How Do Authoritarian Regimes Like Assad's Fall?

How does the collapse of a government occur? What factors lead a dictatorial ruler in an authoritarian society to be ousted from power following a revolution, popular uprising, military coup, and similar events? Bashar al-Assad is the latest example of a dictator who fled his country in a complex yet straightforward process, paving the way for a new government in Syria. The rapid developments in Syria have reminded many of the major revolutions in contemporary world history, where even a few days before the fall of a dictator, the situation seemed completely normal. Although there may be differing opinions among political scientists regarding the application of the term 'revolution' to Assad's downfall, a fundamental question that many have raised is how he reached the end of his road and how other authoritarian governments like his fall. How do authoritarian regimes collapse? Political thinkers and revolution specialists consider various prerequisites for the overthrow of an authoritarian government. Regardless of whether what happened in Syria can be termed a revolution or should be classified as a type of armed rebellion, civil war, guerrilla warfare, or uprising, there is consensus that certain prerequisites are necessary for the removal of a tyrannical ruler, most of which can also apply to other oligarchic governments. Public Discontent In situations where the changes and developments within an authoritarian government have at least some roots from within and are not entirely the product of a foreign actor, public discontent can be considered a key component. This discontent can arise from various factors such as the authoritarian nature of the government, feelings of deprivation among different social classes, economic problems, and a lack of hope and future among the citizens of that society. These economic problems can also stem from international pressures. When sanctions and global restrictions against a regime come into play, competition among the elites for access to financial resources increases, leading to a predictable rise in rent-seeking and corruption. The result of this process is an increasing alienation of the populace from the authoritarian government. This component was fully observed in Syria and became evident more than a decade ago when the effects of the so-called 'Arab Spring' reached Syria. In the years that followed, although Bashar al-Assad's regime was able to suppress opponents with the help of foreign actors such as Russia, the Islamic Republic, and Hezbollah, he never succeeded in restoring hope for the future among Syrian citizens. Moreover, economic problems deepened over the years, and multi-layered crises increasingly expanded the impoverished class in the country. Additionally, his repressive and autocratic government continued to operate in an even more oppressive manner without allowing any space for political freedoms. As a result, when the rebels of 'Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham,' which has been on the U.S. terrorist organization list since 2018, rapidly occupied cities in Syria one after another, no public opposition was observed from the Syrian citizens. Ineffective Repression Political scientists argue that while public discontent with a government may exist for many years and issues such as feelings of deprivation, economic problems, and political repression may suffocate the people, this factor alone is insufficient for the removal of a government, especially through revolution. Although what happened in Syria does not fit the classic definition of a revolution, if we consider the army and military forces as part of the repressive apparatus responsible for countering regime opponents, they had become completely ineffective groups over the years, especially after the civil war, failing to perform even their most basic duties. Corruption in the Syrian army had become a constant trend over the years, bringing with it structural weaknesses and numerous other problems. Even before this, many experts on Syrian domestic affairs had pointed out that the Syrian army lacked the capability to confront its threats without the support of foreign actors such as Russia, Hezbollah, and the Islamic Republic. Consequently, when the rebels advanced into various cities in Syria, not only was there no effort to stop them from the army, but they also fled one after another from their posts. In other words, as long as the repressive apparatus and the regime's threat response mechanisms continue to function effectively, the chances of widespread public discontent transforming into regime change will be very low. The Role of Foreign Actors Another component that some revolution specialists emphasize is the effective or negative role of foreign actors in such situations. A government that relies on foreign support for its continued rule always faces the risk of seeing its seat shake if that support is disrupted. Bashar al-Assad has owed his prolonged presence in the presidential palace in Damascus for many years to Russia, Iran, and Lebanese Hezbollah. Without this support, Assad would have had to flee Syria during the same period when Hosni Mubarak, Ali Abdullah Saleh, Muammar Gaddafi, and Zine El Abidine Ben Ali were ousted from power. It is possible that his earlier departure would not have led to such an intense civil war in Syria, and now Syrians around the world would not be celebrating the rise of a militia group rooted in Al-Qaeda and ISIS. However, recent events had caused all three foreign actors supporting Assad to face serious challenges: Russia is embroiled in the war in Ukraine and no longer has the capacity to focus on the situation and developments in Syria as before. Hezbollah has suffered heavy blows during the war with Israel, losing several ranks of its political and military commanders, and much of its weaponry has been destroyed by Israel in recent months. Additionally, a recent ceasefire agreement between this group and Israel has limited their operational space in Syria. The third actor, the Iranian government, has also faced many economic problems due to the pressures of economic sanctions in recent years, and internal discontent regarding the Islamic Republic's regional policies has been significant during protests that have occurred in various cities in recent years. Moreover, several senior commanders of the Quds Force of the IRGC and other parts of this military force have been killed over the years, and the logistical capacity of the Quds Force in Syria has been severely affected by numerous Israeli attacks. On the other hand, Turkey's role has facilitated the process of Assad's fall; although there are doubts about the extent of Ankara's influence and control over these extremist Islamist groups, Turkey can at least be considered the main stage manager of this process and the advance of rebel forces against Assad. Consequently, another influential component in the fall of an autocratic leader is the withdrawal of foreign actors from their support and the effective involvement of opposing foreign actors in supporting anti-regime players. The presence of a charismatic leader for overthrowing it is said that behind every revolution, there has been a charismatic leader who has been able to consolidate internal energies against the ruling government and simultaneously attract the support of foreign actors. This leader must be able to mobilize the masses or at least their supporters for such revolutionary or rebellious action by proposing a new ideology while not inciting neutral groups against themselves. They must create comprehensive plans that make groups not at the core of the opposition feel no concern about the formation of this new process and, in the most optimistic scenario, remain silent and quiet. This can prevent obstacles in the path of regime overthrow. The leader of this movement must also design their ideology in such a way that it does not raise concerns among foreign actors, and if they can even persuade regional powers to support them, a significant step has been taken. Abu Muhammad al-Julani, in the days leading up to the fall of Assad's regime, tried to speak in national discourse for all Syrians and changed his attire to reduce concerns about the rise of Islamist extremists in place of Bashar al-Assad. He also attempted to present a new image of himself and his group, which is still on the U.S. terrorist organization list, in his discussions with Western media to prevent deterrent actions from foreign actors. Organizing the Opposition Revolution specialists say that a rebellion, movement, or social current can lead to the overthrow of a tyrannical ruler even without a leader, but if there is no organization behind these efforts, it will certainly fail. 'Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham' has been able to organize its forces well in recent years while in a dormant state and, utilizing foreign aid, especially from Turkey, has successfully laid the groundwork for a widespread rebellion against Bashar al-Assad in the areas under its control. This group, by training forces and also infiltrating state and military apparatuses from the beginning of its movement until the end, quickly achieved success that was only possible through extensive organization. The advantage of the Tahrir al-Sham group was that Assad's regime and its supporters, after the start of the 'Astana' process, concluded that it was no longer possible to eliminate the armed opposition groups in Damascus and consequently preferred to cede lands in various parts of the country to facilitate Bashar's continued rule in the capital. As a result of this action, these militia groups have been able to expand their operational space over the years without interference and carry out the necessary organization for such a significant movement. Erosion Among the Regime's Loyalists Another key component that seems essential for the fall of an authoritarian regime is the erosion among the forces loyal to the ruling regime. As long as the agents of the ruling system do not doubt the correctness and validity of their governance and their leaders, they will be willing to remain martyrs for that dictatorial system. This is why autocratic regimes make extensive efforts to train loyal forces through the implementation of comprehensive ideologies, and as long as this worldview can convince those forces to continue supporting the regime, it will be sufficient for the leaders of that government. However, when due to various reasons such as economic problems, witnessing the abuses of ruling party leaders, increasing levels of inequality and discrimination, corruption, and the promotion of alternative models, this erosion among loyal forces becomes widespread, a rift will emerge within the ruling body that is not easily repairable. This was also something that occurred during the years of Ba'ath Party rule in Syria; increasing discrimination, corruption, inefficiency, and inequality had all caused a significant portion of the regime's loyal forces to have disagreements with the rulers, and the emergence of groups such as the Free Syrian Army and the Syrian National Army was the result of these very fissures.