Syria: A Look At One of the Most Fragile States in the

World

Foundations of Colonialism to Independence: 1924-1946

● French presence in Syria can be traced back before the collapse of the ottoman empire

● The French gained Syria as a territory after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and World War I

French Mandate Takeaways:

1. Political Instability 2. Creation of a class system based on a Syrians ethnicity or religious affiliation

Unrest and Political Change: 1946-1970

● Sunni control of state following independence

● Series of military coups follows → intense instability○ Alawite move into top military positions

● Ba’ath Party coup in 1963○ Establishes secular state

● 1970 Hafez al-Assad assumes control in bloodless military coup

Foundations of the Assad Regime: 1970-2000

● Political and economic inequality → favoritism of Alawite ○ Top political and military leaders Alawite

● Brutal suppression of Syrian people

● Rebellion of Muslim Brotherhood (Siege of Hama)

● Resistance to peace of with Israel○ 1967 Golan Heights

Hafez al-Assad

Rationale Behind Current State of Peacelessness

● Some of us chose 2011 and the Civil War as the demarcating line between the current state and the historical context. However, as a group we decided this was too narrow of a focus.

● Three components to our group definition of the current state: 1. 2000-2011: Rise of Bashar al-Assad and continuation of issues of structural

violence that existed during his father’s reign2. 2011-10/23/2015: Syrian Civil War and the direct violence issues that

characterize the conflict3. 10/23/2015-Present: Recent Developments such as the increased

involvement of Russia and France

Different approaches to where to start & why

Start with a discussion of Bashir al Assad and his lack of reform (unrest leads to Arab Spring)

Show video to illustrate the result of Arab Spring and the ensuing violence

Summarize video

finish by talking about the most recent events

Current State of Peacelessness: 2000 - 2011

● Damascus Spring (2000-2001): brief period of democratic ideas○ ended when Assad felt threatened and began to repress Syrians again

● Income gap ○ Shifted the focus of economic development from rural areas to urban areas=increased

poverty ■ 62% of Syrians live in rural areas

● “Baathization”○ giving job preferences to Baathists

● Ranked 139 out of 142 for gender equality○ lack of equal rights and opportunities for women

Vox Video from October 14, 2015

● Syria’s War: Who’s fighting and whyhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKb9GVU8bHE

Current State of Peacelessness: 2011 - 10/23/2015

Direct Violence:

● Arab Spring peaceful protests, government violence against protesters● Outbreak of Civil War

○ Creation of the Free Syrian Army● Use of Chemical Weapons by the Assad Regime ● ISIS begins to take over a large amount of territory ● Increased Sexual Violence

Structural Violence

● Lack of accessible healthcare ○ Hospitals being destroyed, doctors fleeing

● 80% of Syrians now live in poverty

Current State of Peacelessness: Recent Developments

● Russia has increased involvement in Syria leading to Assad gaining momentum

● Global Terrorist attacks (mainly attacks in France, Lebanon and Iraq) have led to global cooperation to try and defeat ISIS

Creating Our Group Vision ● Early group meetings included in depth discussion of own personal visions.

There were many similarities, as well as some key differences.● Achieving a negative peace was a crucial first step for all group members ● Different ideas for positive peace emerged● Almost all group members divided their visions into distinct categories or

stages, this also occurred strategies.

Vision ● Short Term (focus on negative peace)

○ Reestablishing sovereignty ● Medium Term (efforts toward positive peace)

○ Kurdish Region○ Stable, Democratic government ○ Basic needs of population are met

● Long Term (achieving positive peace)○ economic equality○ religious and ethnic tolerance○ gender equality ○ economic development ○ successful reconciliation

Strategy GROUP STRATEGY

STAGE 1: ● Peaceful Settlement ● Humanitarian Assistance

Stage 2:● Democratization with a focus on Human Rights ● Health ● Gendered Perspective

Stage 3:● Economic Development ● Education/ Peace Education● Reconciliation● Preventative Diplomacy

Specific peace tool that we each focused on (Democratic Peace, Peaceful Settlement, Humanitarian Assistance, Formal Diplomacy

General similarities and why they exist

Differences between strategies and why (differing levels)

A general strategy that broadly represent all of our strategies

Stage I: Ending Direct Violence and Sowing Seeds of Positive Peace

STAGE I● Peaceful Settlement

○ This tool is oriented towards ending the civil war and bolstering Syrian sovereignty

○ We included both types of diplomacy, Formal and Track II, in order to find as many instances of common ground as possible.

● Humanitarian Assistance○ The humanitarian crisis that has accompanied the civil war has been catastrophic.○ NGOs

Stage II:Establishing Efforts Towards Positive Peace

Stage II: ● Democratization with a focus on Human Rights

○ Majority of Syrians want a Democratic and fair government○ Individual liberty rights such as right to assemble, etc

● Health ○ Long term accessible health care

● Gender Perspectives to include women and increase gender equality

Strategy Stage III: Economic and Social Development

Stage III● Economic Development

○ Rebuilding Syria’s GDP○ Rebuilding Syria’s Infrastructure

● Reconciliation○ Ensuring those who were harmed have trust and feel protected by their new government

○ Increase focus on education to decrease levels of inequality based on gender, religion or ethnicity

■ Also in order to prevent conflicts in the future

● Preventative Diplomacy○ Forming good relationships with all actors in the area ○ Creating trust between both sides of the Syrian Civil War

Critiques of Strategy

- Alex: almost too broad (decreases feasibility) and relies initially on identifying certain actors which inherently has issues (who should be at the table, why)

-Jack: relied very heavily on assumptions for how people would act and react

- Maite: Imposing Western ideas that might not be effective

- Sophie: too focused on developments far in the future, too sparse on current issues and relationships

-Maria: willingness for sides to actually stop fighting-foundation of vision

Any Questions?