Diaspora Mobilization for Western Military Intervention During the Arab Spring

ABSTRACT

Literature on diaspora interest groups suggests that they exacerbate home-country conflicts by lobbying for hawkish interventions. However, studies fall short of understanding why diasporas support militarized interventions in home-country conflicts. Using original data on Libyan and Syrian pro-revolution activism during the Arab Spring, I demonstrate that extreme escalations in state repression, activists’ transnational ties, and norms supporting the “responsibility to protect” produced perceptions that militarized interventions were necessary countermeasures to mass killings. Overall, analyses of diasporas’ orientations to home-country conflicts should account for annihilative threats to populations at home, diasporas’ relations with those on the ground, and humanitarian intervention norms.     

“出兵-撤兵”与俄罗斯在叙利亚地缘政治目标的实现

叙利亚危机爆发后第五年,俄罗斯正式出兵叙利亚,成为打击“伊斯兰国”的重要力量。通过军事行动,俄罗斯成功阻止了恐怖活动的进一步蔓延、提升了自身国际影响力、在困境中绝处逢生。当前,中东地区矛盾依旧纷繁复杂,多方势力持续深度博弈,俄罗斯两次宣布从叙利亚撤出部队,展现了其军事-外交联动运用的“巧实力”,获得了战略红利、实现了部分既定地缘政治目标。然而,俄罗斯长期介入叙利亚与美国及西方展开地缘博弈,对其国家振兴无疑是一个沉重的负担,尤其是叙利亚持续动荡的局势及域外大国的深度介入,使俄罗斯虽两次宣布撤兵,却从未真正撤出,围绕叙利亚及中东地区主导权和国际话语权的争夺还将在各大国间反复上演。随着普京开启其第四个总统任期,俄罗斯在解决叙利亚危机、破除西方制裁、振兴国家经济等问题上依然面临严峻挑战,这需要普京和俄罗斯精英阶层寻求解决问题的“新思路”。     

The Syrian chemical weapons disarmament process in context: narratives of coercion,consent, and everything in between

This article explores the successful Syrian chemical weapons disarmament process (2013–2014) within the context of post-Cold War coercive arms control policy and scholarship, particularly related to the Middle East. Based on extensive interviews with individuals involved in the process, we explore the coexistence of two rival, apparently contradictory narratives: one (backed by Western states) claimed coercion was the main contributor to disarmament, while the other (defended by Syrian authorities and Russia) insisted on the process’s consensual features. Our study suggests that the hybrid disarmament framework, embodied in a unique joint mission between the United Nations and the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, conveniently accommodated both narratives, which in turn contributed to the mission’s success. We then ask whether, with the apparent US retreat in the Middle East, the Syrian case (as well as the 2015 Iran nuclear deal) signals a possible turn in international non-conventional arms control processes that would leave more room for consent and diplomacy.     

Weaponization of the Land and Property Rights system in the Syrian civil war: facilitating restitution?

The Syrian civil war has seen the weaponization of its land and property rights system by the primary combatant groups in the country. The government is the most robust in its use of the tenure system to locate, target, destroy, confiscate, cleanse and gain revenue by way of the institutions and attributes comprising the system. Based on fieldwork with Syrian refugees in Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey, this article describes seven ways the Syrian government is currently using the land and property rights system in its military-on-civilian engagements. While the objective of such use is presumably to permanently prevail over opposition civilian constituencies, the article describes how this actually creates evidence usable for effective restitution of lands and properties subsequent to the war.     

The Renewed ‘Struggle for Syria’: From the War ‘in’ Syria to the War ‘over’ Syria

ABSTRACT

Syria is generally considered a case of non-intervention. One of the dominant (since the 1990s) kinds of intervention, namely multilateral humanitarian intervention, failed, as did other attempts by a select group of countries to implement a ‘red line’ concerning the use of chemical weapons. However, in this case, there is no sharp dichotomy between intervention and non-intervention. In lieu of an intervention that would tilt the balance and coordinate help to halt massacres, various rival and uncoordinated international and regional interventions overlapped over time, fuelling a market for violence. ‘Weakened interventionism’, as opposed to principled and hierarchical intervention, has manifested itself in Syria in a model recalling “the struggle for Syria” of the 1960s in a new, contemporary setting.     

PAX SYRIANA: THE STAYING POWER OF BASHAR AL ASSAD

The staying power of Bashar al Assad and the ability of his state to outplay their regional and international enemies have come as a surprise to many. Rather than just the Russians and Iranians being responsible for this there was a coherent strategy to win back not just the territory but also the alliances that it temporarily lost during the course of this war. And unlike Saddam after the first gulf war, Bashar al Assad is already remerging fast as a regional player again. Veteran diplomats such as Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski had cautioned against a fight against Assad, so had seasoned academics such as David Lesch and Patrick Seale. Whilst many experts had predicted the fall of Assad within weeks in 2011 a careful reading of the Lebanese war and Syrian regional policy would act as the best guide to answer how Assad has managed to stay in power despite all the odds. A combination of his father's legacy and regional alliances has helped him a great deal. The ethnic and sectarian fault lines of Lebanon, Iraq, Turkey and Palestine have all contributed to his success including receiving support from virtually all stake holders of relevant neighbours such as the Shia and Christian of Lebanon, the Palestinian factions, the Alevi and Arabs of Turkey, the Sunni or Iraq. An ability to divide his opponents both on the battlefield and diplomatic table was the main factor that turned the tide in favour of Assad along with the obvious military support from Russia and Iran, but also by key Arab states such as Egypt and Algeria.     

From Kosovo to Syria: the transformation of NATO Secretaries General's discourse on military humanitarian intervention

The civil war in Syria began approximately four years ago and has resulted in the murder of thousands by the Assad regime and the flight of millions to neighbouring countries. The international community's reluctance to intervene to halt the ongoing massive human rights violations has been explained in geopolitical, military-strategic, diplomatic, and legal terms. Yet, what does this imply normatively? And does the weakening of the military humanitarian intervention (MHI) norm support arguments regarding the poverty of constructivist security studies? This article examines these two questions and demonstrates the weakness of the MHI norm, especially in light of the new interpretations and meanings which authoritative agents ascribe to its key conceptual components in changing strategic, social and political contexts. Yet, the article employs constructivist tools to explore the endogenous challenges to the MHI norm while proving the added value of constructivist security research, not only for explaining “norm evolution” but also “norm decline”. Taking discourse as a reflection of social norms and an arena for encouraging new intersubjective interpretations of concepts, it examines the above assertions by analysing the discourse of NATO Secretaries General from 1999 (Kosovo crisis) to today.     

TALIBANIZATION OF THE ISLAMIC STATE AND THE QUEST FOR RETROSPECTIVE LEGITIMACY

This paper develops the notion of ‘Talibanization’ – a concept which stems from the resilience and the determination of the Taliban to remain a dominant player in Afghanistan even after the downfall of their state in 2001. The factors that helped the Taliban to maintain their influence after the disintegration of their state constitute a pattern which could be applied to other conflict-driven areas such as Syria. By critically examining the socio-political conditions in the Syrian district of Jarablus, this paper demonstrates the ways in which the inept post-IS administration is inadvertently helping IS to gain what we call ‘retrospective legitimacy’ a drive which could sustain its influence for many years following its downfall.     

Understanding the War in Syria and the Roles of External Players: Way Out of the Quagmire?

With Western commentators, media and think tanks still being the predominant determinant of the global international relations discourse and therefore also of the discourse relating to Syria, discerning actual realities coherently from the fog of a very biased narrative presents great challenges. Deciphering the complexities of West Asia has never been easy and the situation in Syria is particularly complicated. This article argues inter alia that the Commonwealth as an entity needs to add its efforts, voice and prestige to the global effort to prioritize the restoration of peace in West Asia in general and Syria in particular.     

Global South solidarity? China,regional organisations and intervention in the Libyan and Syrian civil wars

Why was China responsive to regional organisations’ call for intervention in the case of the Libya crisis, where it supported sanctions and an International Criminal Court referral, and acquiesced to a no-fly zone, but unresponsive to pressure from regional organisations for intervention in the Syria crisis, issuing repeated vetoes instead? Using interviews and other primary data, this article explains the variation by highlighting that China is most responsive to regional organisations when these groups remain cohesive, congregate around the same policy position and when they publicly criticise or isolate China.