The stories encountered while working with Syrian refugee families in New Zealand were nothing short of devastating. These were not abstract reports from afar but deeply personal accounts of torture, imprisonment, and extrajudicial killings—testimonies that laid bare the unimaginable suffering inflicted by Bashar al-Assad’s regime.
The sheer savagery of the repression shattered any lingering illusions about the regime’s capacity for cruelty within the supposed norms of the liberal world order. In those moments, the idea of Syria’s liberation from such tyranny felt less like a hope and more like an unreachable dream.
However, after nearly 14 years, that moment arrived when Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), led by Abu Mohammad al-Golani, seized control of major Syrian cities, including Damascus. Syrians worldwide, including in Europe, celebrated this turning point, taking to the streets with their flags of solidarity and full of hope for their homeland.
For the millions of Syrian refugees in EU nations, this moment of triumph brings uncertainty. While many may feel a sense of joy, they also face a pressing new question: What comes next for them as refugees?
Meanwhile, EU nations have responded by halting new asylum applications, signaling a shift that has raised concerns among many Syrians. Many may wish to wait and see how HTS governs before deciding to return to their homeland.
EU policymakers now face a critical dilemma. Should they encourage Syrian refugees to return home with support packages, or should they allow for voluntary repatriation on an individual basis?
For refugees in Turkey and Lebanon, where they face hostilities and limited opportunities, the decision to repatriate may be more straightforward. However, for those in EU countries, the situation is more complex.
Refugees in the EU enjoy access to social services and have pathways to citizenship. Many have been in Europe for nearly a decade, benefiting from integration policies and generous hospitality. For these refugees, the choice between staying in the EU or returning to Syria is a difficult and deeply personal one.
The EU’s decision to halt asylum applications seems to signal that European governments are preparing for the possibility of mass repatriation. From their perspective, the restoration of Syria and the return of its citizens could be seen as a priority in a post-conflict world.
The fall of Assad’s regime is undoubtedly positive news, and temporary protection measures for Syrians in Europe may now be considered fulfilled.
However, the safety of returning refugees remains a significant concern. HTS, while now in power, has previous links to groups like Al-Qaeda and ISIS. Whether HTS will establish a government based on democratic principles and protect minorities is unclear.
For groups such as the Yazidis, Christians, Shias and Kurdish Syrians, the situation remains precarious. While Assad’s downfall offers hope for a more inclusive and democratic future, this vision must be weighed against new conflicts and power struggles.
Recent clashes between Turkish-backed forces and Kurdish groups have heightened fears of further instability and violence, particularly in regions already devastated by war.
These minority communities, which have long been marginalized and caught in the crossfire of competing factions, now face the additional threat of displacement and persecution in a rapidly changing political landscape that provides little assurance of security or justice. The harsh reality of a fragmented and volatile nation tempers hopes and aspirations for a liberated Syria.
The EU has previously paused refugee applications in response to other conflicts, such as the Afghan crisis, where many refugees were forced to return. But as we know, Afghanistan remains unsafe, especially for minorities and women, who continue to face severe restrictions on education and employment. This precedent raises concerns about whether Syria is truly ready for the safe return of its people.
A further complicating factor is that the European Union is already heavily burdened with the responsibility of supporting millions of Ukrainian refugees fleeing Russia’s ongoing aggression. This has placed immense pressure on European institutions, straining resources and testing the limits of public and political tolerance for large-scale migration.
In this context, the potential repatriation of Syrian refugees could ease some of this strain by reducing the social and economic costs associated with hosting displaced populations.
The main challenge is to determine whether Syria, particularly the areas governed by HTS, will uphold the rights, security and livelihoods of returning Syrians, especially those from minority communities.
The organization’s historical ties to extremist ideologies and its current control over parts of northwestern Syria raise significant doubts about its ability to promote a genuinely inclusive and democratic society.
Conversations between EU foreign secretaries and the Jolani group that leads HTS are ongoing, signaling an attempt to find common ground or establish frameworks for cooperation.
These discussions are delicate, as they involve balancing humanitarian concerns, geopolitical interests and the broader implications of engaging with a group still viewed with suspicion by many in the international community.
Despite these efforts, the future remains uncertain, as the direction HTS will take in shaping its governance, enforcing the rule of law, and ensuring the safety of returnees is yet to be seen. For now, the prospect of large-scale repatriation remains as much a political gamble as a humanitarian necessity.
If HTS adopts a repressive stance akin to that of the Taliban, the EU must reevaluate its approach to repatriation. Until HTS allows democracy to thrive and ensures the protection of all citizens, regardless of their religion, ethnicity, or background, Syrian refugees should not be pressured to return.
Ultimately, the EU must uphold its commitment to voluntary repatriation. Syrian refugees deserve the autonomy to make this life-altering decision at their own pace. EU policymakers should recognize that repatriation is a gradual process and ensure that refugees are not forced into unsafe conditions.
The EU should extend temporary protection to Syrian refugees and engage in diplomatic efforts to guarantee their safe return when the time is appropriate. As an institution founded on human rights, the EU must remain committed to protecting those rights.
At the core of this issue is a critical dilemma: while the EU can promote repatriation and lay the groundwork through diplomacy, the decision to return must always be voluntary, particularly for those Syrian refugees currently residing in EU member states.
Dr Sheraz Akhtar lectures at Thailand’s Chiang Mai University. His research focuses on refugee communities’ social, economic and education development in host countries.
Patrick Keeney is a Canadian writer and editor. His interests lie at the intersection of politics, philosophy and the history of ideas.
