SDC Representative Bassam Ishak on current situation in Syria and the founding of the Levantine National Council: “The defense of Christian interests must come from those who are directly affected and deeply invested in the future of Syria”

WASHINGTON, D.C. — After a turbulent six months following the fall of the Baathist regime of dictator Bashar al-Assad, SyriacPress talked with Bassam Ishak, President of the Syriac National Council of Syria (SSNC) and a member of the Presidential Council of the Syrian Democratic Council (SDC) Mission in Washington, D.C. 

The SSNC advocates for a democratic, secular, and pluralistic Syria with equal rights for all citizens, regardless of ethnicity, religion or race to ensure rights of Syriac Christians and all components of Syrian society. 

SyriacPress asked Ishak about his experiences during the past months, his opinion about the current Syrian Transitional Government (STG), his work in Washington, and the newly established Levantine National Council. 

SyriacPress: In early May, Christians in Syria announced the establishment of the Levantine National Council with the goal of uniting their aspirations. In your opinion, how will this Council contribute to strengthening the voice and presence of the Syriac and other Christian peoples in Syria in general and conveying their voices internally and even abroad? 

Bassam Ishak: The newly formed Council, Al-Majlis al-Mashriqi, is critically important at this stage of Syria’s history, as the country transitions from the Assad dictatorship into a new political era. This period presents an opportunity to shape a new system of governance and, eventually, a permanent constitution. Christians in Syria have specific perspectives on what this future should look like, and it’s essential that these views are expressed clearly and effectively. 

The Council plays a vital role in bringing together Christian voices — particularly those with expertise in law, governance, and political advocacy — to articulate the aspirations and concerns of their communities. It is not enough to rely solely on religious leaders. While their moral guidance is valuable, the complexity of today’s political landscape requires professionals with the right credentials and experience to represent the community’s interests both domestically and internationally. 

Moreover, the current governing structure in Syria has taken on a distinctly religious tone, which directly affects the Christian population. This makes it even more important for Christians to address these changes from a perspective rooted in both faith and political rights. 

Finally, the Council recognizes that the defense of Christian interests must come from those who are directly affected and deeply invested in the future of Syria. A strategy of appeasement or avoidance, often seen in traditional religious leadership, is no longer sufficient. What’s needed now is a proactive, courageous, and informed approach — and that is precisely what Al-Majlis al-Mashriqi aims to provide. 

SP: Does your own organization [Syriac National Council] intend to become involved in the Levantine National Council and/or a member? 

BI: We have been asked to join and are considering joining.

SP: The Syriac people are known as a Christian people and have not yet been mentioned or recognized by their national name by the Syrian Transitional Government (STG). Rather, they have faced attacks from the Minister of Culture in a new attempt to diminish their history. How do you view this issue? Will this reality change in the future? 

BI: The lack of recognition for the Syriac people — and, frankly, for other ethnic and religious groups in Syria — is a significant shortcoming in the performance of the Transitional Government. All Syrian communities, including Christians, Syriacs, Kurds, Arabs, and others, have endured years of war, instability, and suffering. Naturally, we all hope to see the Transitional Government succeed in building a new Syria that truly includes and represents all Syrians. 

However, up to now, the promise of a “Syria for all Syrians” has remained just that — a promise, not a reality. You cannot claim to build an inclusive Syria while excluding the very identities that make up the Syrian mosaic. Even though the current constitution is temporary, it gives us a clear insight into the mindset of those drafting it. The fact that it does not acknowledge any ethnic or religious components of Syrian society is deeply concerning. 

As Syriacs, we are not opposed to the idea of a transitional government. On the contrary, we want to be part of the process and contribute positively. But inclusion must be more than symbolic — it requires active listening, recognition, and space for all communities. Without that, Syria risks repeating the mistakes of the past. You cannot achieve internal stability or prosperity without first recognizing the country’s true diversity. Countries like Singapore have succeeded precisely because they’ve built constitutions that recognize all groups, protect religious freedoms, and embrace pluralism. 

Regarding the recent comments by the Minister of Culture, they were a serious insult — not just to Syriacs in Syria, but to millions around the world. Dismissing the Syriac language as merely a dialect of Arabic is not only historically inaccurate, it reflects a dangerous mindset — one that prioritizes a single identity at the expense of truth and inclusivity. Ironically, this damages the Arabic language as well, because elevating it through false claims does not serve its dignity. We all respect and speak Arabic — it’s our national language — but this must not come at the cost of denying the heritage and legitimacy of other native languages, like Syriac. 

This moment should serve as a lesson to the Transitional Government. Ministers, especially those responsible for culture, must understand Syria’s rich and diverse history. They must respect all communities and recognize that Syria’s strength lies in its pluralism. Moving forward, we hope to see better decisions, greater recognition, and a true commitment to building a Syria for all its people. 

SP: Moving on to another topic. What are the latest developments in the Syrian Democratic Council’s representation in Washington and the most prominent meetings it has held recently? How are you working to convey the voice of the peoples of Syria, within your recent diplomatic work, especially given the significant influence of the United States on the Syrian issue? 

BI: One of the most meaningful steps I’ve taken recently to amplify the voice of the Syrian people in Washington was my visit to Damascus — my first in over thirteen years. Until recently, I had only been able to travel to northeast Syria, but this visit marked my return to Damascus after the fall of Assad’s regime. The goal was to witness the situation firsthand and engage directly with a broad range of Syrians to better understand their daily realities — their concerns, aspirations, and challenges. 

Upon my return to Washington, I actively participated in several panel discussions and policy forums where I shared these insights. One key issue I raised was the impact of economic sanctions. What I saw on the ground made it clear that ordinary Syrians — who have no ties to or responsibility for the previous regime — are suffering immensely due to these sanctions. That’s why I’ve advocated for their removal, highlighting the unintended humanitarian consequences they’ve had on innocent civilians. 

In addition to public advocacy, I’ve held meetings with members of Congress and their staff on Capitol Hill to ensure that the voices and needs of Syrians are represented in US policymaking. I also specifically emphasized the plight of Christian communities in Syria, who have been deeply affected by the ongoing instability and lawlessness. Many expressed their urgent desire for a government capable of restoring the rule of law — without the presence of foreign rebel factions, whose recent actions, especially in the coastal areas, have caused serious concern among local populations. 

I was encouraged to see that following these efforts, and amid broader diplomatic developments, President Trump publicly announced his intention to lift sanctions during his visit to Riyadh. Since then, we’ve seen the initial steps from several government institutions working to implement this directive. I view these developments as a positive sign, and I remain committed to ensuring that US policy reflects the real needs and hopes of the Syrian people. 

SP: Syria has seen significant transformation and volatility over the past five months. We’ve seen the violent clashes in the coastal region which left over a thousand Alawites killed. The conflict between the Druze in the south and the STG is still ongoing. Furthermore, the agreement between the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) and the STG is still to be worked out in detail. In your opinion, will the STG be able to control the security situation in the country? 

BI: The hope of many Syrians I spoke with during my recent visit to Damascus — including my own — is that the Transitional Government will eventually be able to control the security situation across the country. However, I am not convinced that their current approach is effective or sustainable. 

The government’s strategy seems to rely almost entirely on enforcement and the projection of power. While enforcement is indeed one component of security, it is not sufficient on its own. Effective security also depends on building public trust and establishing legitimate, locally-rooted institutions. One of the core problems is that many of the forces attempting to impose order are not under the direct control of the Transitional Government, and even those that are, often come from outside the regions they’re trying to secure. 

This has created a major disconnect between security forces and local communities, particularly in the coastal region. Had the government prioritized recruiting local police forces from the resident populations of these areas, it would have likely been much easier to stabilize the situation and build trust. 

Moreover, the Transitional Government has not yet articulated a compelling, inclusive vision for Syria’s future that speaks to the full diversity of its people. While some segments of the population may feel represented, many others do not. This lack of inclusivity is a major weakness and overcoming it will require a shift away from rigid ideological frameworks toward more pragmatic, locally responsive policies. 

In short, security in Syria will not be achieved simply through superior force or larger numbers of personnel. It will require the Transitional Government to rethink its strategy and empower local communities, unify fragmented forces under a central command, and offer a political vision that resonates with all Syrians. Without such steps, lasting security will remain out of reach.

SP: The US has announced the lifting of sanctions on Syria. President Trump even met with head of the Transitional Government Ahmad al-Sharaa in Riyadh. The EU this week has also announced the lifting of sanctions. Do you support the lifting of US sanctions? In other words, do you agree with President Trump that the Syrian people deserve a new chance, despite the fact that the Syrian Arab Republic is now led by former members of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS)? 

BI: Yes, I do support the lifting of US sanctions, and I believe President Trump was right in saying that the Syrian people deserve a new chance. After my recent three-week visit to Syria, I returned to Washington more convinced than ever that the sanctions have been harming ordinary Syrians — people who have already suffered tremendously over the past 14 years of war and instability, and who bear no responsibility for the policies of past regimes. 

The recent lifting of sanctions by both the US and the EU — although conditional and phased — is a major step forward. In the case of the US, these sanctions have been suspended for 180 days, as the President alone cannot lift all sanctions without congressional approval. This initial suspension represents an important opportunity. Both the US and European governments are approaching this as a step-by-step process: sanctions relief will continue if there is tangible progress from the Syrian Transitional Government in return. 

Some of these sanctions date back to the 1980s, rooted in the dynamics of the Cold War and have long outlived their original purpose. Their continued enforcement has only deepened the suffering of innocent Syrians, many of whom are simply trying to rebuild their lives. So yes, the lifting of these sanctions gives Syria a rare and important chance to move forward — and it must not be wasted. 

As for the leadership of Ahmad al-Sharaa, I believe he should be given a chance — not for his own sake, but for the sake of the Syrian people. The reality is that Syrians are exhausted from war, division, and economic hardship. If al-Sharaa can provide stability, listen to the people, and correct course when needed, then he deserves the opportunity to prove himself. We all want to see him succeed, not for political gain, but because the people of Syria need and deserve relief, dignity, and a path toward recovery. And if he falters, we must speak up — not out of opposition, but to help guide Syria toward a better future. We’re all in this together, and our shared goal should be a Syria that serves all its citizens.