The interview explores the complex challenges facing Syria after more than a decade of conflict, focusing on identity, governance, and pathways to inclusive recovery. Drawing on his recent return to the country, Zedoun Al Zoubi reflects on the deep exhaustion of Syrian society, the visible scars of destruction, and the devastating impact of sanctions. Yet he underscores the resilience of Syrians, who continue to strive for renewal despite immense hardships.

A central theme is the crisis of national identity. Zedoun argues that Syria has long lacked a unifying national identity capable of transcending sectarian, ideological, and regional divides. The war has intensified this fragmentation, exposing the absence of inclusive symbols and narratives. For him, rebuilding a shared identity is not an abstract ideal but a political necessity, one that requires recognition of diversity, the rehabilitation of inclusive symbols, and the institutionalization of local and national belonging.

He links this identity crisis to the failures of governance. Zedoun stresses that centralized, authoritarian rule cannot secure Syria’s stability, nor can sectarian-based power-sharing arrangements. Instead, he advocates for a model of participatory governance grounded in administrative decentralization. This approach would allow elected local authorities to manage local affairs—such as education, health, and infrastructure—while the central government retains responsibility for defense, foreign policy, and macroeconomic management. He highlights the Syrian constitutional declaration’s reference to linguistic and cultural rights as a step toward embedding pluralism within governance structures.

Drawing on examples such as the “Abshiri Horan” solidarity campaign, he illustrates how strong local identities, when aligned with national unity, can mobilize resources effectively and foster social cohesion. In his view, decentralization enhances accountability, strengthens trust, and provides mechanisms for communities to see tangible results from their contributions.

Zedoun stresses repeatedly that dialogue is the only viable path forward. He rejects both violent confrontation and external imposition, warning that further polarization and demonization will only deepen divisions. Instead, he calls for layered dialogues: local, national, sectoral, and cross-communal. Such dialogues, he argues, are essential for drafting a genuinely participatory constitution and ensuring an inclusive transitional process.

On the regional and international front, he notes that Arab states remain inclined to support stability through engagement with the current government, while international dynamics—such as the potential easing of sanctions—will continue to shape Syria’s trajectory.

Ultimately, Zedoun concludes that Syria’s future hinges not on waiting for external actors or the failure of rivals, but on Syrians themselves embracing dialogue, rejecting hatred, and committing to the arduous but necessary work of rebuilding a shared identity and participatory governance.