What if the GOP was in power during the Syrian Crisis?

IEMED Mediterranean Yearbook 2013, 2013

The Syrian crisis has become a tough knot to unravel. The relentless battle that Bashar al-Assad’s regime is waging against the opposition is compounded by the intrigues of the regional powers that have become involved, directly or indirectly, in the conflict, making it that much harder to find a solution.

This thesis aims to analyze both the evolution of Turkish-Syrian relations during the period of the AKP governments and the emergence of the Syrian revolt in March 2011. With the popular revolts in many Arab countries starting in December 2010, Turkey’s general foreign policy vision, which had already undergone considerable changes from the traditional foreign policy of Turkey under the rule of the AKP government, was deeply affected by the Arab revolts. With the newly-emerged political and social conjuncture in the Middle East and due to the lack of foresight for any kind of a regime change or the collapse of secular and authoritarian regimes in the Middle East, the vision of zero-problem policy with neighbors did not easily adopt to the radical changes in the region. Nonetheless, the AKP government expected that the Assad regime would remain in power for only a few weeks, since the ruling elite in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya were toppled in a short time. Afterwards, she provided unilateral support to the Syrian v National Council, which was later replaced by the Syrian National Coalition and the Free Syrian Army by legitimizing her policy through humanitarian reasons. This thesis argues that the confrontation between the Sunni and Shia political entities, due to the rising sectarianism in the Middle East during the Arab revolts, led to the alienation of Turkey to her neighbors and therefore, Turkey’s zero-problem policy with Syria failed.

In December 2010, when trouble erupted in Tunisia, the Arab countries of West Asia and North Africa were mired in serious problems. In the entire Arab world, political freedom was at a premium, to varying degrees. There was large scale unemployment. Benefits of economic growth were cornered by a few; and the younger generation was restive. The crisis in Tunisia spread swiftly to other regional countries, for the economic and political conditions were not much different. It was thought that unrest would spread to Syria and the regime would collapse. This did not happen. Calls for rising up against the ruling Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's regime did not find traction. It took a lot of coaxing and involvement of external forces to get the fire ignited in Syria in mid-March 2011. Contrary to predictions, the Syrian regime has withstood relentless pressure and onslaught from abroad for nearly five years. A closer look at the conditions in Syria in 2010/2011 would help understanding why the regime has survived; the complexity of the situation in Syria; and what makes the search for a negotiated political solution difficult.

This article discusses the relation and more importantly the interests of the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran from a realist perspective with regard to the long negative history between the two states since the Iranian Revolution in 1979, with keeping an eye on the United States’ highest priority given to the safety of the States of Israel in the American Policy in the Middle East.

Strategic Assessment, Vol. 16, No. 2 (July 2013), pp. 35-46.

The Syrian crisis was initially motivated by Arab Spring 1 revolt both in the Middle East and North Africa in 2010. The prolonged Syrian civil war itself is a "Puzzle" due to complicated situations to resolve with multiple actors involved and uncertain interest. Besides internal conflict, it has also created more enormous implications for global peace and security in the areas of global migration, terrorism, the use of chemical weapons. Now in its eight years, this article aims to analyse the Syrian crisis through different theoretical 2 perspectives of International Relations behind the cry for a regime change in Syria since 2011 and how Syria has become a failed state. At the same time, the role and the interest of different actors 3 in the conflict are discussed. In collecting information, historical method is followed and used description to analyse the data.

The Syrian crisis is quite important for Middle Eastern Security dynamics because it has gradually transformed the entire regional order. There are many regional states involved. Moreover, the crisis has seen how foreign involvement became a new norm for the semantics. The placement of Turkey and Iran and the formation of a trifecta between Russia-Turkey-Iran are of large value. The added plunge of China in Syria is going to have certain impacts for both Middle East and China. Furthermore, non-state actors have a role to play as well. All in all, the regional order and the security milieu give an insight as to the multiple impacts for the region due to the lingering Syrian Crisis. Crisis. he international order at all times, remains highly elusive. Similarly, the regional order is no different because it is something which cannot be at one time calculated as a whole and is abstract. Middle East is a valid example because its regional order is full of significant cracks and craters and is manifest in a war without end. This is largely because of various wars and conflicts. The Syrian crisis is no doubt one which is highly intricate and important for the region. And because of the high stakes, it has become equally important for the international realm as well. Thus the international order and the regional order become somewhat tangled in the realm of Syria. The Syrian crisis has given birth to a series of important features and is responsible for transforming the regional order and with it, perhaps, the international order as well. Its history shows how complex all the actors involved in it have been and going further it will be noticed that though the dynamics greatly changed, the complexity remains obscure. The US remains an involved state but new actors like Russia and China have also become involved. Not only that the regional actors like Israel, Iran, Turkey and KSA have greater stakes and have fairly used non-state actors. The inception and spread of the armed non