Abstract Syria's civil war has left behind a fractured state. While the new president, Ahmed al‐Sharaa, seeks to unify the country and restore centralized governance, this appears unworkable. Instead, this article contends, asymmetrical federalism offers a pathway toward stability. The analysis identifies three dimensions necessary for a durable settlement: regional security autonomy; equitable management of key resources, particularly oil and agriculture; and credible international guarantees to maintain autonomy. Drawing on cases from Iraq, Bosnia‐Herzegovina, and Canada, the examination shows how asymmetrical arrangements can accommodate powerful regional actors, such as the Kurdish‐led Syrian Democratic Forces, while preserving national cohesion. The article outlines mechanisms to address Syria's pluralism, including constitutional recognition of regional jurisdictions, a Federal Security Council with veto provisions, binding revenue‐sharing agreements, and joint security protocols. It also evaluates the role of international actors, especially the United States, as potential guarantors of autonomy and security in the absence of a strong central state. By grounding asymmetrical federalism in Syrian realities, the article demonstrates its potential for representative governance.
Dilan Okçuoğlu (2026) studied this question.