How Türkiye’s opposition responded to Assad’s downfall in Syria

Following opposition forces’ capture of Damascus in Syria, political reactions from Türkiye’s opposition parties have highlighted varying perspectives on the region’s future and the implications for Syrian refugees in Türkiye. 

The main opposition parties of the country are centering their responses to the post-Assad landscape on two primary concerns: preserving Syria’s territorial integrity, with a focus on avoiding the establishment of a so-called autonomous region for terrorism near Türkiye’s southern border and facilitating the safe and voluntary return of Syrian refugees currently residing in Türkiye. 

Opposition perspectives on Syrian developments

Discussions among Türkiye’s opposition have centered on how a transition could impact Syria’s internal dynamics and shape Türkiye’s policies on hosting Syrian refugees, while also addressing various additional concerns.

Istanbul Mayor Ekrem Imamoglu, one of the most prominent figures in the Turkish political arena, expressed discomfort with celebratory headlines such as “Prostration of Gratitude in the Umayyad Mosque,” pointing to Syria’s diverse demographics, including Alawite, Christian and other minority communities. 

The mayor of Istanbul called for restraint following Assad’s downfall, advising against triumphalist rhetoric and emphasizing the need for measured and pragmatic policies.

Meanwhile, an opposition figure faced backlash after sharing a fabricated Mustafa Kemal Ataturk quote on social media, complicating his attempts at a restrained response to the post-Assad situation.

The Republican People’s Party (CHP) leader Ozgur Ozel had faced the same criticism for proposing negotiations with Assad while opposition forces advanced in Homs, a move that made him seen as disconnected from the rapidly unfolding events a few days ago. 

Within the CHP, some district mayors and local figures have launched campaigns aimed at accelerating the departure of Syrian refugees, offering symbolic gestures such as free bus tickets. These initiatives have sparked controversy, with critics accusing them of exacerbating anti-refugee sentiments.

Bugra Kavuncu of the Good Party (Iyi Party) highlighted the importance of maintaining Syria’s territorial integrity and unitary state structure. While acknowledging the end of Assad’s authoritarian rule, he warned of new risks such as a “terror corridor” that could destabilize the region.

Victory Party (Zafer Party) leader Umit Ozdag has consistently positioned his party as a vocal critic of Türkiye’s refugee policies, using this issue to define its platform. Following Assad’s downfall, Ozdag intensified criticism of the ruling Justice and Development Party’s (AK Party) handling of the Syrian crisis, arguing that its policies exacerbated instability and made the large-scale repatriation of refugees impractical. 

The party leader cautioned that Türkiye and Iran could be next in line for destabilization following the fall of Assad. He urged the government to demonstrate sincerity in its policies by officially terminating the “temporary protection” status granted to Syrian refugees. Ozdag stated that such a move would signal a serious commitment to addressing the refugee crisis and pledged to closely monitor developments on the issue.

The DEM Party, meanwhile, called for a Syrian constitution that ensures representation for all ethnic and religious groups, advocating reconciliation.

During speeches in the Turkish Parliament, the co-chairs of the DEM Party called for the cessation of operations by the Syrian National Army against terrorist groups in northeastern Syria, advocating for dialogue instead.

With diverse views on Syria’s future and the fate of Syrian refugees, the parties focus on their own concerns and positions, each emphasizing different aspects of the debate.