Muhsen AlMustafa, a researcher assistant at the Omran Center for Strategic Studies specializing in military and security affairs, believes that building a professional army in Syria is far-fetched, as the army relies on loyalty in appointments and promotions rather than competence and professionalism, despite having an organizational structure of an Eastern style. He considers that human resources are the main obstacle to any transition toward a professional army.

“Any army can be professional, but we must ask how and why professionalism is needed. The regime’s army has the structure of a professional army and adopts the Eastern model in the division of its units. However, the core issue lies in its human element, which makes it difficult to move toward a professional army.”

Muhsen AlMustafa, researcher assistant at the Omran Center for Strategic Studies

He stresses that the chain of command in the Syrian army has been heavily influenced since 2011 by Russian and Iranian interventions, both through official channels and informal networks of influence, which weakened decision-making centralization and made it harder to control certain units. Although Bashar al-Assad officially remains in control of the chain of command, in practice this control is subject to balances imposed by allies.

AlMustafa points out that Iran is not interested in restructuring the army but focuses instead on bringing in militias and signing agreements that allow it to deploy and supply militarily, aiming to keep the regime weak but not collapsing. Russia, on the other hand, began steps toward restructuring but faced resistance from the regime itself, and its efforts slowed due to the war in Ukraine. Economically, he explains that the ongoing “restructuring” measures are administrative and low-cost, with the possibility of limited external funding to keep the army running, while heavy arms deals remain beyond the regime’s capacity.