Secretary of State Marco Rubio and President Donald Trump deserve credit for attempting a diplomatic initiative with Syria. Their May 23, 2025, decision to waive Caesar Act sanctions reflected a willingness to take risks for peace and stability. The administration recognized that perpetual sanctions could push Syria deeper into the orbits of Russia, China, and Iran. Their effort to provide Syria’s government an opportunity to demonstrate responsible governance was strategic.
Unfortunately, interim President Ahmad al-Sharaa has squandered this opportunity with sectarian violence. The massacres of more than 200 Druze civilians between May and July 2025, including twenty-one executed by government forces on July 15, prove that sanctions relief has failed to moderate the regime. These atrocities occurred after the waiver took effect, suggesting that the government interpreted American generosity as weakness rather than incentive for reform.
Atrocities occurred after the waiver took effect, suggesting that the government interpreted American generosity as weakness rather than incentive for reform.
The timeline reveals a pattern. Rubio certified on May 23 that waiving sanctions served U.S. national security interests. Within weeks, Syrian government-affiliated militias escalated attacks on Druze communities in Suwayda province, employing anti-Druze slogans and mutilating bodies. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights and Amnesty International documented these as deliberate, sectarian killings rather than random violence. The government’s July 15 ceasefire announcement came only after international outcry reached a crescendo.
This violence builds upon the March 2025 massacres that killed more than 1,000 Alawis in coastal cities. The Syrian Network for Human Rights documented 803 extrajudicial killings between March 6-10 alone, including thirty-nine children and forty-nine women. These systematic attacks targeting religious minorities reveal the true character of al-Sharaa’s government, led by former commanders of Al Qaeda-affiliated Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham and Jabhat al-Nusra.
The question now concerns who comes next. Syria’s Christian community, 10 percent of the population before 2011 and less than 2 percent today, faces existential threat. Kurdish populations in northern and eastern Syria remain vulnerable to both government forces and Turkish-backed militias. The pattern established with Alawis and Druze suggests these communities may face similar persecution once the government consolidates power.
While the Trump administration’s calculated engagement could moderate extremist elements, prevent state collapse, and block adversaries from filling the vacuum, effective diplomacy requires adjusting to facts on the ground. The post-waiver massacres demonstrate that Syria’s government views American engagement as license for sectarian consolidation rather than opportunity for inclusive governance. Former terrorist leaders like al-Sharaa and Foreign Minister Assad Al-Shaibani have not abandoned their extremist ideologies, despite Western outreach.
The national security rationale for maintaining the waiver has evaporated. Sectarian violence destabilizes the region by driving refugees into Jordan and Lebanon. Religious persecution strengthens extremist recruitment narratives. American credibility as a defender of religious freedom and human rights suffers when U.S. policy enables documented atrocities.
Regional minorities watch whether the United States will defend vulnerable populations or prioritize expedient arrangements with former terrorists.
Rubio retains authority to revoke the 180-day waiver based on changed circumstances. The July massacres provide compelling justification for immediate action. Reimposing sanctions would demonstrate that American policy responds to evidence and holds governments accountable for their actions. This flexibility represents strength, not weakness, in diplomatic engagement.
The stakes extend beyond Syria’s borders. Regional minorities watch whether the United States will defend vulnerable populations or prioritize expedient arrangements with former terrorists. Christian communities throughout the Middle East need tangible evidence that religious freedom remains an American priority. Kurdish populations require assurance that their safety matters in U.S. calculations.
Moving forward requires balancing pragmatism with principle. The administration should reimpose sanctions while maintaining diplomatic channels for future engagement contingent on measurable improvements in minority protection. The U.S. Department of the Treasury should designate officials responsible for the massacres as Specially Designated Nationals. Congress should examine how future waivers can include stronger accountability mechanisms. The time to act is now.
