• Research
  • Strategic Europe
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Europe logoCarnegie lettermark logo
EUUkraine
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Paul Salem"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center",
  "programAffiliation": "",
  "programs": [],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "Levant",
    "Syria"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Political Reform"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media
Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center

The Long Road in Syria: Pressure and Politics

The chances for a compromise soft landing in Syria remain slim; but the alternative is a crash landing that leaves a failed state and civil war in its wake.

Link Copied
By Paul Salem
Published on May 8, 2012

Source: Il Espresso

As the death toll in Syria crosses the 10,000 mark—with many more injured and detained—the crisis seems no closer to a resolution. Although the regime has lost control of many parts of the country, it is still strong and can survive for many more months—perhaps even years. And although the uprising is widespread and persistent, the opposition itself remains divided and in disarray. 

The Arab countries, Turkey, and the West have put political and economic pressure on the Assad regime but have shied away from military intervention. The Arab League and the UN, for their parts, have both backed Kofi Annan’s mediation plan aimed at stopping the fighting and bringing all parties to the negotiating table.  

The Annan plan is already failing; but it contains the right combination of pressure and politics—a combination that needs to be sustained and intensified over the long run to force the regime to compromise and to protect Syria from a full-scale decline into devastation and civil war.

Without consistent and escalating pressure, the regime will not compromise; and without a political parachute for the regime’s leaders, they will fight to the death, taking the country down with them. The key to increased pressure on the Assad regime lies in convincing Russia and China that removing President Assad and his cronies from power is the only way to prevent Syria’s collapse—and rescue the state from ruin. Just as Washington understood that retiring Hosni Mubarak was crucial to salvaging the allied Egyptian state, Moscow should be made to see that preserving its alliance with Syria requires it to press for changes to the regime.

The launch and probable failure of the Annan initiative are necessary to convince Moscow and Beijing that Damascus is acting in bad faith. They are equally important in prompting the UN Security Council to ratchet up pressure on the Assad regime. This pressure should include tighter economic and political sanctions; a limited safe corridor or no-fly zone in northern Syria may need to be considered as well. Only if Syria gets a clear and much stronger message from a united international community will it begin to take the need for negotiation and compromise seriously. If the Assad regime continues to dig itself deeper into isolation and trouble, Iran may also become convinced that, in order to save its ally from complete ruin, it must encourage the Syrian leadership to change course and strike a new political deal with its domestic opponents.

Any negotiated settlement in Syria will have to include the following components: the departure of president Assad, his close family, and his cronies; the appointment of a new interim president; assurances to the Alawi community and military leadership that they have a place in the new Syria; a transitional government that includes the opposition as well as the Baath Party; the drafting of a new, democratic constitution; and the holding of free, transparent parliamentary and presidential elections.

The chances for a compromise soft landing in Syria remain slim; but the alternative is a crash landing that leaves a failed state and civil war in its wake. The international community should continue to back the Annan plan, and when it fails—as it almost inevitably will—move to tighten sanctions. Simultaneously, it must hold out to the regime leaders the lure of a safe exit, while offering the state and opposition the opportunity to negotiate a new deal for a new Syria.

This article originally appeared in Italian in Il Espresso.

About the Author

Paul Salem

Senior Fellow at the Middle East Institute

Paul Salem is a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute.

    Recent Work

  • Paper
    Iraq’s Tangled Foreign Interests and Relations

      Paul Salem

  • Article
    Bracing for Impact in Syria

      Paul Salem

Paul Salem
Senior Fellow at the Middle East Institute
Paul Salem
Political ReformLevantSyria

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Europe

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    The EU Needs a Third Way in Iran

    European reactions to the war in Iran have lost sight of wider political dynamics. The EU must position itself for the next phase of the crisis without giving up on its principles.

      Richard Youngs

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Can Europe Still Matter in Syria?

    Europe’s interests in Syria extend beyond migration management, yet the EU trails behind other players in the country’s post-Assad reconstruction. To boost its influence in Damascus, the union must upgrade its commitment to ensuring regional stability.

      Bianka Speidl, Hanga Horváth-Sántha

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Europolis, Where Europe Ends

    A prophetic Romanian novel about a town at the mouth of the Danube carries a warning: Europe decays when it stops looking outward. In a world of increasing insularity, the EU should heed its warning.

      Thomas de Waal

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Taking the Pulse: Are Europe’s New Asylum Policies a Betrayal of its Values?

    Hard-line approaches to asylum policy are increasingly common, with crackdowns proposed even by parties that traditionally hold liberal views on migration. Does this shift represent a break with Europe’s fundamental values?

      Thomas de Waal

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Armenia’s Election Is a Foreign Affair

    As the 2026 Armenian election approaches, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan is facing fierce opposition from both Russia and the diaspora. He will need the help of Europe, the United States, and regional neighbours to advance his ambitious foreign policy. 

      Thomas de Waal

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Europe
Carnegie Europe logo, white
Rue du Congrès, 151000 Brussels, Belgium
  • Research
  • Strategic Europe
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Gender Equality Plan
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Europe
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.