Thanks to Russian and Iranian intervention, the chances of the Assad regime’s defeat seem very slim; yet it is equally unlikely that Assad will regain complete control of the country. Furthermore, there no longer exist democratic forces opposed simultaneously to al-Qaeda, Islamic State (IS), and Assad. Jonathan Spyer puts forward a plan for the U.S. and its Western allies that takes these dire circumstances into account:

It ought to be fairly obvious why a victory for the Assad regime would be a disaster for the West. Assad, an enthusiastic user of chemical weapons against his own people, is aligned with the most powerful anti-Western coalition in the Middle East, . . . dominated by the Islamic Republic of Iran. It includes Hizballah in Lebanon, the Shiite militias of Iraq, and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. If Assad were to win, the Iranian alliance would consolidate its domination of the entire land area between the Iraq-Iran border and the Mediterranean Sea—a major step toward regional hegemony for Iran. . . .

With no particular joy but a good deal of confidence, I can report that the Syrian rebellion today is dominated in its entirety by Sunni Islamist forces. And the most powerful of these are the most radical. . . . So if there is no British or Western interest in a victory for either the regime or the rebels, what should be done with regard to Syria?

First of all, it is important to understand that Syria as a unitary state no longer exists. . . . [T]he country has fragmented into enclaves, and is not going to be reunited in the near future, if at all. . . .

The West, [however], has established a successful and effective patron-client relationship with the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces. Dominated by the Kurdish YPG, but including also Arab tribal forces such as the Sanadid militia, this is the force that is reducing the dominions of the Islamic State in eastern Syria, in partnership with Western air power and special forces. . . .

The destruction of the Islamic State by a strengthened SDF would lead to control of Syria east of the Euphrates by a Western client of proven anti-terrorist credentials. Further west, the truncated enclaves of Assad and of the Sunni Arab rebels would remain. It is possible that, over time, the fragmentation of Syria would be formalized. But it’s equally likely that the various component parts would remain in de-facto existence for the foreseeable future.

For some time, opponents of U.S support for Israel have been urging the White House to end the war in Gaza, or simply calling for a ceasefire. Douglas Feith and Lewis Libby consider what such a result would actually entail:

Ending the war immediately would allow Hamas to survive and retain military and governing power. Leaving it in the area containing the Sinai-Gaza smuggling routes would ensure that Hamas can rearm. This is why Hamas leaders now plead for a ceasefire. A ceasefire will provide some relief for Gazans today, but a prolonged ceasefire will preserve Hamas’s bloody oppression of Gaza and make future wars with Israel inevitable.

For most Gazans, even when there is no hot war, Hamas’s dictatorship is a nightmarish tyranny. Hamas rule features the torture and murder of regime opponents, official corruption, extremist indoctrination of children, and misery for the population in general. Hamas diverts foreign aid and other resources from proper uses; instead of improving life for the mass of the people, it uses the funds to fight against Palestinians and Israelis.

Moreover, a Hamas-affiliated website warned Gazans last month against cooperating with Israel in securing and delivering the truckloads of aid flowing into the Strip. It promised to deal with those who do with “an iron fist.” In other words, if Hamas remains in power, it will begin torturing, imprisoning, or murdering those it deems collaborators the moment the war ends. Thereafter, Hamas will begin planning its next attack on Israel:

Hamas’s goals are to overshadow the Palestinian Authority, win control of the West Bank, and establish Hamas leadership over the Palestinian revolution. Hamas’s ultimate aim is to spark a regional war to obliterate Israel and, as Hamas leaders steadfastly maintain, fulfill a Quranic vision of killing all Jews.

Hamas planned for corpses of Palestinian babies and mothers to serve as the mainspring of its October 7 war plan. Hamas calculated it could survive a war against a superior Israeli force and energize enemies of Israel around the world. The key to both aims was arranging for grievous Palestinian civilian losses. . . . That element of Hamas’s war plan is working impressively.