The latest violence in Syria confirms a hard truth: The current regime has neither the capacity nor the will to rebuild a unified, pluralistic state. Eight months into power, and just after the March massacre of Alawis, the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham group and tribal militias loyal to Damascus are now targeting another minority: the Druze.
This time, Israel stepped in. Committed to protecting the Druze, it pushed back tribal and government forces under Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa, forcing a ceasefire. Yet the fighting has not stopped, and there is no sign the regime intends to share power or protect minority communities through federalism or territorial autonomy.
So, what is the long-term solution?
The Druze spiritual leadership has demanded one: an “opening of roads towards our Kurdish brothers,” as it put it last week, linking Sweida in the south to Kurdish-controlled territory in the northeast, held by the Syrian Democratic Forces.
The Druze spiritual leadership has demanded a solution: an “opening of roads towards our Kurdish brothers,” linking Sweida [Suwayda’) in the south to Kurdish-controlled territory in the northeast, held by the Syrian Democratic Forces.
Years ago, Walid Phares, former foreign policy adviser to President Trump, argued for a “freedom corridor” connecting Kurdish and Druze regions through a secure zone, from Abu Kamal to the Golan Heights, passing near the U.S. base at Tanf. He presented this plan to the House Counterterrorism Caucus in 2009.
The moment has arrived to put that idea into action.
The Druze have formally requested the opening of such a humanitarian corridor from the SDF commander, Gen. Mazloum Abdi. The SDF, a disciplined and battle-tested force, can implement it, but only with support from the U.S. and Israel. The Kurds are now sending a batch of humanitarian aid to Sweida.
Kurds and Israelis are natural allies, but they lack a direct connection. The corridor would change that, creating a secure bridge between Israel, the Kurds and the Druze. It would serve as a protective buffer against future massacres, regional instability and threats to Israel’s security.
Strategically, the corridor would block Iran’s land route from Iraq into Syria and Lebanon. In any regional conflict, it would help contain Iran’s proxies and reinforce a Kurdish-American-Israeli-Druze alignment.
Had this plan been implemented a decade ago, many of the recent atrocities could have been prevented and Israel could have strengthened ties with key natural allies in the region. Instead, the U.S. and Europe rushed to recognize and lift sanctions on the new rulers in Damascus.
Europe, in particular, acted out of fear of Islamism in Europe and the pressure to create conditions for millions of Syrian refugees to return. Still, appeasement has not brought stability. It never will.
The freedom corridor is a viable, strategic alternative. It is in the map of the “New Middle East” unveiled by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in September.
A corridor that changes the game
The freedom corridor is more than a defensive measure. It would redefine the political geography of Syria and the wider region. It would connect two resilient, secular, pro-Western populations — the Kurds and the Druze — creating a protected spine that could anchor a post-Assad future. It would also give other minority groups that have no trust in the Syrian de facto regime a physical and political space to survive and self-rule away from jihadi militias and the failed central regime in Damascus.
The corridor would give them leverage to negotiate that future on more equal terms.
Each week of inaction leads to more bloodshed, more displacement and more lost ground to extremist fighters. There is a moral case, there is a strategic case and there is now a political opening.
Kurds are celebrating the 13th anniversary of establishing their well-managed administration, known as Rojava (Western Kurdistan), sustained despite Islamic State group threats and Turkish invasions since 2018. Unlike the new Syrian regime, they have built an inclusive system where Christians, Yezidis, Kurds and Arabs live freely and work together toward a better future. They are the true alternative on the ground, proof that stability and pluralism work with them, not with an Islamist mindset that seeks domination through massacre and exclusion.
The U.S. has invested, especially militarily, in the SDF. That alliance has held back the Islamic State group, challenged Iranian influence and kept a check on Bashar Assad’s power. Without follow-through, however, those gains risk unraveling. The freedom corridor would secure them, reinforce U.S. credibility and send a message that Washington stands with its partners, not just when they fight terrorists but also when they face existential threats.
For Israel, the corridor could serve a humanitarian and national security interest. The Druze are not just an ally; they are kin. Geopolitically, cutting Iran’s land bridge to the Mediterranean is one of Israel’s highest priorities. The corridor does all.
Each week of inaction leads to more bloodshed, more displacement and more lost ground to extremist fighters. There is a moral case, there is a strategic case and there is now a political opening.
The freedom corridor must move from proposal to policy before it is too late.
A version of this story appeared on July 23, 2023, in the daily Threat Status newsletter from the Washington Times.
