A version of this story appeared in the daily Threat Status newsletter from The Washington Times. Click here to receive Threat Status delivered directly to your inbox each weekday.
OPINION:
Last week, after days of violence across Syria, Sen. Lindsey Graham fired off a warning via X to the transitional government in Damascus: “If Syrian government forces continue to advance in the north toward Raqqa, I will push for reimposing Caesar Act sanctions on steroids.”
Indeed, recent attacks by Syria fly in the face of the conditions set by the United States to lift the Caesar Act sanctions under the National Defense Authorization Act.
The lifting of sanctions was never intended to be a blank check for Damascus. Among the most central requirements were commitments to protect minorities, uphold minority rights, ensure accountability for abuses and demonstrate a meaningful departure from sectarian repression. Yet just weeks later, multiple minority communities in Syria have been subjected to serious attacks, signaling that the country is moving not toward compliance but in the opposite direction.
Rather than measurable progress, the period after sanctions relief has been marked by renewed violence, religious persecution and deepening insecurity, most acutely affecting Alawite communities. The gap between what the Syrian transitional government committed to and what it has delivered on the ground is no longer open to interpretation. The promises made to secure relief have not translated into protection or restraint.
Alawite civilians have been met with lethal force during protests in coastal cities, where demonstrations driven by political exclusion and economic hardship have been answered with gunfire, fatalities and sweeping curfews. Rather than engaging grievances through lawful and inclusive mechanisms, the state has again defaulted to coercion.
In the aftermath of these protests, Alawite neighborhoods have been subjected to attacks by armed groups, leaving behind destruction and fear. More troubling still is the persistent failure of the interim government to protect minority civilians from targeted violence.
The deadly bombing of an Alawite mosque in Homs starkly illustrated the vulnerability of communities that the transitional government claims to safeguard. Minority protection cannot be reduced to rhetoric; it requires prevention, accountability and the restoration of public trust — none of which is evident.
At the same time, the interim administration has announced plans to dismiss more than 300,000 public sector employees, ostensibly as part of a broader effort to remove former regime personnel. In practice, many of these positions are linked to state-provided housing. Dismissals often trigger evictions, disproportionately affecting Alawite families, particularly in Homs and Damascus.
The campaign is already underway. Hundreds of employees have been dismissed from state-owned entities, including the Construction and Development Co., where Alawites constitute the majority of the workforce. In recent days alone, approximately 400 long-serving employees in Homs — many with 15 to 25 years of service — were abruptly terminated. Similar mass dismissals affecting Alawites have been reported repeatedly over the past year.
Far from protecting minorities, such policies risk entrenching collective punishment under the banner of reform.
Renewed clashes in Aleppo between transitional government forces and the Syrian Democratic Forces underscore a persistent pattern: The Syrian state continues to privilege militarized control over political inclusion when dealing with minority communities despite repeated calls from U.S. officials to halt the violence.
After meetings with interim Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa and Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani, U.S. Special Envoy for Syria Tom Barrack urged an immediate cessation of hostilities between government forces and the Kurdish-led SDF. Yet the fighting has continued, accompanied by serious human rights violations against Kurdish civilians.
Concerns have also been raised at the highest levels of Congress. Sen. James E. Risch, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, publicly expressed grave concern over the conduct of armed forces in Aleppo and called on the Syrian government to hold those responsible for abuses accountable.
Taken together, these developments stand in direct contradiction to the spirit and the explicit requirements of the National Defense Authorization Act, which conditioned sanctions relief on demonstrable behavioral change, including the protection of minority communities.
The National Defense Authorization Act did not demand perfection. It demanded good faith and credible evidence that the Syrian transitional government could protect civilians, tolerate dissent and move away from punishment by association. The record to date points in the opposite direction.
If the United States allows these failures to go unanswered, then it risks emptying the conditionality of any real meaning. Sanctions relief without enforcement sends a dangerous signal: that commitments are optional, accountability is negotiable and minority rights can be subordinated to geopolitical convenience.
This moment calls for a sober reassessment of policy. The U.S., alongside its allies, must be clear that promises without action are insufficient. Civilian protection must be visible and verifiable, accountability mechanisms strengthened, and inclusive governance pursued in substance rather than symbolism.
For the sake of Syria’s diverse communities — Sunni, Kurdish, Alawite, Christian and others — the transitional government must either honor the commitments it has made or face the consequences of failing to do so. Per Mr. Graham, that could well mean an immediate reimposition of the Caesar Act sanctions.
• Morhaf Ibrahim, M.D., is president of the Alawites Association of the United States.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.