Opinion - After years of war, Syria glances westward — toward Trump
President Trump has announced the beginning of sanctions being lifted on Syria, which had been imposed during the genocidal rule of Bashar al-Assad. The Syrian people and their new leadership deserve a chance to rebuild their great nation. While the sanctions were still in place, the Syrian American Alliance for Peace and Prosperity invited us to visit post-Assad Syria at a very tenuous moment for the Syrian people. We agreed and set off on an open-minded, fact-finding mission. What we saw was daunting, but we ultimately we came away cautiously optimistic.
When we arrived in Damascus, we observed grown men openly weeping and others cheering as they saw their homeland for the first time in decades. For centuries, Syria had boasted a diverse, multicultural population, until the 54-year reign of the Assad regime. Assad leveled entire villages while waging war on his political enemies, inflicting billions of dollars of damage on his own country. In this political genocide, Assad murdered close to a million of his own people — Christians, Muslims, Kurds and Druze alike, regardless of religion — all while using military aid and financial support from Russia and Iran.
With Russia's invasion of Ukraine and Iranian activities being curtailed through sanctions and the degradation of their terrorist proxies, support that had been vital to Assad's reign dissipated. He was ultimately forced to flee to Russia as rebel forces advanced, although he regrettably was able to pilfer additional billions from the nation's coffers on his way out the door.
During our visit, we witnessed the devastated Syrian economy, where cash is almost worthless and credit cards are not accepted. Open-air markets resort to basic barter and trade for items like clothing and necessities, which are laid out next to rubble. With no functioning gas stations, young men with large hand-held jugs stand along the road to fill vehicles for a price negotiated on the spot.
Despite this, the spirit of the Syrian people is not broken. Banners reading 'Make Syria Great Again' were displayed along the roads, sending messages of hope for the first time in decades. We heard nothing but admiration for President Trump and his administration — most notably for his decision to stop the bombing of Idlib in 2019.
We then met individually with Syria's new president, Ahmed al-Sharaa, well aware of his previous history as a Syrian Al-Qaeda member, though having cut ties in 2016. However, contrary to his biography, the actions al-Sharaa has taken to help the country so far have been positive.
Al-Sharaa has enlisted an impressive and diverse group of Syrian advisors, some of whom had fled the country years ago to escape Assad. His Minister of Social and Labor Affairs, Hind Kabawat, is an accomplished Christian woman, and not a choice one would expect from someone with prior ties to al-Qaeda. Just as surprising, one of al-Sharaa's first acts upon taking power was to free thousands of Syrians that Assad had imprisoned and tortured. Al-Sharaa has declared a return to religious freedom, and during our visit, we witnessed a huge gathering of the Christian population for the first public celebration of Easter held in decades.
In our meetings, al-Sharaa expressed a desire to work with the West. He called Israel by name and simultaneously emphasized his desire to promote peace and even possibly join the Abraham Accords. His commitment to avoid the often alluring proxy relationship with Iran is a testament to his desire to find more favorable partners. America is accustomed to being asked for funds and military support, but al-Sharaa wants Syrians defending Syria. His main request was for sanctions relief and for Syria not to be divided into regions. This is not only good for Syria, but a more stable western-leaning Syria provides a new layer of protection for America's ally to the south, Israel.
He expressed the importance of having democratic elections, welcoming tourists of all faiths, and creating new trade routes, pointing to the country's strategic location and its ability to allow faster transit of products to the West. He emphasized the necessity for post-conflict Syria to have an economic partner, pointing out that Russia has already made an offer, in addition to others like China and Iran making overtures; however, al-Sharaa has not yet accepted these. His clear preference is to make the U.S. the preferential trade partner, an opportunity Syria finally has for the first time in over 50 years.
Hearing al-Sharaa and the Syrian government express an interest in being a stabilizing force in the region for peace and prosperity is a moment in time we must consider carefully, and why we applaud President Trump's decision to lift the sanctions on a war-weary Syria. For accountability, we also believe al-Sharaa must be willing to accept international investigations into the treatment of Syria's religious minorities.
When a new leader opens the doors to his country without restriction while still weakened from decades of dictatorial destruction, and when he promotes religious freedom while simply asking for a chance to open trade with the West, we should explore what might be possible. We believe huge investments are waiting to rebuild this great nation. With Trump at the helm, this could be a monumental moment for unexpected peace in the Middle East.
Cory Mills represents the Florida's 7th Congressional District and is a member of the House Foreign Affairs and Armed Services Committees. Marlin Stutzman represents Indiana's 3rd Congressional District.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
11 minutes ago
- CBS News
Israel says 21 people wounded as Iran fires dozens of missiles following U.S. strikes on nuclear facilities
Tel Aviv, Israel — Iran launched a wave of missiles at Israel on Sunday morning, wounding at least 21 people — four of them seriously, paramedics said — after the U.S. joined Israel's week-long attacks on the Islamic Republic's nuclear sites. Iranian missiles made impacts in four sites across Israel: in Haifa, Tel Aviv, Be'er Yaakov and Nes Ziona, according to Israel's Magen David Adom emergency response service. Searches were underway for people believed to be trapped under the rubble of a collapsed building in Tel Aviv, local media reported. The Israel Defense Forces told CBS News that Iran had launched about 30 missiles at Israel. Israeli security forces and first responders gather at the site of an Iranian strike that hit a residential building in the Ramat Aviv area in Tel Aviv, June 22, 2025. JACK GUEZ/AFP/Getty Images circulating on both Israeli television and social media platforms showed serious damage to buildings, as well as injured people being rescued by first responders. The IDF said in a statement that during the missile barrage, no alert sirens had gone off in Haifa, despite there having been an impact from a missile there. "The possibility that there was an issue with the interceptor is being looked into," the IDF said, referring to its missile defense systems. "There was no malfunction in the alert system and a previous warning had been issued to the area." The Iranian assault took place hours after President Trump announced that the U.S. military had carried out strikes on three of Iran's nuclear sites: Isfahan and Natanz, and the well-fortified Fordo enrichment facility. In a briefing in Washington on Sunday, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine said the U.S. operation, called "Midnight Hammer," used seven B2 bombers carrying bunker-busting bombs to attack Fordo and Natanz. It struck Isfahan, which had already been heavily bombed by Israel in previous days, with Tomahawk missiles launched by submarines. Since the beginning of Israel's "Operation Rising Lion" against Iran, its National Public Diplomacy Directorate says Iran has fired over 450 missiles at Israel and 400 drones. 24 people in Israel have been killed in Israel, all of them in the early days of Iran's retaliatory attacks last week. As of Friday, the Washington-based group Human Rights Activists in Iran, which relies on a network of contacts in the country, said 722 people had been killed in the country by Israel's strikes, with the attacks hitting 25 of the Islamic Republic's 31 provinces.
Politico
11 minutes ago
- Politico
Israel is not dragging America into war with Iran, its president says
Israeli President Isaac Herzog said Sunday Israel is 'not dragging America' into a war with Iran after President Donald Trump announced he bombed three Iranian nuclear sites. 'We are leaving it to the decision of the head of, the president of the United States and his team,' he said on CNN's State of the Union, 'because it had to do with America's national security interest, period. We are not intending and we don't ask for America now to go to war because the Iranians are threatening Israel. The decision was taken because the Iranian nuclear program was a clear and present danger to the security interests of all of the free world.' Despite Trump claiming in an address to the nation Saturday night that Iran's nuclear sites had been 'completely and totally obliterated,' Herzog told host Kasie Hunt he could not say whether this was the case, instead claiming that the sites had been 'hit very hard, both by the Israeli attacks and absolutely by the American attack overnight.' Herzog also said that while Israel was not actively working toward a regime change in Iran, it would be a 'very blessed' outcome. 'After all, this regime is a very oppressive regime,' he said. Herzog reminded Hunt that he is the head of state in Israel, but noted that his authority was limited; it is the Israeli Security Cabinet led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that oversees war planning. He said he did not know the 'exact details' of communication between Trump and Netanyahu, but that there was 'a very close and intimate dialogue' between the two. Israel and Iran have exchanged strikes for over a week, with Iran firing dozens of missiles at Israel on Sunday. Iran threatened to retaliate against the U.S. for its airstrikes, with Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi warning of 'everlasting consequences' and saying he does not know 'how much room there is left for diplomacy.'
Bloomberg
18 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
The US Has Two Paths in Iran. Its Clerics Will Decide Both.
The US has bombed Iran's nuclear facilities, and nobody, inside or outside the White House, can be sure how it will play out. That now depends entirely on the Iranian response and on what was destroyed at the deeply buried nuclear site at Fordow. For there are two possible paths to American success in the war that Israel cornered President Donald Trump — a man who claimed near-magical powers for ending and preventing wars — into joining. Both will test assumptions about the Islamic Republic's strength and messianic nature, because both are for Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his generals to decide. The clearest path to success is that Iran's nuclear program has indeed been 'obliterated' and would require years and fortunes to rebuild, neutralizing that toxic issue for the foreseeable future. In this scenario, Iran's leaders may talk Armageddon and 'everlasting' consequences for 'The Great Satan,' but they choose any retaliation against US targets very carefully. Their goal would be to avoid a direct military escalation with the US that they might survive, but at enormous risk and cost. US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth made clear on Sunday, during a press conference, that was the hope. He said there were "both public and private messages being directly delivered to the Iranians in multiple channels, giving them every opportunity to come to the table.' Trump's fiercest critics would have to concede that this would be a good outcome, and that his options in any case had become quite limited the day Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ordered his air force to take out Iran's nuclear program. With Fordow still intact, Iran would remain in possession of the feedstocks and enrichment cascades needed to create weapons-grade fuel. A nuclear breakout would have been far more likely, for never would the case for owning a nuclear deterrent have been clearer. A second path to victory — at least in the eyes of Netanyahu — would be through a bombing campaign so devastating and targeted in scope that it destabilizes Khamenei and results in a change of regime friendly to the Jewish state and the West. The assumption is that the country would be taken over by the urban opposition, which despises the clerical elite that's run Iran since the 1979 revolution, and has no interest in their country's continued isolation. With scenarios like these, no wonder so many opponents of American involvement are reaching back to the 2003 US invasion of Iraq for parallels. That, too, was justified by claims of an urgent nuclear threat and the promise of replacing an oppressive regime. The outcome was horrendous. But for one important aspect, which I'll come to, this isn't like Iraq. Trump wasn't itching for war with Iran, but was dragged into one by Israel. The likelihood of an Iraq-style ground invasion and occupation is approximately zero. The Iranian threat, including possession of an advanced nuclear program, wasn't fabricated. Iran has enriched enough uranium to 60%, a level that has no conceivable civilian use, to make nine warheads. Not even Iran disputes this. The only question is what they intend to do with it and how quickly. Also, unlike Saddam Hussein's Iraq, Iran does pose an active threat — above all to Israel — through the active organization, funding and arming of mainly proxy assaults, especially since the Hamas terrorist attack of Oct. 7, 2023. Iran isn't only publicly committed to the eradication of the Jewish state, but has persistently taken action to further that goal. I'll leave it to others to parse whether all that justifies Israel's self-defense claims in terms of international law. Here's what concerns me more: First, the Iranian state has far more power to bring the region and global economy down in flames than Iraq ever did. Second, we don't yet know whether Fordow's bunkered enrichment cascades were, in fact, destroyed. Trump said they were; the Iranians said they remain untouched and that, in any case, vital equipment and people had been removed. Both have ample cause to lie, but if the cascades weren't destroyed, this is not yet over. There will be more airstrikes, more pressure for retaliation, more casualties and unintended consequences. Indeed, in terms of preventing an Iranian bomb, the outcome could well prove worse than if the US and Israel had done nothing at all. Nor does the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency know where Iran's stockpiles of enriched uranium are, because these were removed by Iran to avoid their being blown into the atmosphere by US and Israeli munitions. That's good; there has to date been no radioactive contamination reported beyond immediate-impact areas. But it also means that the key feedstock for attempting to dash out a bomb is no longer under IAEA surveillance. If the prospects for ensuring a non-nuclear Iran are far from certain, those for forcing a positive change of regime are still less so. What we know of this phenomenon is, first, that it works best when the authority under attack has lost the will to kill, or lacks control over the security services needed to carry out its orders. Second, that it's best done organically, from within, and not through foreign military intervention. And finally, that success rests on the pre-existence of organized democratic opposition. None of these apply in Iran. Far more likely is that any change would come from within the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, where a decision might be taken to remove the 86-year-old supreme leader for having insisted on a policy that proved disastrous. Maintaining Iran as a threshold nuclear power provoked Israel, the US and their Gulf allies by developing a nuclear program so clearly angled toward an eventual military purpose, but without producing the arsenal that might have provided the country with a North Korea-style immunity from attack. Would these be modernizing pragmatists who want to deescalate with the West? Or hard-liners determined to fix Khamenei's error? Would they liberalize the economy that, under international sanctions, the IRGC came to dominate? Would they liberalize politically, in a country that is, in reality, one of the last land empires, with large and sometimes restive Turkic, Kurdish, Arab and Baluchi minorities? The potential for an Iraq, Libya or Syria-style chaos is real. More likely is that the Islamic Republic survives, with or without new leadership, and that the question of Iran's nuclear proliferation remains unresolved. That leaves what happens next primarily up to clerics and generals in Tehran. Trump could yet emerge the hero he so badly wants to be. And yet, perhaps ironically, he and Netanyahu now need to hope Khamenei and the younger IRGC commanders replacing those killed by Israeli strikes are more rational, and less messianically driven than they've been portrayed.
