Photo Credit: The New York Times/ Tomas Munita

Currently, international attention is rightly focused on implementing the peace plan put forward by former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan and preventing Syria from sliding further into full scale civil war. Ending the conflict has proven to be a difficult task as fighting has continued, while introduction of U.N. monitors has proven problematic.

Should regime change occur, as has happened in other countries impacted by the Arab Spring, the security sector reform challenges facing a transitional government would be no less daunting. In the immediate aftermath of the conflict, Syria's new authorities would need to restore public order and prevent the kind of civil disturbance, looting, and criminal activity that occurred in Baghdad in 2003.

They would also have to establish control of weapons depots, some reportedly containing weapons of mass destruction, border crossing points, and vital infrastructure, including government buildings, museums and cultural centers. These tasks would be made easier by the introduction of international peacekeepers; however organizing and deploying such a force in a timely manner would be an additional challenge. In the longer-term, a transitional government would face problems similar to those experienced by other countries in the aftermath of the Arab Spring.

Syria has large, powerful military forces that have historically played a major role in the country's political affairs. These forces would have to be brought under civilian authority, returned to barracks and eventually right-sized and refocused on external defense. Similarly, Syria's extensive internal security services and paramilitary groups would have to be vetted, reorganized and demobilized in a manner consistent with the rule of law.

Finally, the Free Syrian Army and the local citizen committees will have to be brought into a unified chain of command and integrated into new security structures that will also include legacy forces. These are daunting tasks.

While it is critical to end the current fighting, there is a need to think ahead should Syria experience the kind of transformation that has occurred elsewhere in the region.   

Related Publications

Iran and Israel Are Racing Toward Confrontation in Syria

Iran and Israel Are Racing Toward Confrontation in Syria

Monday, May 21, 2018

By: USIP Staff; Mona Yacoubian

Ties between Tehran and Damascus have been close since the 1979 revolution, but the relationship deepened after Syria’s civil war erupted in 2011. With the Assad regime’s survival at stake, Tehran doubled down on its support, providing critical military assistance—fighters and strategists—and economic aid estimated to be in the hundreds of millions of dollars.

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

What is Next for U.S.-Turkey Relations?

What is Next for U.S.-Turkey Relations?

Friday, April 20, 2018

By: Eric S. Edelman

Relations between the United States and Turkey have come under increasing strain in the past two years over the U.S. role in Syria and Ankara’s strengthening ties with Russia. American support for Kurdish forces battling ISIS has angered Turkey, which sees the cooperation as bolstering Kurdish nationalist elements inside its borders. USIP Board member Eric Edelman, a former U.S. ambassador to Turkey during the George W. Bush administration, and USIP International Advisory Council member Jake Sullivan, who served as Vice President Joe Biden’s national security adviser, provide some insight on the state of Turkish-American relations.

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

Osama Gharizi on U.S. Objectives in Syria

Osama Gharizi on U.S. Objectives in Syria

Wednesday, April 18, 2018

By: Osama Gharizi

From Lebanon, Osama Gharizi shares his analysis about the clarity of U.S. objectives after retaliatory missile strikes targeting the Assad regime’s suspected chemical weapons facilities. Gharizi says these strikes sent a signal to Assad and his allies that there are limits to U.S. and coalition intervention in Syria. In turn, these limits strengthen Russia, Turkey, and Iran’s roles as the diplomatic arbiters to negotiate a peace deal. Separately, Gharizi addresses the risks associated with the suggestion of setting up an Arab force in Syria that could create further obscurity in terms of U.S. intent and objectives versus those of Arab countries forming such a force.

Conflict Analysis & Prevention; Civilian-Military Relations

Q&A: After Airstrikes, What’s Next for the U.S. in Syria?

Q&A: After Airstrikes, What’s Next for the U.S. in Syria?

Monday, April 16, 2018

By: USIP Staff; Mona Yacoubian

On Friday evening, the United States, together with Britain and France, launched a joint military operation in response to the Syrian regime’s April 7 chemical weapons attack on Douma. The Douma attack left more than 40 civilians dead and several hundred experiencing symptoms of exposure to toxic chemicals. The coordinated airstrikes hit three targets associated with Syria’s chemical weapons infrastructure: a scientific research center, a chemical weapons production facility, and a chemical weapons storage area. Around this time last year in April 2017, the Trump administration launched a unilateral cruise missile strike on the Shayrat airfield following a sarin attack by the Syrian regime on the town of Khan Shaykhoun, which killed more than 90 civilians. U.S. Institute of Peace Senior Advisor for Syria Mona Yacoubian provides some insight into the airstrikes and the challenges that lie ahead.

Conflict Analysis & Prevention; Global Policy

View All Publications