In mid-March 2011, protests against arbitrary leadership and for democratic institutions took place in Syria's major cities. The Syrian regime has responded brutally and the dynamics have since been developing into an ongoing armed conflict.
Soon counting its sixth year, the Syrian conflict has been described as sectarian in character. Other scholars have criticized the usage of this term and the concept behind it in this particular context. Overall, this paper will argue that the concept of "sectarianism" does help to explain the current conflict in Syria, while listing and explaining the areas in which the concept helps, as well as stressing the dangers implied when using the term and which analyses have to accompany the usage of the concept, i.e. how the concept does not help to explain the conflict.
For this purpose, a historical perspective will be avoided in order to account for the modernity of the involvement of sectarianism in Syrian politics. The author attempts to put the concept into its modern context. Main time frames and features of the conflict outlined in the following are regarded as critical in the sectarianization of the political sphere, and therefore in the development of the conflict. This includes Hafez al-Assad's coup to power, and the strategies employed by his regime before and after the uprisings. In particular, the building of a sectarian narrative and how it serves to supply resources to the regime will be described.
Lastly, this paper will outline the involvement of sectarianism in international as well as extremist participation in the conflict. Taking all these factors into account, the main argument of this paper is that non-doctrinal sectarianism is involved in the conflict and needs to be taken into account when attempting an explanation of the conflict. However, it will also argue that sectarianism does not serve to superficially explain the conflict as an outbreak of age-old hatreds between Sunni and Shii Muslims, and that, most importantly, many more fault lines, additional to sect, are involved.
These arguments lead to a conclusion that an explanation of the conflict will involve the concept of "sectarianism", but most importantly needs to go beyond simple binaries and has to include the multi-dimensionality, heterogeneity, and complexity of the political set-up before the uprisings, during the uprisings, as well as during the conflict up to this day.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Sectarianism
2.1 Doctrinal vs. Political Sectarianism
3. Case study: Sectarianism and the Armed Conflict in Syria
3.1 Conventional Understanding
3.2 Critical Perspectives
3.3 The Assad Regime
3.4 The Uprisings and Assad's Strategy
3.5 Regional Politics: International Involvement and Extremism
4. Conclusion
5. References
Research Objectives and Themes
This paper examines how the concept of "sectarianism" explains the ongoing conflict in Syria, arguing that while political sectarianism is a significant factor in regime strategy, the conflict is not an inevitable result of ancient religious hatreds but a complex modern development.
- The distinction between doctrinal and political sectarianism.
- The role of the Assad regime in instrumentalizing sectarian narratives.
- The impact of international involvement and extremist groups on the conflict's dynamics.
- Critique of simplistic, binary analyses of Syrian society.
- The historical timeline from the Al-Assad coup to the current armed conflict.
Excerpt from the Book
3.3 The Assad Regime
An analysis of Syria today is essential since, as Quilliam (2015) has noted "Hafez al-Assad is the architect of modern Syria" (para. 1). Assad seized power in 1971 following a number of coups, and after having previously been the post of commander of the Syrian air force and minister of defence. He then went on to personalize his power over the government and created a system that is coined "divide and rule", pointing towards an artificial split in society created by the ruling family. After Hafez al-Assad's death, his son Bashar al-Assad came to power. To the surprise of many, Bashar al-Assad replaced many of his father's close advisors that were mostly from the rural provinces with "children of the elite - a generation raised in the city, with no constituency other than their own concentric networks of influence" (Quilliam, 2015, para. 8).
In 1989, not even 20 years after Hafez al-Assad's coup, Daniel Pipes notes a dramatic change in the position of the "the Alawis", now the ruling Elite inheriting key military positions, dominating the government, and enjoying a disproportionate access to education. According to him, "for many centuries, the Alawis were the weakest, poorest, most rural, most despised and most backward people of Syria" (p. 429). In an attempt to answer the question on how this change occurred, the author suggests a sectarian agenda pursued by the Assad family. Here, it is important to link back to the distinction between doctrinal and political sectarianism as introduced in the first paragraphs of this paper. Many scholars have argued that Assad's government did not promote Alawi Islam in terms of its doctrine. In the Syrian case, it is not the doctrine that is disputed, but the access to resources and political power is assigned on the basis of religious affiliation, i.e. group membership. Therefore, the Assad regime has politicized Alawi affiliation (Ismail, 2013).
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Outlines the research question regarding the utility of "sectarianism" in explaining the Syrian conflict and establishes the methodological focus on modern developments rather than historical primordialism.
2. Sectarianism: Defines the conceptual framework, distinguishing between religious/doctrinal issues and the process of political sectarianization.
3. Case study: Sectarianism and the Armed Conflict in Syria: Analyzes the demographic and political landscape of Syria, contrasting conventional binary interpretations with more critical perspectives regarding the regime's strategy and the impact of the 2011 uprisings.
4. Conclusion: Summarizes that while the concept is useful, the conflict must be understood as multi-dimensional and artificially induced by the regime's political strategies.
5. References: Provides the bibliographic foundation for the arguments presented throughout the text.
Keywords
Syria, Sectarianism, Assad Regime, Political Sectarianization, Middle East, Armed Conflict, Alawis, Sunni-Shii, Identity Politics, Regional Politics, Extremism, Modern Development, Power Dynamics, Social Groupings.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the central research question of this paper?
The paper explores in what way, if at all, the concept of "sectarianism" helps to explain the ongoing conflict in Syria.
What is the core argument of the author?
The author argues that while the conflict is not an eruption of age-old religious hatreds, political sectarianism is a crucial tool used by the Assad regime to maintain power and distribute resources.
How does the author distinguish between doctrinal and political sectarianism?
Doctrinal sectarianism refers to disputes over religious belief, whereas political sectarianism involves the deliberate politicization of sect identity to control access to resources and power.
What methodology does the paper employ?
The paper utilizes a case study approach, focusing on modern Syrian history—specifically the era of the Al-Assad family, the 2011 uprisings, and the subsequent armed conflict—to avoid primordial, long-term historical analysis.
What are the primary themes discussed in the work?
The main themes include the structural roots of the Syrian conflict, the regime's "divide and rule" strategy, the impact of international actors, and the rise of extremist groups in the context of sectarianization.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Keywords include Syria, Sectarianism, Assad regime, political sectarianization, identity politics, and power maintenance.
How did the Assad regime use sectarianism to respond to the 2011 uprisings?
The regime created a sectarian geography and narrative to portray the conflict as a choice between their rule and an existential threat from extremist majorities, thereby forcing minority groups to seek protection through the regime.
What role does the "invention of tradition" play in this analysis?
The paper uses this term to criticize the common tendency to explain every Middle Eastern conflict as a product of ancient religious animosity, arguing that these identities are instead modern, constructed phenomena.
Does the author believe the conflict itself is inherently sectarian?
The author concludes that while the conflict has been "sectarianized" by the regime and extremist groups, the initial uprisings were driven by demands for democracy, freedom, and an end to corruption, not by sectarian identity.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Rebekka Schliep (Autor:in), 2017, Can sectarianism explain the conflict in Syria?, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/369469
