its authority, these aggressive actions could be driven by financial motives. According to local sources, security forces frequently demand the surrender of weapons from residents in former opposition areas, irrespective of whether such weapons actually exist in the targeted locations.

These weapons were, at least in some cases, originally sold to local residents by the security forces themselves, facilitated through intermediaries, only to be handed back to the same forces by the residents who purchased them.

This raises questions about the involvement of the security forces in an illicit cycle of arms transactions and underscores the potential exploitation of local communities for profit.

If the Syrian regime persists in its efforts to tighten its grip over former rebel-held areas, there is a significant risk of escalating clashes and unrest in these regions.

Therefore, countries engaged in negotiations with the regime must exercise vigilance and prevent it from using demands for reforms as a pretext to justify future escalations or violations.

Instead, the required steps should be clearly delineated, thoughtfully assessed, and subject to monitoring by independent guarantors to ensure their contribution to long-term stability, rather than allowing them to be manipulated.