EU sanctions put Syrian leadership’s promises to the test

It is these principles and values that led the EU to sanction three pro-Turkish factions: the Sultan Suleiman Shah Brigade, the Hamza Division, and the Sultan Murad Division. All were allegedly involved in attacks on civilians. Their commanders—Mohammed al-Jassem (Abu Amsha) and Saif Boulad Abu Bakr—were also sanctioned.

The violence in the coastal areas began with coordinated assaults by remnants of the former regime, but the retaliatory campaigns that followed spiralled into indiscriminate violence, including summary executions, torture, and arbitrary killings. More than 1,700 people were reportedly killed in just three days, many of them civilians from the Alawite community.

Militias still

The sanctioned factions had operated under the Turkish-backed Syrian National Army in northern Syria but were formally absorbed into the newly formed Syrian Ministry of Defence in December. On paper, these groups dissolved and were restructured under the ministry. The Suleiman Shah Brigade became part of the 25th Division (still led by Abu Amsha), while the Hamza Division was absorbed into the 76th Division (still led by Saif Boulad Abu Bakr).

In practice, little has changed. Reports indicate that the internal structures of these factions remain largely intact, and their commanders continue to wield substantial influence over their fighters. This reality makes the latest EU sanctions more enforceable on both the factions and key commanders associated with them.

In turn, this complicates international coordination and support for the new military apparatus—particularly for the EU and its member states. For the transitional authorities, the EU sanctions are only a challenge if they choose to ignore them. Taken seriously, they offer an opportunity.

Stick or twist?

Interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa has already acknowledged that violations occurred in the coastal region in March and has launched a fact-finding mission to investigate and hold those responsible accountable. The logical next step is for this committee to coordinate with the EU and human rights organisations—both local and international—to review available evidence and ensure transparency.

If he proceeds with a thorough, independent investigation, then regardless of its findings, al-Sharaa can say he is upholding the rule of law. Then, if it finds that the commanders were not to blame, he can claim to be defending his generals against false accusations. If it does confirm their involvement, it justifies him fully dissolving these groups into the national army and removing controversial figures.

Making the right choice here is not just a personal victory for al-Sharaa—it is a necessary step toward Syria's recovery and long-term stability. Accountability is not about convenience; it is about standards. By choosing justice over expediency, Damascus sends a message: no more impunity, no matter your affiliation. More than any speech or sanction, that would truly signal a new beginning.