President Ahmad al-Sharaa’s recent visit to Washington was far more than a ceremonial gesture. It marked a critical waypoint in Syria’s evolving diplomatic trajectory and prompted serious questions about the direction of its foreign policy. Amid shifting global power structures and intensifying rivalries, Damascus faces a unique strategic challenge: whether it can maintain a balanced approach in its relationships with key global powers — particularly the United States, China and Russia — while avoiding entanglement in rigid alliances during an era of mounting geopolitical tension.
This shift is not confined to Syrian-American relations alone. It raises a broader question about Syria’s capacity to redefine its position within a rapidly changing international system. For states on the periphery of global power, the task is to develop new frameworks for political flexibility. As it seeks to break diplomatic isolation and re-engage with the West, Damascus now finds itself at a strategic crossroads that may well shape its external posture for years to come.
Opening Doors and Recognising Limits
Dr Amer Muhammad, a political studies scholar, sees Sharaa’s visit to Washington as part of an effort to reassert Syria’s presence on the global stage. The United States remains a decisive player in the Syrian file. While the visit aimed at easing sanctions and repairing relations with Western capitals, it also sought to position Syria more advantageously in political negotiations.
For decades, Damascus has maintained strong ties with Moscow. Today, it seeks a broader diplomatic stance: preserving its security partnership with Russia while strengthening economic links with China, particularly in infrastructure and technology, in alignment with Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative. Sharaa’s vision suggests a Syria capable of managing diverse interests and presenting itself as a flexible actor in future negotiations.
Political writer and activist Samer Asaad adds another layer, viewing the visit not merely as a diplomatic reset or an attempt to relieve sanctions, but as a test of Syria’s potential to manoeuvre within an altered world order. The current leadership, he notes, is aware that its room for action has significantly narrowed. Even a limited rapprochement with Washington carries the ambition of recalibrating Syria’s position among the great powers. This, he argues, is not so much an exercise in multipolar balancing as it is a pragmatic move to escape prolonged economic and political isolation. The key lies in converting this diplomatic moment into a sustainable path forward, while carefully avoiding the contradictions that define global power rivalries.
The Realities of Balance and Narrow Margins
Syria’s influential allies and adversaries impose serious constraints on Damascus’s freedom of movement. Any effort to maintain balance demands precise calculations and an acute awareness of political risk.
Dr Muhammad argues that Syria can chart a viable path by adopting a rational and communicative foreign policy built around long-term investment and cautious engagement. This includes continuing security cooperation with Russia, expanding economic ties with China, and seeking non-confrontational dealings with the United States — for instance, through joint efforts on counterterrorism and drug interdiction, while pursuing economic recovery at home.
He suggests that Damascus could benefit from opening doors to Western institutions, thereby maintaining an open-door policy guided by pragmatism rather than binding alliances that could spark conflict.
Asaad, however, remains sceptical. He warns that Syria’s ability to maintain such equidistance is undermined by deep-rooted structural and political constraints stemming from years of conflict. The notion of simultaneously pursuing security cooperation and economic openness — while avoiding geopolitical friction — presupposes a degree of international stability that may not exist.
China invests cautiously and with long-term strategic calculation. Russia regards Syria as a critical outpost it is unwilling to see realigned. The United States wields leverage through a combination of sanctions and strategic pressure. Asaad concludes that while a rational, communicative approach may offer some space for manoeuvre, it does not amount to a long-term strategy unless Syria also addresses its internal political divisions, which continue to hamper its diplomatic agility.
Prospects for Expanding Ties
Dr Muhammad believes that a flexible foreign policy — based on engagement with major powers and increased participation in international forums — could help Syria strengthen its external relations through economic diplomacy. By promoting investment across key sectors and forging new trade agreements, Syria could diversify its partnerships and enhance its regional position.
This approach, he argues, would enable Damascus to capitalise on its military and economic ties with Russia and China, while renewing connections with Arab neighbours and pursuing practical cooperation with Turkey. These steps could reinforce Syria’s Arab identity and strengthen regional alliances.
Asaad remains more cautious. He contends that Syria’s foreign policy flexibility is ultimately limited by Washington’s influence. Despite the potential benefits of diversification and economic outreach, the United States still holds decisive influence over the boundaries of Syria’s diplomatic movement — through its financial power and institutional reach.
A real opening, Asaad argues, requires a substantial rethinking of Syria’s relationship with the United States. Damascus must recognise the narrowness of its options in a world where American influence intersects with Chinese and Russian ambitions. Without some form of agreement with Washington, Syria’s ability to broaden its partnerships and revitalise its economic diplomacy will remain constrained, regardless of how many tools it employs or how diverse its strategies may appear.
This article was translated and edited by The Syrian Observer. The Syrian Observer has not verified the content of this story. Responsibility for the information and views set out in this article lies entirely with the author.
