At evening prayers on Sunday, June 22, Syria saw the first terror attack against a church since the fall of the Assad regime: a suicide bomber detonated an explosive device at the Mar Elias Church in the Dweilaa neighborhood of the capital Damascus, killing 22 people and wounding more than 50.  

The Syrian government condemned the attack, and after initial investigations, quickly blamed the Islamic State group (IS) and its backers. While it did not specify the latter, the government was likely referring to Iran and its affiliates—even if its reluctance to point to Iran by name suggested a desire to distance itself from the current conflict in the broader region.  

The church bombing took place less than 48 hours after the first American strikes on Iran’s nuclear program, suggesting that the attack in Syria was start of an indirect response by Iran, which is unable to hit back in the Gulf and unwilling to respond in Yemen, Lebanon, or Iraq. Therefore, it is turning to Syria, whose new regime it sees as an American project that is still in a vulnerable stage.  

Indeed, other circumstantial evidence suggests that Iran may have been indirectly responsible for the attack. The Islamic Republic had previously provided IS with help in expanding in Iraq and Syria. For example, it allowed the group to establish an enclave in the Al-Sa’an desert region of Hama province in mid-2017, followed by another in a remote area of Suwayda province in mid-2018. It has also turned a blind eye to the organization’s leaders using Iranian territory to enter Iraq and Syria.  

IS had engaged in a campaign of explicit incitement prior to the attack, calling on its supporters to exploit the chaos arising from war across the region to step up its recruitment, training, and recruitment, notably in Syria. Through unofficial social media accounts, it also labelled the new government and President Ahmed al-Sharaa as its foremost enemies, and called on its supporters to take the initiative to attack that government’s interests.  

IS has several direct and indirect motives for carrying out the attack on Mar Elias Church, suggesting further, similar operations are likely. The group has a long history of targeting the places of worship of Christians and other minorities as a prelude to broader operations. In Iraq, for example, IS precursor the Islamic State in Iraq attacked the Our Lady of Salvation Syriac Catholic cathedral in Mosul in late 2010, then went on to carry out 30 bombings in a single day in 2012.  

Through the Mar Elias attack, IS may have sought to achieve the following:      

• To undermine the stability that Al-Sharaa’s government has been seeking, with some success, to establish. The deadly IS attack has undermined this effort and placed the government on the back foot, as well as demonstrating to Syrians and world powers that Damascus is incapable of imposing stability.  

• To undermine government efforts to sow peaceful coexistence. Since the launch of the operation that toppled the Assad regime, Syria’s new rulers have sought to reassure all of Syria’s minorities that they will preserve their rights and security, even establishing a special committee for civil peace. However, the IS attack has placed the government in a new state of confusion, weakening its efforts to build trust with Syria’s religious and ethnic minorities. This could have repercussions for its relations with all minorities, including the Druze, Alawites and Kurds, as well as the Christians. The Sunni extremist group’s targeting of the Christian minority—specifically their largest denomination, the Greek Orthodox—places pressure on its members not to take part in building the new state, whether through the People’s Assembly or other institutions. This creates the appearance of a monochrome new government in which a single group has a monopoly on power, creating justifications for foreign intervention that would further confuse the government, which is already facing Israeli intervention on behalf of the Druze in Suwayda and Russian intervention on behalf of Alawites in the coastal region.  

• Weakening the economic environment that the government is striving to fix, as a top priority in its state-building and counterterrorism efforts. The attack has shaken the trust the government was seeking to build with Syrian and foreign investors. IS seeks to keep the Syrian economy weak, in order to exploit that situation to attract and recruit members to its own ranks and prevent the state from acquiring what it needs to combat the group.  

•   Laying the groundwork for an IS comeback. The jihadist group is seeking to demonstrate make its presence felt in Syria and influence the government’s priorities. IS wants to sow chaos and block any progress towards security, political, economic, and social stability, creating the ideal environment through which to ensure its own survival, expansion, and chance of making a comeback. It is hoping to reverse the decline in its influence since late 2019, which has included the killing of most of its leaders and the arrival to power of a new Syrian government, with an Islamist background, that enjoys popular and international acceptance and poses a threat to IS.  

In conclusion, the jihadist group is seeking to exploit the current moment of regional instability for its own ends. It appears to have been preparing for this for some time, in order to undermine the transitional phase in Syria. This intersects with the goals of Iran and its proxies, whose current situation gives them reasons to sow further chaos in the region. This could lead to a resurgence in  terrorism, which they could use as a tool to pressure the international community not to allow the fall of the Iranian regime.  

Finally, the Syrian government is clearly determined to continue its efforts to combat terrorism, prevent the return of IS, bring about stability, prevent anything that could undermine of civil peace and coexistence, and create a secure economic environment. It is taking serious steps toward building a state for all Syrians, regardless of their religious and ethnic affiliations, by preserving their rights and ensuring protection and security for all.