Finals

At the beginning of this class, my understanding of the politics and events in the Middle East were minimal at best. All I really knew was that there were very serious events going on in the Middle East, specifically in and around Syria. As the class began, I began to understand why there was so much unrest around the Middle East and with this project, I sought to have a deeper understanding of the Syrian Civil War, its contenders, and its stakeholders around the world. For a little background information, the Syrian Civil War began on March 15, 2011 when protests in Damascus and the southern city of Deraa demanded the release of political prisoners. During the protests, the Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad’s security forces shot a number of people dead in Deraa, which triggered days of violent unrest that steadily spread throughout the nation. Since then, it is estimated that 310,000 people have been killed in the conflict, 3.9 million people have fled Syria as refugees, 7.6 million have been driven from their homes, and 12.5 million are in need of immediate life-saving aid, as of April 2015, according to an article posted to CNN.

Now that you are familiar with the numbers of the Syrian Civil War, I’d like to introduce the stakeholders. The main stakeholder is of course, Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad and his Regime, followed by his close allies, China and Russia. In a recent blog entry titled, “Chinese and Russian Relations,” it has two artifacts that show just how close these countries are. China and Russia both back Syria and, as stated in the blog, they will defend them against powers such as the United States. One difference between the two is that Russia has much more to loose within this conflict since they are providing arms to the Syrian government, while China seems to be only providing moral support. In another blog entry titled, “The Syrian Government and its Allies, Both New & Old” it shows how the Syrian government would like for Russia to expand their influence in the Middle East in order to counter the expansion of the United States. A great deal of my blog deals with the relationship between Russia, China, and the Syrian government as they seem to be some of the biggest supporters of the Syrian regime, but they are not the only ones. In the same post as before, I also discuss how other Middle Eastern countries such as Tunisia, have decided to reconcile their ties with the Regime in order to counter a greater threat, rebel groups such as the Islamic State of Iran and Syria (ISIS). This reconnection came after an attack on a museum in Tunisia which killed numerous foreigners and it greatly affected the tourist industry within Tunisia as stated on a recent Reuters article. With the backing of two superpowers such as Russia and China, and its re-connection with Tunisia, it seems that the Syrian government has begun to regain some power, internationally at least. This does not necessarily mean it will bring an end to the war as there are still various opposition groups within Syria fighting against Assad.

Speaking of being against Assad, let us now look at those who oppose Assad’s regime, internationally. While Assad has begun to reconnect with other Middle Eastern countries, it does not necessarily mean that all of the Middle East will want to join him. In fact, Jordan, one of the countries that border Syria, has made no attempt to reconcile with the Syrian regime, in fact, they have done the complete opposite. In a blog post titled, “Syria & Jordan Relations” I discuss how because of the growing violence in Syria, Jordan has closed down two of its border crossings that connect with Syria. Unlike Tunisia, Jordan has closed itself off even more from Syria despite the threat that knocks at their door. Turkey is another country who is not pleased with the Syrian regime. While Turkey has been one of the main countries hosting Syrian refugees, they have been greatly criticized due to the rising numbers of foreign fighters entering Syria through Turkey. In a blog post titled, “Turkey Criticized Over Role In Syrian Conflict” it shows how, despite its recent criticism, Turkey has been doing a lot to stop the flood of foreign fighters into Syria. They also decided to close down a border crossing on its border with Syria due to the rising violence but they would still allow humanitarian aid which shows that while Turkey is largely opposed to the violence, they are still willing to aid the people of Syria.

In another blog entry titled, “Turkey and Syrian Relations” I state how the relationship between these two governments has been rough especially since Turkey had a tomb of a very special person in Syria and because of the threat of rebel groups attempting to destroy it, they evacuated it without really saying much the regime. This shows just how little respect Turkey now has for Assad and his regime. Another country who has little regard for Syria is France, which can be seen in my blog entry, “Rising Tensions Between France & Syria.” Recently, France sent a few diplomats to Syria in the attempt to reconnect with them due to the threat of rebel groups reaching Paris. In the end, France decided against it, as well as Britain in a later article, both stating that if they retied their ties it “would likely end all hope of a political transition and push moderates into the arms of radical Islamist groups.” The significance of this is that while there are a few countries who are beginning to reconnect with Syria, the majority will continue to oppose them. World powers such as France & Britain want nothing to do with them, and having as much influence as they do, it means most countries will take their side and not Assad’s. These stakeholders are by no means the only ones, but they are some of the most prominent stakeholders of this year at least.

The major stakeholders have been named, but what are there perspectives as far as perspectives of globalization go? There are many opposing views here but if I had to lump all the stakeholders into two groups, I would put those who support Assad as the political realist, while those who oppose him would fall under the category of political idealist. Just to note, not all of the groups have the same views and perspectives, but in the name of time and space, this is how I feel they all fit in general terms. The define these terms, a political realist believes in a strong central government with little intervention from outside forces while the political idealist believes that while war can be necessary, they should do everything in their power in order to try to reduce its impact, if not avoid it entirely. They also believe in international ties in order to avoid war and while a strong government is good, there need to be more things within the government to balance it out.

While doing my own research, we also read Controversies in Globalization edited by Peter M. Haas and John A. Hird. Within this book there were a variety of topics and the one that I felt related the most to my topic was the fifth chapter “Terrorism and Security: Is International Terrorism a Significant Challenge to National Security.” This chapter showed two sides to the controversy, Charles Duelfer believes that international terrorism is a significant challenge  to national security and it is only going to grow larger. There are certain trends that are becoming apparent in the post 9/11 decade and, according to Duelfer, one must pick up these trends in order to better prepare for terrorism. This is something that Tunisia has tried to do with their reconnection with the Syrian government. On the other hand, John Mueller believes that while there is a certain threat of international terrorism, there is more of a threat in the overreaction to it. The Western countries such as France and Britain shows this very well as they have been very patient and thoughtful in their endeavors in Syria. As an example, France was directly attacked by a terrorist organization and while they considered reconnect their ties with Syria, they eventually decided against it as they saw that that road would not lead to any good for anyone, except maybe Assad. Someone who I feel would fall in the middle of these two would be Turkey and Jordan as they have taken some military actions by closing down their borders but then again they haven’t gone so far as to provoke war with Syria, or some of the rebel groups.

The research I have done throughout the semester and the readings and assignments done for class have been very intense and eye opening. If it were not for this class, I would still be very blind to the events in the Middle East. This is especially true with the Civil War going on in Syria. The war has been going on for about 4 years now and there seems to be no end insight. With all of the different stakeholders in this conflict, the end of the war is likely not near despite recent peace talks, which ended in failure. With all this research I have done, I am interested to see where the conflict will lead and if other countries in the Middle East, or around the world, will reconnect with the Syrian regime or if they will further distance themselves from them and support another group within Syria.

Throughout the semester I have been researching the Syrian Government, the Islamic State within Syria, and both of their connection or allies in the battle for Syria but towards the end of the semester I focused more on the Syrian Government. For a little background information, the Syrian Civil War began on March 15, 2011 when protests in Damascus and the southern city of Deraa demand the release of political prisoners. During the protests, security forces shoot a number of people dead in Deraa, which triggered days of violent unrest that steadily spread throughout the nation. Since then the violence has escalated which has really made or broke political ties with Syria. As many are aware, Russia has been one of the closest allies to Assad and his regime. In this blog entry titled “The Syrian Government and its Allies, Both Old & New” it shows how Assad would like for Russia to expand their influence throughout the Middle East in order to counter the expansion of the United States and its allies. It also shows how due to outside threats such as radical rebels, other Middle Eastern countries are beginning to reconnect with Syria such as Tunisia.

While other Middle Eastern countries are beginning to reconnect with Syria, other Western countries are not so sure. In a blog entry titled “Rising Tensions between France & Syria,” it states how France and Britain was considering reestablishing ties with Assad for the same reason as Tunisia, to counter a greater threat such as ISIS. Alas, both countries decided against it as Britain states reestablishing ties “would likely end all hope of a political transition and push moderates into the arms of radical Islamist groups.” The Syrian government lost many political ties at the beginning of the Civil War, and even before, and while it has begun to regain some, and they still have Russia at their side, it doesn’t necessarily mean they will regain control of Syria anytime soon, at least not all of Syria.

As far as the perspectives of globalization go, Russia is very much a political realist and Tunisia is also, but not as much as Russia. Russia has always been in favor of a strong central government and they believe that Assad is the only person that can control Syria. As for Tunisia, by reconnecting with Assad, it means they believe more in him than any other group attempting to take control in Syria. For the Western Nations, such as France and Britain, they are the complete opposites as they are seen more as political idealist. A political idealist believes that while war can be necessary, they should do everything in their power in order to try to reduce its impact, if not avoid it entirely. They also believe in international ties in order to avoid war and while a strong government is good, there need to be more things within the government to balance it out.