The sudden collapse of the Assad regime could result in Syrian refugees being pressured into returning. But Maissam Nimer and Susan Beth Rottmann say refugee returns must be voluntary, dignified, and sustainable – not driven by political agendas. Given Syria's shattered infrastructure, instability, and limited opportunities, 'safety' means more than simply the absence of violence
With the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime, Syrian refugees abroad, prevented from going back for more than a decade, can finally imagine returning to their home country, at least for a visit. They no longer risk being detained by the regime, or forced into the military. Many Syrian refugees in Turkey have said previously that the fall of Assad was a precondition for their safe return.
It did not take long for public debates to raise the prospect of return for Syrian refugees, particularly in countries like Lebanon and Turkey, which host the majority. Indeed, many European countries have halted asylum applications for Syrians.
Political change alone rarely prompts large-scale returns, as refugees must weigh up safety, infrastructure, and legal factors
However, political change alone rarely prompts large-scale returns, because refugees must weigh up safety, infrastructure, and legal factors. 'Safety' means more than a lack of state violence. A safe country should offer political stability and the opportunity to build a dignified life. It must include access to housing and basic services, and the chance to rebuild livelihoods. Displaced Syrians must approach return with caution, because premature or coerced return risks already vulnerable populations becoming even further victimised.
International frameworks for safety usually define it as the absence of direct 'fear of being persecuted' by a state 'for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion' as per Article 1A(2) of the 1951 Convention. By this narrow definition, post-Assad Syria is indeed 'safe'.
But such legal definitions do not help people like Mahmoud, a young Syrian we spoke to in Turkey: 'I wanted to return, but there is nothing there – no work, no home. It's like going to death.' This sentiment is common among displaced Syrians; several told us they have nothing left in Syria. As one of the participants of our research, Omar, says: 'Going back to Syria is no longer an option; I've got nothing left. At least here, I can survive notwithstanding it all'. For these individuals, returning would mean once again uprooting their lives and facing new safety challenges.
In the post-Assad era, local violent disputes and revenge dynamics – as well as Israeli airstrikes and incursions – could constitute new safety challenges
For many Syrians, the Assad regime was a source of terror. Young men in particular feared conscription, arbitrary detention, and checkpoints. While regime violence may be a thing of the past, local violent disputes and revenge dynamics – along with Israeli airstrikes and incursions – could cause new security challenges. Minority ethnic and religious groups, as well as women, may face harassment.
The decision to return is deeply personal, shaped by individual circumstances and on-the-ground realities. Years of hostilities have left homes and infrastructure destroyed, and there is limited electricity, water, and healthcare. Housing may well have been seized and occupied by others; war-damaged buildings may need considerable investment to become habitable. After years of financial struggle abroad, many families simply do not have the resources to rebuild.
Furthermore, our research on Return Aspirations and Trajectories of Migrants within the GAPs project funded by the EU found that some refugees have successfully built new lives abroad. Many have established businesses, made a living, or raised children who no longer speak Arabic or know Syria as home. Educational stability and cultural integration abroad are critical factors for families who decide against return.
On the other hand, those with strong economic ties to their home country – such as family businesses or real estate – may view return as an opportunity to reclaim lost livelihoods. Individuals with political connections or influence may see a role for themselves in shaping Syria's future. While returning is desirable for some, it would be devastating for others. We need to move beyond thinking of return as a binary choice: either never returning or imminent return, and take compromise options into account.
The international community must approach refugee return with caution. Voluntary, safe and dignified return should take place in accordance with international law. While interest in return is natural, especially if conditions improve, we must give Syria time to rebuild in a way that fosters enduring safety, stability, and sustainability.
We must give Syria time to rebuild in a way that fosters enduring safety, stability, and sustainability
'Safety from state violence' should not be the only prerequisite for return. Policy-makers must also consider a country's liveability and agency. Governments should give refugees the right to make informed choices about their futures, and this means committing to help rebuild Syria's infrastructure and instituting inclusive, equitable administrative systems.
'I'm very uncertain now. I went back to Syria briefly for my parents' funeral. The situation there is still terrible, and it's not safe… Bombs, conflicts… We lived in fear of death every day,' Khalil, a 28-year-old Syrian from Aleppo, told us. The fact that he could go back when the regime was in power means that Khalil was not directly and personally targeted, but the experience of fear for him and others is likely to continue.
The future of Syria depends not only on the end of violence but on the creation of a society where its people – whether they choose to return or remain abroad – can live safely and with dignity. Anything less risks repeating the cycle of displacement and instability that has defined the past decade. As we have seen with repatriated Afghan migrants, coerced returns are often followed by re-migration, with the help of smugglers, under more desperate conditions.
Safety, then, means more than just surviving – it means having a home worth returning to. Syria now stands at a crossroads. The main focus should not be on how many refugees return, but on whether they can rebuild lives worth living.
