The political and diplomatic efforts led personally by Ahmad al-Sharaa—through his travels and meetings with Western diplomats—alongside visits by his Foreign Minister, Assad al-Shibani, to several European capitals yielded notable results. These engagements began to foster Western, particularly European, acceptance of the new Syrian administration and consideration of entering into a pragmatic partnership with it.
The U.S. stance, however, remained hesitant for various reasons. Chief among them was that Syria was not a genuine priority for the Trump administration, whose primary focus lay with Israel’s situation. Further hesitation stemmed from Sharaa’s background, that of his team, and their prior association with Hayat Tahrir al-Sham. Nevertheless, the Americans initiated contact with Sharaa as early as December, with Barbara Leaf presenting a set of U.S. demands that formalized the terms laid out in the Aqaba meeting.
This cautious engagement was soon disrupted by events on the Syrian coast, where reports, images, and videos emerged of violations committed by forces involved in attacks on coastal villages and towns.
Objectively, these factions inflicted far greater political damage on Ahmad Sharaa than on the Alawite community itself. It was Sharaa and his administration who bore the brunt of the fallout from the actions of government forces and allied factions.
“The coastal events have turned the clock back, perhaps by two years, after three months of hard-won progress,” remarked an American diplomat, reflecting current U.S. perceptions of Syria’s trajectory.
The role of Sebastian Gorka
A divide within the U.S. administration regarding Sharaa’s leadership began to take shape. On one side, the State Department expressed a clear interest in initiating political dialogue with Sharaa, supported by key regional allies, foremost among them Saudi Arabia. Calls emerged for appointing a special U.S. envoy to Syria to liaise directly with the new administration.
In contrast, the Department of Defense maintained a more transactional view, seeking cooperation with Sharaa’s team primarily to integrate the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) into the new Syrian army and to ensure a dignified U.S. withdrawal should President Trump choose to pull American troops from Syria. A limited partnership was also sought to prevent a resurgence of ISIS post-withdrawal. The Defense Department endorsed the agreement signed between Sharaa and Mazloum Abdi at the height of coastal violence, viewing it as a stabilizing measure. Abdi was flown by a U.S. helicopter to Dumayr Airport near Damascus to meet Sharaa and formalize the accord.
The strongest opposition to Sharaa came from Trump’s inner circle in the National Security Council, which adhered to a strictly “counterterrorism” agenda. Sebastian Gorka, director of the NSC’s Counterterrorism Office, played a central role in steering Syria policy toward this narrow lens. Their position was further bolstered by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, known for her vehement opposition to Islamist groups in general and Syrian opposition factions in particular.
Following the coastal events, the State Department drafted a balanced and relatively measured public statement condemning sectarian violence and urging all parties to cease hostilities and exercise restraint. Secretary of State Marco Rubio submitted the draft for White House approval, but it was returned with significantly harsher language: “The United States condemns radical Islamic terrorists, including foreign extremists, who have killed civilians in western Syria in recent days” and “The interim Syrian authorities must hold perpetrators of these massacres against minority communities accountable.” Rubio abided by the revisions and released the statement as amended.
The coastal incidents significantly tipped U.S. policy in favor of a “counterterrorism” approach, weakening the State Department’s position advocating for political engagement with Syria’s new leadership—at least for now, while broader U.S. policy on Syria remains unsettled.
The NSC’s perspective on the coastal events relied heavily on information supplied by “churches,” which reported the targeting and killing of Christians and other minorities in Syria. These sources, likely American churches reacting to media coverage, were amplified by a tweet from Elon Musk questioning the number of Christians killed in Syria. Despite extensive refutations and clarifications showing that the vast majority of victims were Alawites and that Christian casualties were minimal, a narrative contrary to fact gained traction within Trump’s national security apparatus. This misinformed version quickly spread in Washington, prompting Senator Jim Risch, Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, to declare, “The massacre of unarmed Alawites and Christians is horrific. It serves as a stark reminder of the need for U.S. caution in handling the Syrian file.”
This internal divide in Washington was starkly illustrated by divergent positions voiced on the same day (Friday). Leading congressional figures advocated easing economic sanctions, especially sectoral ones. Meanwhile, the State Department insisted that “power is now concentrated in the hands of one person, which is unhealthy” and maintained that sanctions relief would not come soon. The most surprising—and perilous—development was the statement by Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, suggesting possible Israeli normalization with Lebanon and Syria. This development poses a serious threat of pressuring Syria and Sharaa into normalization with Israel in exchange for recognition and economic aid.
The U.S. administration has yet to finalize its Syria policy. The State Department has planned a second mission to Damascus in mid-April, likely led by Deputy Assistant Secretary Natasha Francesca, to discuss American concerns and demands with Sharaa. These include the Aqaba terms, the coastal violations, and the constitutional declaration, which the State Department criticized for consolidating power in one individual’s hands. The only point of consensus within the Trump administration is the need for real change in Syria—an inclusive governance model that departs from the previous regime’s authoritarianism, facilitates a resolution to the current deadlock, enables a smooth U.S. withdrawal, and opens the door for the lifting of U.S. sanctions.
Sharaa managed to absorb the damaging blow dealt by his forces and allied factions on the coast by publicly acknowledging and condemning the violations and establishing a fact-finding committee. However, this issue will remain a persistent item on Washington’s list of demands—an episode that has, in effect, reset the American clock on Sharaa back to the beginning.
Mohammad al-Abdallah is the director of the Syria Justice and Accountability Center, a Syrian-led non-profit organization documenting human rights violations in the country.
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.
