Photo Credit: The New York Times/ Tomas Munita

On May 7, barring a last-minute delay, Syria will hold parliamentary elections. More than 2,500 candidates will compete for 250 seats, under the terms of a slightly modified constitution approved in a referendum in late February. According to the revised constitution — which, officials indicate, received the support of some 90 percent of votes cast in the February referendum -- restrictions were eased on the formation of new political parties, and the tenure of Syria's president was limited to two seven-year terms, unless exceptional circumstances require extending the president's tenure. Perhaps more important, the new constitution replaced a highly controversial clause that guaranteed a leading role for the ruling Ba'ath Party in Syrian society and politics with language establishing a multi-party system.

These elections have been welcomed by Syria's supporters, including Russia and China, which have praised them as evidence of the Assad regime's commitment to implementing the reforms it promised following the outbreak of the Syrian uprising in March 2011.

For most observers of Syria, however, there is far less to these elections than meets the eye. The constitutional referendum in February was widely criticized for taking place in the midst of widespread violence. The amendments approved are cosmetic and will have no meaningful impact on the distribution of political power. For example, under the new constitution, President Bashar al-Assad, in office since 2000, is eligible to serve two seven-year terms beginning in 2014. If he observes these term limits, he could serve 28 years as president, just two years shy of his father’s tenure. Should he determine that exceptional conditions exist, he could remain in office indefinitely. A number of newly-created parties are competing in the May 7 elections, but none of them are credible opponents of the ruling Ba`ath Party. The process for a new political party to secure approval virtually rules out the possibility that a truly oppositional party might be permitted to form.

Quite apart from these transparent attempts to exploit the appearance of reform, the elections are little more than a vain attempt to provide the Assad regime with a fig leaf of popular legitimacy and fend off international pressure for more far-reaching political change. Yet after more than a year of mass protests and a ruthless regime crackdown that has left some 10,000 Syrians dead and hundreds of thousands more wounded, detained, or displaced; in the midst of intense diplomatic effort to isolate the Assad regime and hold it accountable for crimes against humanity; in the face of a broadening web of economic sanctions targeting firms and individuals complicit in gross violations of human rights, the holding of elections is a bizarre, if not surreal, act by a regime determined to show the world that it remains unaffected by the turmoil and destruction it has wrought. Even if the elections are held on schedule, they will have no discernible effects. Their most likely result is an upsurge in the self-righteous rhetoric of the regime as it claims popular approval for the violence it has unleashed against its opponents.

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