One of the most persistent gaps in the U.S. debate on Syria appears to be the assumption that the new leadership in Damascus exercises real control over the forces it claims to command.
In an interview with Alhurra, a U.S. State Department official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said Washington’s think tanks tend to assume that figures such as Ahmad al-Sharaa will be of consequence in the next phase because his background or political rhetoric enables him to control the narrative, rein in factions and keep Syria stable.
But that assumption, the official said, is now rendered detached from reality.
“What we are seeing now is that he is unable to control these dynamics,” the official said. “Large segments of former ISIS elements and defectors from Hayat Tahrir al-Sham are unhappy with al-Sharaa. They believe he has moved toward moderation. That perception alone is enough to destabilize the situation.”
Those warnings have taken on added urgency following a deadly attack near Palmyra over the weekend, in which two U.S. soldiers and a civilian interpreter from Iraq’s Kurdistan Region, a member of the Christian community, were killed. An investigation into the circumstances of the attack is ongoing, but U.S. is increasingly concerned that the perpetrators may have infiltrated Syrian security forces or took advantage of loopholes within these forces to carry out the assault.
For Washington, the incident places the nascent and fragile cooperation with Damascus under direct pressure. Voices within U.S. policymaking circles are calling for a reassessment of America’s role in Syria, or even a reduction of that role if the safety of U.S. forces cannot be ensured.
The State Department official warned that this is precisely “the scenario many analysts have underestimated in recent weeks.”
“The danger is not just the attack itself,” the official said. “It is what it reveals about the brittleness of internal cohesion, the loyalties, and the chain of command and control in Syria.”
The official added that these internal fractures are now raising alarm across Syria’s social fabric and across its sectarian and ethnic lines. “Alawites are worried. Sunnis are worried. Kurds are watching closely. There is a pervasive fear that Syria is not moving toward integration, but rather toward further fragmentation.”
He said wide-ranging diplomatic discussions are now underway around two possible scenarios.
Quoting a European intelligence source, the official said, “one possibility is that al-Sharaa’s rule is just a temporary one. The other possibility is that Syria may slide into wide internal unrest driven by unresolved divisions rather than reconciliation tracks. And the two scenarios could unfold simultaneously.”
The Palmyra attack also bears consequences for Damascus’ efforts to gain legitimacy in Washington. Syrian officials understand that effective cooperation with U.S. forces is a key benchmark for any new security structure. For more than a decade, the United States has worked closely with the Syrian Democratic Forces in eastern Syria — a partnership the Pentagon considers effective.
Damascus now wants to demonstrate it can achieve a comparable level of cooperation. But the official stressed that trust is reciprocal.
“If U.S. forces do not feel safe working with units backed by Damascus, the Syrian Democratic Forces will not feel safe integrating into them,” he said.
These concerns reverberated locally as well. The Syrian Democratic Council condemned the Palmyra attack as a “terrorist act” undermining security and stability in Syria and the region, according to North Press Agency, which covers areas under the autonomous administration. The council renewed its call for the implementation of the March 10 agreement between Kurdish forces and Damascus as a necessary step toward restoring stability.
The U.S. official added that “everyone wants a clean narrative — a story that turns the page, sidelines spoilers, and delivers stability. But a parallel reality is taking shape and is being ignored.”
“What Syrians are facing now does not correspond to any clear transition model,” he concluded. “Events like the Palmyra attack are a reminder of just how fragile this phase remains.”
Joe Kawly
Joe Kawly is a veteran global affairs journalist with over two decades of frontline reporting across Washington, D.C. and the Middle East. A CNN Journalism Fellow and Georgetown University graduate, his work focuses on U.S. foreign policy, Arab world politics, and diplomacy. With deep regional insight and narrative clarity, Joe focuses on making complex global dynamics clear, human, and relevant.
