What is the status of the situation in Syria?

Syria's civil war continues unabated in early 2013 amid an enduring international deadlock over how to mediate the twenty-two-month-old conflict that has killed more than sixty thousand people and displaced some seven hundred thousand more, according to the United Nations. In recent weeks, the United States and its allies have expressed concern that the chaos in Syria could help terrorist groups like Hezbollah obtain advanced weaponry, including chemical weapons, which could spark a regional conflagration. An Israeli airstrike on Syrian territory in January, which targeted sophisticated weaponry, highlighted this looming threat. The unrest has also proved a magnet for global jihadists, including al-Qaeda-linked groups like Jabhat al-Nusra, fighting for the establishment of an Islamist state.

Share

--

--

Western governments fault Russia and China--both staunch supporters of the Assad regime--for a lack of diplomatic progress on Syria. Moscow and Beijing have vetoed three UN Security Council resolutions aimed at isolating Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, and have rejected the imposition of economic sanctions. Policymakers in the United States continue to press for Assad's departure, but debate continues over whether greater unilateral action is prudent, including providing arms to the opposition.

What is the Syrian opposition movement?

The Syrian resistance remains highly fractured both politically and militarily, a concern many analysts cite as hindering more decisive international support. However, in November 2012, several Syrian resistance factions came together to form an umbrella group known as the National Coalition of Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces. The alliance, which was formed following months of division among competing groups, opened the door to international diplomatic recognition, greater foreign financing, and military aid. Sheikh Ahmad Moaz al-Khatib, a moderate Islamist cleric and prominent national figure within Syria, was elected as the coalition's president.

The new resistance group was quickly recognized by several countries including Britain, France, Turkey, and a number of Gulf Arab states. Washington, which hoped the new coalition would serve as a legitimate counterweight to a rising tide of jihadist insurgents in Syria, recognized the group in December. Meanwhile, the United States formally designated Jabhat al-Nusra, a jihadist group which has, in places, fought alongside more secular rebel factions, a Foreign Terrorist Organization. Many analysts say that Jabhat al-Nusra battle-hardened jihadists have eclipsed the effectiveness of Free Syrian Army fighters, and fear the group will hijack the revolution.

The Free Syrian Army was formed from a group of army defectors intent on waging a violent insurgency to depose Assad. While the FSA has served as the primary armed Syrian opposition force during the civil war, it underwent a major restructuring in December 2012. Rebel groups selected Brigadier General Selim Idris to replace the army's former senior officer, Col. Riad al-Assad. FSA's command is dominated by Islamists, many with links to the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafist groups. Analysts note that the FSA's makeup largely mirrors that of the new civilian opposition leadership.

What are the prospects for a UN-brokered peace agreement?

Lakhdar Brahimi, a veteran diplomat from Algeria, replaced Kofi Annan as the UN-Arab League special envoy to Syria in September 2012. Since he began, Brahimi has advocated for an international plan agreed to in Geneva last year, which calls for a ceasefire, the formation of a transitional government with "full executive powers," and elections. The so-called Geneva plan has the support of Western nations, including the United States, as well as both Russia and China, which have stood by Assad. But analysts say that neither the Syrian government or opposition is interested in the proposal, with rebels unwilling to consider a plan that does not include Assad's departure, and Assad unwilling to go voluntarily.

In January 2013, Brahimi pleaded with the international community to use the Geneva principles as a basis for action at the UN Security Council. The sticking point in such talks remains the role of Assad in any transition. Washington has categorically called for Assad to step down immediately, while Moscow has said such demands for Assad's ouster would preclude progress in peace negotiations.

What has been the policy of Arab and Muslim governments?

The Arab League suspended Syrian membership and imposed economic sanctions on Damascus in November 2011, unprecedented moves by the twenty-two-nation bloc. It also brokered an ill-fated peace agreement--a precursor to the Annan plan--with the Assad regime that called for ending violence against protestors and negotiations with opposition groups. In late December 2011, the League sent a team of observers to Syria to monitor the plan's implementation.

In January 2012, the League officially called for Assad to step down and requested a resolution from the UN Security Council in support. However, the proposal was vetoed by Russia and China (discussed below). Just a few weeks later, the League withdrew its observer mission, citing the continued violence.

Turkey, once a strong supporter of Syria, broke with Damascus after the government crackdown intensified, and has led calls for Assad to step down. Turkey has permitted Syrian refugees and opposition forces to reside within its borders. Bilateral relations reached a boiling point in October 2012 when Turkey shelled Syrian targets after a series of cross-border mortar attacks. In January 2013, Turkey received a NATO contingent of Patriot missiles to defend against cross-border attacks.

Saudi Arabia and Qatar have provided the Syrian opposition with small arms, but have thus far refrained from supplying heavy weaponry, such as shoulder-fired rockets. U.S. officials have cautioned against providing such arms, saying they may end up in the hands of jihadists. However, analysts say there is evidence of private fundraising across the Gulf region aimed at providing rebels with heavy arms.

What are the U.S. sanctions on Syria?

The United States has placed a variety of sanctions on Syria that prohibit aid and restrict bilateral trade. This report (PDF) from the Congressional Research Service discusses the host of U.S. sanctions in much greater detail, but major policy provisions include:

State Sponsor of Terrorism Designation (1979)

This classification automatically subjects it to several general sanctions, including restrictions on foreign aid (which it hasn't received since 1981); a ban on defense exports; controls dual use exports; and other miscellaneous restrictions.

Syria Accountability Act (2004)

This banned all exports to Syria except food or medicine; prohibited U.S. businesses from operating in Syria; banned the flight of Syrian aircraft in the U.S.; reduced diplomatic ties; imposed travel bans on Syrian diplomats; and froze foreign transactions on Syria property.

USA PATRIOT Act

A ruling implemented by the Bush administration under the Patriot Act in 2006 bans U.S. banks and their overseas subsidiaries from doing business with the Commercial Bank of Syria.

Executive Orders

Subsequent Executive Orders under Presidents Bush and Obama have also targeted Syrian individuals and entities. Notable measures in response to the 2011-2012 crisis include Executive Orders 13572 and 13573, which froze the U.S property of several high-ranking Syrian and Iranian officials, including President Assad. More broadly, Executive Order 13582 froze all U.S. assets of the Syrian government, prohibited U.S. persons from doing business with the Assad regime, and banned U.S. imports of Syrian petroleum products.

Additionally, Washington officially closed its embassy in Damascus and withdrew Ambassador Robert Ford on February 6 amid an escalating assault by Syrian security forces on the city of Homs. The U.S. government ordered the expulsion of Syria's charge d'affaires from Washington in May 2012, following the brutal slaughter of more than a hundred civilians, mostly women and children, by regime forces in the Houla region. Many other governments internationally also dismissed top Syrian diplomats in response to the massacre.

What are the European Union sanctions on Syria?

The European Union has passed more than a dozen rounds of sanctions on the Assad regime since the March 2011 uprising. This list from Reuters AlertNet provides more comprehensive details of the EU measures. Significant sanctions include:

• Asset freezes and travel bans imposed on top members of the Syrian military and government, including Assad and his family
• Establishment of an arms embargo
• Sanction on the Syrian central bank
• Bans on the import of Syrian oil and the export of equipment for the petro industry

What has been the effect of sanctions?

Western bans on the import of Syrian oil, the mainstay of its economy, have exacted a heavy toll, according to reports. In May 2012, Syrian oil minister Sufian Allaw said the restrictions had cost the country approximately $4 billion. Prior to the March 2011 unrest, Syria obtained some $7-8 million per-day in oil export revenue, mostly from Europe.

The Syrian economy has averted collapse by relying on the aid of friendly nations, including Russia, Iraq, and Iran, according to Samer Abboud at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. The sanctions that have hit Syria the hardest, he says, "are those imposed by the League of Arab States and the European Union. Their sanctions mainly target sources of government revenue by prohibiting transactions with individuals, companies, and state-owned institutions tied to the regime."

How have China and Russia responded to the Syrian unrest?

Both Russia and China have significant economic and military relations with Syria. As permanent members of the UN Security Council, the countries have vetoed three Western-backed resolutions aimed at isolating the Assad regime--the most recent on July 19, 2012. Analysts say the diplomatic opposition stems from fears of another Western-backed military intervention similar to that in Libya and the Ivory Coast.

In early July 2012, Russia endorsed a Syria "Action Group" plan that called for a transitional government in Damascus, but Moscow was keen to have the proposal omit any explicit demands for Assad to leave power. Russia has since re-emphasized that it will not back a UN proposal that would include sanctions as a solution to the Syrian political crisis.

What are the regional implications?

An unraveling of the crisis in Syria could bring significant repercussions for the region. One concern is of a brewing proxy war in which Sunni states like Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and the Persian Gulf countries line up in support of the Syrian resistance, and Shiite-majority nations such as Iran and Iraq seek to bolster Assad's hold on power. "When you consider the history of neighboring nations where civil wars led to the loss of power for minorities--specifically Lebanon in the 1980s and Iraq more recently--it doesn't bode well for Syria," says Aram Nerguizian of the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Iran, a longtime Syrian ally, continues to have crucial links to the regime in Damascus. Tehran has provided Damascus with both military and much-needed economic assistance, including helping the regime circumvent Western sanctions on oil exports, U.S. and European officials say. In May 2012, Washington claimed the Iranian Basij militia helped trained the Syrian Shabiha, the militia implicated in the brutal Houla massacre.

Adding to the political complexity is the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah, long supported by Iran. Hezbollah has warned that foreign intervention could stir a wider conflict in the region, particularly against the state of Israel.

Other possible regional impacts of the spiraling chaos in Syria include refugee flows, sectarian conflict, and non-state transnational violence, as well as the questionable security of Syria's large stockpiles of conventional and chemical weapons.

What are the policy options?

Russian and Chinese resistance to international action at the UN has led to speculation of whether an independent group of nations or unilateral actors will intervene in Syria. However, there is no strong agreement on how the international community could assist the opposition in ousting the Assad regime.

Experts and analysts have offered several military options, including deploying ground troops, the use of air power, no-fly zones, and training and logistical support for the rebels. While diplomatic pressure (PDF) may provide symbolic value, most analysts do not expect it to change military conditions on the ground.

NATO has said categorically that it will not contribute to a military intervention in Syria, nor will it provide assets to deliver humanitarian or medical assistance. NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said in February 2012, "Syria is ethnically, politically, religiously much more complicated than Libya."

In August 2012, the White House warned the Assad regime that its preparation or use of chemical weapons would precipitate an armed military intervention by the United States. "We have been very clear to the Assad regime but also to other players on the ground that a red line for us is, we start seeing a whole bunch of weapons moving around or being utilized," President Barack Obama said.

As of February 2013, U.S. policy toward Syria remains focused on ratcheting up diplomatic and economic pressure on the Assad regime, as well as providing non-lethal and humanitarian aid to opposition forces. The Obama administration has repeatedly voiced concerns that funneling heavy weapons to the opposition forces could result in their spread to Islamist extremists. However, some media report that CIA personnel operating in southern Turkey are coordinating arms shipments to rebels in concert with U.S. allies in the region, including Saudi Arabia and Qatar.