In the article “Human Rights: Activists Discuss Post-Assad Syria”, several scholars discuss “The Day After” plan concerning the state of post-assad Syria. One scholar Steve Haydemann – of the USIP – states that the plan focuses on developments that assist “already autonomous regions”. Professor Afra Jalabi then talks about the importance of equality and justice for Syrians, specifically under rule of law. In another article “Syria After Assad: Heading Towards a Hard Fall?” writer Michael Eisenstadt, takes a more radical view on post-assad Syria. For example, he suggests the idea of an Alawite statelet; the unlikelihood of one resultant state with a strong central government; and Iran taking advantage of this broken state to strengthen its involvement and alliances. Concerning the first article discussed, it is important to realize the extent to which this civil war is effecting the rest of the world. Yes this “The Day After” plan definitely involves Syrian diplomats, scholars and the like, but the involvement of countries such as the US, and Germany has been crucial in its development and success thus far. Another thing this article brings to light is the human rights aspect of post-assad Syria. Yes it may be obvious to outsiders that human rights should be one of the focuses in considering the future Syria, but when it comes to foreign policy and government development, justice is not always top priority. The second article discussed was chosen precisely because it gave a completely different persepective on the future of Syria – a prediction that could be seen as logical or extreme.  Nonetheless this author arguably has a quite radical view on the future of Syria and how outside interaction was negatively impact the nation. However, towards teh end of the article Eisenstadt suggests that Washington should continue humanitarian acts by helping Syrian refugees across the Middle East and that the US is one of Syria’s only helpful allies in the end. This gives an interesting dilemma in foreign players with Syria.

I will honestly say I chose this topic with very minimal knowledge on anything related to Syria. When finding articles, I was simply looking for sources that helped me understand the state of Syria before, during, and after Assad and the uprisings. I chose one of these articles because it gives a good, holistic picture of Syria – from its people to the climate to politics – and how everything factors into the Syria we know today.  One point in particular is the fact that different people have different ideas as to what being a Syrian means. For example many are Sunni-Muslims who speak Arabic, for these people that is exactly what being Syrian means. Then there are the minority groups who – by the time of the uprisings – are seen as a threat to Nationalists. This can be seen as a cause of the focus of revolution shifted to issues of politics and religion. The second article I have chosen because it related this massive topic to something very specific, reminding me of the complexity of this revolution. It focuses on a city that, 17 months after the uprising began, had decided to take their lives out of the control of the regime and created councils – including a military council – so that the city could run itself. This of course happened after months of attacks between rebels and the regime. Although daily life can still be a challenge in this city of Aazaz, the people are satisfied that they are at least not under the rule of the Assad government.