Behind America’s Return to Syria: A Plot to Crush the ‘Axis of Resistance’ Under the Guise of Diplomacy!

In a symbolic move marking a shift in Washington’s approach toward Damascus, the United States has reopened its ambassador’s residence in Syria after a 13-year closure. This act is a clear sign of a changing policy toward Syria and an effort to engineer the country’s future. It signals a new chapter in “America’s return to Syria,” with multilayered objectives—foremost among them, exploiting the post-Assad environment and steering Syria’s political future in favor of Western interests, particularly curbing Iranian and Russian influence in the region.

Gradual Revival of Diplomacy with Strategic Intent

The closure of the U.S. Embassy in Damascus in 2012 was a reaction to the outbreak of Syria’s devastating civil war. Now, over a decade later, Washington is cautiously but steadily reviving diplomatic channels with Syria’s new government. This return, however, is not merely about Syria’s internal stability; it reflects a broader strategy to engineer a new Middle Eastern order.

Syria’s new government—desperate for international support to rebuild and consolidate power after years of conflict and instability—presents an opportunity for the U.S. to counter regional and global rivals. American officials believe that through active engagement in “New Syria,” they can avoid the power vacuums that plagued Iraq and Afghanistan, enabling the rise of radical groups or rival states. Key priorities include shaping a more “democratic” (Western-aligned) political structure and, critically, reducing Iran’s influence, which became a cornerstone of the previous government’s survival during the war.

Energy Diplomacy and the Leverage of Reconstruction

One of Washington’s primary tools to expand its influence in Syria is energy diplomacy. In recent months, American, Qatari, and Turkish companies have signed agreements to rebuild Syria’s energy infrastructure. These projects—mainly focusing on restoring the power grid and developing gas fields—are designed to increase Damascus’ economic dependence on the West.

By wielding this tool, the U.S. seeks to sideline Russia and Iran in Syria’s reconstruction process. Should this plan succeed, Syria may gradually drift away from the Tehran-Moscow axis. However, some analysts warn that this strategy could provoke resistance from militant groups operating in Syria.

Syria as a Geopolitical Bridge and the New Security Architecture

Syria’s geopolitical position—linking Iran to Hezbollah in Lebanon and other regional resistance groups—has always been strategically vital to Tehran. A political reshuffle in Damascus that increases U.S. and allied influence within Syria’s power structures could severely undermine this bridge. Washington’s long-term goal is to redefine Syria’s role in the new Middle Eastern security landscape, shifting it from a cornerstone of the “Axis of Resistance” to a neutral or even pro-Western actor.

In this context, there are growing whispers about encouraging Damascus to normalize relations with Israel, akin to the Abraham Accords signed by several Arab states. While a Syrian-Israeli normalization remains highly complex and time-consuming—given the Golan Heights issue and widespread anti-Israeli sentiment in Syria—it nonetheless fits into Washington’s broader strategic puzzle.

The Role of the Special Envoy and Embassy-Free Diplomacy

This intricate and multilayered strategy is being overseen by the U.S. Special Representative for Syria, led by Thomas Barrack. Known for his vast regional network and preference for quiet diplomacy, Barrack plays a key role in direct communication with Syria’s new leadership and in relaying Washington’s messages.

The current U.S. approach—symbolic engagement without fully reinstating an ambassador or reopening the embassy—signals a cautious but forward-moving strategy.
On one hand, Washington seeks to regain influence; on the other, it avoids the political and security costs of reopening a full embassy while Syria remains unstable. This approach also gives the U.S. leverage—should the new government veer from Western interests, pressure options remain on the table.


Challenges to Washington’s New Strategy

Despite its design, the U.S. strategy faces several potential challenges:
1. Arab and Islamic Public Opinion: Excessive closeness between the new Syrian government and the U.S.—especially under American pressure for Israeli normalization—could provoke a severe backlash in Arab and Islamic public opinion. This may endanger the new government’s domestic legitimacy.


2. Resistance from Pro-Iran Groups: Groups that have long fought alongside Iran against Israel and Western influence are unlikely to accept a strategic pivot in Damascus without resistance. Internal instability, sporadic clashes, or even militant actions remain serious security threats.


3. Balancing Act with Iran and Russia: The U.S. must walk a fine line—pressuring Iran to scale back its influence without triggering a direct military confrontation. Miscalculations could escalate regional tensions. Meanwhile, despite being preoccupied elsewhere, Russia is unlikely to relinquish its strategic interests in Syria and may act as a spoiler.


4. The Legacy of Mistrust: Years of civil war and foreign interventions have left a deep legacy of mistrust among Syria’s internal and external actors. Building a sustainable consensus for Syria’s future will be an uphill battle.


Conclusion

The symbolic reopening of the U.S. ambassador’s residence in Damascus is far more than a routine diplomatic gesture. It marks the beginning of a grand and complex game aimed at redrawing Syria’s future and, more broadly, re-engineering the Middle East’s geopolitical order. The success of this strategy depends on multiple factors: the degree of alignment by Syria’s new government, regional and international reactions, and Washington’s capacity to navigate the challenges ahead.

After a decade of destruction, Syria stands at the threshold of a new chapter. Whether this chapter brings the spring of stability and prosperity or the continuation of a wintry instability remains uncertain. What is certain, however, is that America’s return to Syria is real—and its consequences will shape the region’s geopolitics for years to come.

*Translated by Ashraf Hemmati from the original Persian article written by Mohammad Saleh Ghorbani