Beyond the battlefield: Can Syria’s opposition govern its conquests?

However, managing the densely populated city of Aleppo, along with other newly seized territories like Hama, poses governance challenges on an unprecedented scale. Meeting the needs of millions of residents and restoring basic services, let alone expanding them, threatens to deplete the SSG's already limited resources.

Compounding these difficulties is the international community's reluctance to engage with the SSG. Its affiliation with HTS, which is designated as a terrorist organisation by several countries, creates significant barriers to securing international funding beyond basic humanitarian aid. This leaves HTS and the SSG to shoulder the full burden of service provision. Rebuilding Aleppo alone would require massive investments in infrastructure, public-sector salaries, and economic revitalisation—costs that far exceed their current capacity. Without external assistance, sustaining governance efforts may prove impossible, potentially sparking dissatisfaction among local populations and undermining their control.

HTS appears to be aware of the gravity of these challenges and has taken steps to adapt. Reports suggest that its leader, Abu Mohammad al-Jolani (recently identified by his official name, Ahmad al-Sharaa), has expressed openness to delegating Aleppo's governance to a transitional authority, signalling a flexible approach. He has also reportedly floated the idea of dissolving HTS to integrate its military and civilian structures—a move aimed at improving its standing with international actors. However, scepticism persists among donors and global stakeholders, whose willingness to provide non-humanitarian aid will likely depend on tangible evidence of a credible shift in HTS's governance model and objectives.

Ultimately, the opposition's success in governing these territories will hinge on its ability to balance urgent needs with long-term stability. Building trust with local populations, securing sustainable resources, and protecting critical infrastructure will be essential to transforming military gains into lasting political and economic achievements.

Defending gains

Despite their rapid gains, the opposition's ability to defend newly captured areas remains uncertain. The swift pace of the advance has left little time to fortify positions or establish robust defensive lines, exposing these territories to potential counterattacks. This weakness is particularly pressing as the regime, though battered and losing ground, is far from defeated. With continued support from international backers, al-Assad's forces could regroup, mounting counteroffensives to disrupt the opposition's momentum and potentially reclaim lost ground, at least partially.

The sheer scale of the newly seized territories further complicates efforts to secure them. Monitoring and defending such a vast, fragmented front line stretches resources thin, creating exploitable gaps. These vulnerabilities are not limited to the regime alone. Rival actors are already attempting to take advantage of the situation. For example, reports of Kurdish forces advancing toward Kuweires Airport amid ongoing clashes in Hama highlight the broader challenges posed by competing factions seeking to capitalise on the opposition's overstretched defences.

Beyond military challenges, the opposition's ability to secure these areas is essential for political and economic stability. Without effective protection, instability will persist, deterring displaced residents from returning and stalling the revival of local economies. Stabilisation is critical for rebuilding infrastructure, restoring businesses, and fostering the conditions needed for long-term prosperity. Failure to defend these territories risks not only reversing recent military gains but also undermining the opposition's ability to present a credible alternative to al-Assad's regime.

Maintaining unity

Holding together the coalition of opposition factions—each with its own priorities and leadership styles—is another challenge. While the shared goal of ousting al-Assad has kept them aligned thus far, recent territorial gains have introduced new risks. These successes could expose fractures within the coalition, threatening to undermine progress if disputes are not carefully managed.

A key source of tension lies in the distribution of "spoils" seized during the ongoing military campaign. The opposition has acquired substantial resources, including weapons, ammunition, military bases, and financial assets critical for sustaining operations and consolidating power. Hence, disagreements over how these assets are divided risk alienating factions that feel excluded, potentially igniting internal strife.

Control of strategic territories compounds this challenge. Many captured areas include vital trade routes and infrastructure capable of generating much-needed revenue. Questions over governance and revenue-sharing in these regions could heighten competition among factions, distracting them from their broader objective of defeating the regime.

Accountability presents another complex issue. Reports of human rights abuses, looting, and property violations jeopardise public trust and international legitimacy. Addressing these allegations is essential but fraught with danger—disciplining offending individuals could alienate influential factions or escalate internal dissent.

Tensions over these challenges have already started to surface. HTS, the de facto leader of the Aggression Deterrence Room, recently detained several commanders and fighters from the Syrian National Army (SNA), accusing them of looting in Tal Tifat and rural eastern Aleppo. The arrests have exacerbated tensions between the two groups, with HTS criticising the SNA for prioritising clashes with the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) over confronting the al-Assad regime. In response, some SNA leaders argue that HTS's continued presence on international terrorism lists undermines its legitimacy and calls for governance to be transferred to other entities.

The coalition's ability to remain unified hinges on developing mechanisms for resolving disputes and forging a shared vision that transcends individual interests. Without such efforts, their recent advances could collapse under the strain of internal divisions.

The opposition's success in consolidating their territorial gains will depend on their ability to address immediate needs while laying the foundation for long-term stability. Failure to do so could reverse their advances, reignite internal divisions, and prolong the suffering of civilians caught in the conflict. For the opposition, this is not just a military turning point—it is a test of their capacity to govern, protect, and inspire hope for a viable alternative to al-Assad's rule. The consequences of failure will extend beyond their ranks, leaving millions of civilians to bear the brunt of renewed instability.