Commentary
Yezid Sayigh
{
"authors": [
"Yezid Sayigh"
],
"type": "other",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center"
],
"collections": [
"Arab Awakening"
],
"englishNewsletterAll": "menaTransitions",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center",
"programAffiliation": "MEP",
"programs": [
"Middle East"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"Levant",
"Syria",
"Middle East"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Security"
]
}
Source: Getty
Syria’s Age of Revolution: Peaceful Protest to Armed Struggle
The nature of the Syrian revolution is particularly complex. A deeper social reading on Syria is required to further understand the violence in Syria and the importance of its timing during the Arab uprisings.
By Yezid Sayigh
Published on Jan 13, 2014
Source: London School of Economics and Political Science
“The nature of what’s going on in Syria—the Syrian revolution—is so particularly complex,” said Carnegie’s Yezid Sayigh during a public lecture at the London School of Economics and Political Science. Sayigh reflected upon the notion of “revolution” as a framework to “understand the nature and the strengths and weaknesses of the protagonists – both the regime and its various foes.”
Noting parallels with other historical experiences, such as the beginning of Palestinian activism, Sayigh explained the importance of social dynamics in Syria: “the sort of discourse we get and the sort of reporting we get on which a lot of policy is built is about good and bad…tyrannical regime versus democratic opposition, moderates versus radical Islamists.” Sayigh noted that it’s not necessarily wrong, but that “this kind of reporting, it doesn’t really tell us what is going on in Syria and certainly not enough to understand where things are going, and why they’ve gone where they are, and why we keep seeming to be surprised about where things have gone.”
Sayigh emphasized the importance of a social reading on Syria, explaining that “had there not been an Arab Spring...the Syrian revolution—the uprising—probably wouldn’t have started just in that time, in that way.” Additionally, by looking at violence of the armed struggle, including “who wields violence, how it’s wielded, what for, with what discourse, that, I think, tells us more about the nature of the Syrian revolution.”
This conference was recorded and hosted by the London School of Economics and Political Science.
About the Author
Yezid Sayigh
Senior Fellow, Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
Yezid Sayigh is a senior fellow at the Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut, where he leads the program on Civil-Military Relations in Arab States (CMRAS). His work focuses on the comparative political and economic roles of Arab armed forces, the impact of war on states and societies, the politics of postconflict reconstruction and security sector transformation in Arab transitions, and authoritarian resurgence.
- What Is Israel’s Plan in Lebanon?
- All or Nothing in GazaCommentary
Yezid Sayigh
Recent Work
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 Russia Eurasia Center
- Russia Is Meddling for Meddling’s Sake in the Middle EastCommentary
The Russian leadership wants to avoid a dangerous precedent in which it is squeezed out of Iran by the United States and Israel—and left powerless to respond in any meaningful way.
Nikita Smagin
- Is Frustration With Armenia’s Pashinyan Enough to Bring the Pro-Russia Opposition to Power?Commentary
It’s true that many Armenians would vote for anyone just to be rid of Pashinyan, whom they blame for the loss of Nagorno-Karabakh, but the pro-Russia opposition is unlikely to be able to channel that frustration into an electoral victory.
Mikayel Zolyan
- The Afghanistan–Pakistan War Poses Awkward Questions for RussiaCommentary
Not only does the fighting jeopardize regional security, it undermines Russian attempts to promote alternatives to the Western-dominated world order.
Ruslan Suleymanov
- After Ilia II: What Will a New Patriarch Mean for Georgia?Commentary
The front-runner to succeed Ilia II, Metropolitan Shio, is prone to harsh anti-Western rhetoric and frequent criticism of “liberal ideologies” that he claims threaten the Georgian state. This raises fears that under his leadership the Georgian Orthodox Church will lose its unifying role and become an instrument of ultraconservative ideology.
Bashir Kitachaev
- Tokayev’s New Constitution Is a Bet on Stability—At Freedom’s ExpenseCommentary
Kazakhstan’s new constitution is an embodiment of the ruling elite’s fears and a self-serving attempt to preserve the status quo while they still can.
Serik Beysembaev
