2016 Country Review

Syria

2016 Country Review

http://www.countrywatch.com Table of Contents

Chapter 1 1 Country Overview 1 Country Overview 2 Key Data 5 Syria 6 Middle East 7 Chapter 2 9 Political Overview 9 History 10 Political Conditions 11 Political Risk Index 233 Political Stability 248 Freedom Rankings 263 Human Rights 275 Government Functions 281 Government Structure 282 Principal Government Officials 288 Leader Biography 289 Leader Biography 289 Foreign Relations 291 National Security 316 Defense Forces 326 Chapter 3 328 Economic Overview 328 Economic Overview 329 Nominal GDP and Components 332 Population and GDP Per Capita 334 Real GDP and Inflation 335 Government Spending and Taxation 336 Money Supply, Interest Rates and Unemployment 337 Foreign Trade and the Exchange Rate 338 Data in US Dollars 339 Energy Consumption and Production Standard Units 340 Energy Consumption and Production QUADS 342 World Energy Price Summary 343 CO2 Emissions 344 Agriculture Consumption and Production 345 World Agriculture Pricing Summary 348 Metals Consumption and Production 349 World Metals Pricing Summary 351 Economic Performance Index 352 Chapter 4 364 Investment Overview 364 Foreign Investment Climate 365 Foreign Investment Index 367 Corruption Perceptions Index 380 Competitiveness Ranking 392 Taxation 401 Stock Market 401 Partner Links 401 Chapter 5 403 Social Overview 403 People 404 Human Development Index 407 Life Satisfaction Index 411 Happy Planet Index 422 Status of Women 431 Global Gender Gap Index 434 Culture and Arts 443 Etiquette 445 Travel Information 446 Diseases/Health Data 457 Chapter 6 463 Environmental Overview 463 Environmental Issues 464 Environmental Policy 465 Greenhouse Gas Ranking 466 Global Environmental Snapshot 477 Global Environmental Concepts 488 International Environmental Agreements and Associations 502 Appendices 527 Bibliography 528 Syria

Chapter 1 Country Overview

Syria Review 2016 Page 1 of 540 pages Syria

Country Overview

SYRIA

A country in the Middle East, Syria was occupied successively by Canaanites, Phoenicians, Hebrews, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, and Byzantines, before finally coming under the control of the Ottoman Turks.

Following World War I, France acquired a mandate over Syria, and the French administered the area until granting it independence in 1946. Since independence, however, the country has lived through periods of political instability driven by the conflicting interests of various ethnic and religious groups.

Syria united with Egypt in 1958 to form the United Arab Republic, but the two entities separated in 1961 and the Syrian Arab Republic was reestablished.

In 1963 the Baath (Renaissance) party took control of the country, which rules to this day. Baath government has seen authoritarian rule at home and a strong anti-Israeli policy abroad, particularly under former President Hafez al-Assad.

In 1967 Syria lost the Golan Heights to the Israelis, while civil war in neighboring Lebanon allowed it to extend its political and military influence in the region. Syrian troops stationed in Lebanon since 1976 withdrew in April 2005.

Following the death of Hafez al-Assad in 2000, Syria underwent a degree of relaxation, and hundreds of political prisoners were released. But real political freedoms have not been granted, and the economy remains dominated by the state.

In 2011, Syria -- along with many of other countries -- was plagued with anti-government unrest in the "Arab Spring" sweeping the region. A harsh crackdown by the Assad regime led to global condemnation and saw Syria subject to unprecedented sanctions by the Arab League.

Like many of its neighbors in the Middle East, Syria’s economy depends heavily on oil production and export.

Editor's Note:

Syria Review 2016 Page 2 of 540 pages Syria

Since early 2011, anti-government protests have spread and escalated across the Arab world; Syria emerged as an addition to the list of countries experiencing unrest in March 2011. At first, protesters stopped short of demanding the resignation of President Bashar al-Assad, instead demanding greater political freedom and efforts to end corruption. For his part, President Assad announced he would advance a reform agenda, which would include lifting the emergency laws that had been in place for decades, and increased rights to the country's disenfranchised Kurdish population. These moves were aimed at quelling the rising climate of unrest gripping the country. But over time, as protests continued, and as the Assad regime carried out a hardline crackdown on dissent, tensions escalated between the government and the protesters.

In mid-2011, the United Nations Security Council and the Arab League respectively issued condemnations of the violence in Syria. As well, the United Nations Human Rights Council called for an independent inquiry into the violent crackdown on dissent. Meanwhile, global leaders were calling for President Assad to step down from power, given the brutality of the Syrian regime's crackdown on protesters. As of 2012, the bloody crackdown by the Assad regime on anti- government protesters was ongoing. In fact, the crackdown appeared to become more relentless in places such as Homs and Aleppo. Despite widespread condemnation from the West, a United Nations Security Resolution on the situation in Syria was subject to veto by Russia and China. A subsequent vote in the United Nations General Assembly overwhelmingly condemned Syria for its brutal crackdown. A prevailing truce, brokered by the joint United Nations/Arab League envoy, Kofi Annan, was established in the interests of preventing further bloodshed; however, it was revealed to be an exercise in theory rather than practice and eventually the United Nations monitoring mission ended in failure.

Syria has meanwhile been subject to sanctions by various countries and was sliding into pariah status in the international community. Assassinations, alleged massacres, geopolitical tensions with Turkey and Israel, and most recently, suspicions about the use of chemical weapons, have since mired the Syrian landscape. Indeed, it was increasingly clear that Syria had slipped into a state of civil war and was facing a devastating humanitarian crisis. That crisis reached new heights in August 2013 with claims that Syrian forces launched a chemical attack on the outskirts of Damascus. Was this the clear sign that United States President Barack Obama's "red line" had definitively been crossed? And would the international community become more involved in the Syrian crisis? Would the ensuing chemical weapons deal with Syria between the United States and Russia quiet the war drums? Would Syria actually abide by its international obligations set forth in that agreement? The answers to those questions were yet to be determined. In the meanwhile, the highly anticipated peace summit in Geneva ended without yielding any productive results and the civil war in Syria raged on and on.

By mid-2014, while Syria had shown progress in its disposal of chemical toxins, in keeping with an international agreement intended to avoid intervention by the West, the country was dealing with an

Syria Review 2016 Page 3 of 540 pages Syria ascendant "Islamic State." Previously known as Islamic State of Iraq and Syria or ISIS as well as Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant or ISIL, this group self-declared a caliphate extending from Syria to Iraq. Whereas the West and regional powers in the Middle East had earlier called for an end to the Assad regime, suddenly the geopolitical stakes were quite different as extremist terrorists were now posing the most dangerous threat to regional stability.

As of 2015, Syria was mired in horrendous crisis as the civil war between the Assad regime and its opponents raged on, but also as wide swaths of Syrian territory had fallen to the terror group, Islamic State.

Syria Review 2016 Page 4 of 540 pages Syria

Key Data

Region: Middle East

Population: 22878524

Mostly desert; hot, dry, sunny summers (June to August) and mild, rainy winters Climate: (December to February) along coast; cold weather with snow or sleet periodically hitting Damascus.

Arabic (official) Kurdish Armenian Languages: Aramaic Circassian French

Currency: 1 Syrian pound (£S$) = 100 piastres

National Day is 17 April (1946), Unity Day is 22 February, Revolution Day is Holiday: 8 March

Area Total: 185180

Area Land: 184050

Coast Line: 193

Syria Review 2016 Page 5 of 540 pages Syria

Syria

Country Map

Syria Review 2016 Page 6 of 540 pages Syria

Middle East

Regional Map

Syria Review 2016 Page 7 of 540 pages Syria

Syria Review 2016 Page 8 of 540 pages Syria

Chapter 2

Political Overview

Syria Review 2016 Page 9 of 540 pages Syria

History

Archaeologists have demonstrated that Syria was the center of one of the most ancient civilizations on earth. Around the city of Ebla in northern Syria (discovered and excavated in 1975), a great Semitic empire spread from the Red Sea north to Turkey and east to Mesopotamia from 2500 to 2400 B.C.E. During that period, the city of Ebla had a population estimated at 260,000. Scholars believe the language of Ebla to be the oldest Semitic language.

Syria was occupied successively by Canaanites, Phoenicians, Hebrews, Arameans, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Nabataeans, Byzantines and, in part, Crusaders before finally coming under the control of the Ottoman Turks. Syria is significant in the history of Christianity; Paul was converted on the road to Damascus and established the first organized Christian Church at Antioch in ancient Syria, from which he left on many of his missionary journeys.

Damascus, settled about 2500 B.C.E., is the oldest continuously inhabited capital and one of the oldest continuously inhabited cities in the world. It came under Muslim rule in 636 C.E. Immediately thereafter, the city's power and prestige reached its peak, and it became the capital of the Omayyad Empire, which extended from Spain to India from 661 to 750 C.E., when the Abbasid caliphate was established in Baghdad, Iraq.

Damascus became a provincial capital of the Mameluke Empire around 1260. It was largely destroyed in 1400 by the Mongol conqueror Tamerlane, who moved many of its craftsmen to Samarkand. Rebuilt, Damascus continued to serve as a capital until 1516. In 1517, it fell under Ottoman rule. The Ottomans remained in Damascus for the next 400 years, except for a brief occupation by Ibrahim Pasha of Egypt from 1832 to 1840.

In 1920, an independent Arab Kingdom of Syria was established under King Faysal of the Hashemite family, who later became king of Iraq. His rule over Syria, however, ended after only a few months, following the clash between his Syrian Arab forces and regular French forces at the battle of Maysalun. French troops occupied Syria later that year after the League of Nations put Syria under French mandate.

With the fall of France in 1940, Syria came under the control of the Vichy government until British

Syria Review 2016 Page 10 of 540 pages Syria and Free French forces occupied the country in July 1941. Continuing pressure from Syrian nationalist groups forced the French to evacuate their troops in April 1946, leaving the country in the hands of a republican government that had been formed during the mandate.

Note on History: In certain entries, open source content from the State Department Background Notes and Country Guides have been used. A full listing of sources is available in the Bibliography.

Political Conditions

The Post-Independence Period

Although rapid economic development followed the declaration of independence of April 17, 1946, Syrian politics from independence through the late 1960s was marked by upheaval. A series of military coups, begun in 1949, undermined civilian rule and led to Army Colonel Adib Shishakli's seizure of power in 1951. After the overthrow of President Shishakli in a subsequent coup, in 1954, continued political maneuvering supported by competing factions in the military eventually brought Arab nationalist and socialist elements to power.

Syria's political instability during the years after the 1954 coup, the parallelism of Syrian and Egyptian policies, a wave of Arab nationalism in the region, and the appeal of Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser's leadership in the wake of the 1956 Suez crisis, together created support in Syria for union with Egypt. On Feb. 1, 1958, the two countries merged to create the United Arab Republic, and all Syrian political parties ceased overt activities.

The union, however, was not a successful endeavor. Following a military coup on Sept. 28, 1961, Syria seceded, reestablishing itself as the Syrian Arab Republic. Instability characterized the next 18 months, with various coups culminating on March 8, 1963, in the installation by leftist Syrian Army officers of the National Council of the Revolutionary Command (NCRC), a group of military and civilian officials who assumed control of all executive and legislative authority. The takeover was engineered by members of the Arab Socialist Resurrection Party (Baath Party) which had been active in Syria and other Arab countries since the late 1940s. Baath members also dominated the new cabinet.

The Baath takeover in Syria followed a Baath coup in Iraq the previous month. The new Syrian government explored the possibility of a federation with Egypt and Baath-controlled Iraq. An agreement was concluded in Cairo on April 17, 1963, for a referendum on unity to be held in

Syria Review 2016 Page 11 of 540 pages Syria

September 1963. However, serious disagreements among the parties soon developed, and the tripartite federation failed to materialize. Thereafter, the Baath regimes in Syria and Iraq began to work for bilateral unity. These plans foundered in November 1963, when the Baath regime in Iraq was overthrown.

In May 1964, President Amin Hafez of the National Council of the Revolutionary Command (NCRC) promulgated a provisional constitution providing for a National Council of the Revolution (NCR), an appointed legislature composed of representatives of mass organizations (labor, peasant, and professional unions), a presidential council (in which executive power was vested), and a cabinet.

On Feb. 23, 1966, a group of army officers carried out a successful, intra-party coup, imprisoned President Hafez, dissolved the cabinet and the NCR, abrogated the provisional constitution, and designated a regionalist, civilian Baath government. The coup leaders described it as a "rectification" of Baath Party principles.

The defeat of the Syrian and Egyptian forces in the June 1967 war with Israel weakened the radical socialist regime established by the 1966 coup. Conflict developed between a moderate military wing and a more extremist civilian wing of the Baath Party. The 1970 retreat of Syrian forces sent to aid the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) during the "Black September" hostilities with Jordan reflected this political disagreement within the ruling Baath leadership. On Nov. 13, 1970, Minister of Defense Hafez al-Assad effected a bloodless military coup, ousting the civilian party leadership and assuming the role of prime minister.

Upon assuming power, Hafez al-Assad moved quickly to create an organizational infrastructure for his government and to consolidate control. The Provisional Regional Command of Assad's Arab Baath Socialist Party nominated a 173-member legislature, in which the Baath Party took 87 seats. The remaining seats were divided among "popular organizations" and other minor parties. In March 1971, the party held its regional congress and elected a new 21-member Regional Command headed by Assad.

In the same month, a national referendum was held to confirm Assad as president for a seven-year term. In March 1972, to broaden the base of his government, Assad formed the National Progressive Front, a coalition of parties led by the Baath Party, and elections were held to establish local councils in each of Syria's 14 governorates. In March 1973, a new Syrian constitution went into effect followed shortly thereafter by parliamentary elections for the People's Council, the first such elections since 1962.

Political Conditions on the Ground

Syria Review 2016 Page 12 of 540 pages Syria

Meanwhile, from 1963, Syria has been under a state of emergency. Syrian governments have justified martial law by the state of "war" that continues to exist with Israel (largely due to Israeli occupation of the Golan Heights), and by continuing threats posed by the volatile Lebanese neighbor and terrorists groups (Muslim fundamentalist and Iraqi radicals.)

The government has suppressed all challenges to its authority. Commercial and urban elements, whose power and status have been eroded by the Baath Party and its policies, constitute part of the opposition. The most significant opposition, however, has come from fundamentalist Sunni Muslims, who reject the basic values of the secular Baath program and object to rule by the Alawis, whom they consider heretical.

From the late 1970s until its suppression in 1982, the archconservative Muslim Brotherhood posed an ongoing armed challenge to the regime. In response to an attempted uprising by the brotherhood in February 1982, the government crushed the fundamentalist opposition centered in the city of Hama, leveling parts of the city with artillery fire, killing around 20.000 people and wounding many more. Since then, public manifestations of anti-regime activity have been very limited.

President Hafez al-Assad continued to control a highly authoritarian and corrupt regime, and despite the institutional form of a democratic system, President Assad's government held power for 30 years. In 1999, Assad began his fifth seven-year term, with a 99 percent affirmative vote in the referendum on his candidacy. Assad's survival is due to a strong desire for political stability, achieved through clever manipulation of social groups, the cultivation of Assad as a father for all Syrians-all within a regime reigned by terror and secret police.

Members of President Assad's own sect, the Alawis, hold most of the important military and security positions. The president's Baath Party has also been dominated by the military, which consumed a large share of Syria's economic resources. In recent years there has been a gradual decline in the Baath Party's preeminence, often in favor of the leadership of the broader National Progressive Front.

Although there are no other parties allowed to function other than the Baath Party and its allies, election to the "Majlis ash-Shaab" (People's Assembly) continue to take place. In 1998, Baath Party candidates received the vast majority of seats in the Majlis-135 of 250-but other government affiliated and controlled entities garnered the remaining seats.

Transition of Power

Along the lines of Arab self-proclaimed democratic leaders, President Assad groomed his son Basil to take over after his father. Basil died in a car accident in 1994, and his younger brother, Bashar, an eye-doctor specializing in Britain, returned home to take his place. Bashar gradually received

Syria Review 2016 Page 13 of 540 pages Syria more political responsibility, including 'the Lebanon file,' while also taking up military training. In 1999, he was promoted to colonel. Ruling the country on behalf of this father, Bashar orchestrated a major cabinet reshuffle in March 2000, destined to speed up Bashar's modernization and anti- corruption campaign. Several key office holders in his father's regime have since been indicted for corruption, including former Prime Minister Mahmoud Zubi, who later allegedly committed suicide.

President Assad's health had been frail for years, and his death on June 10, 2000, did not come as a surprise, but was nonetheless a major transition in modern Syrian history. In order to be able to nominate Bashar's candidacy for presidency, the parliament voted to lower the minimum age required for the presidency from 40 to 34 years. Bashar al-Assad was confirmed president in a referendum, featuring no opposing candidates, on July 10, 2000.

Bashar inherited a Syria facing tremendous political, economic and social challenges. Due to its economic isolation for three decades, the Syrian economy is in dire needs of thorough reform. The clash of interests between Syria's military, political, and economic elite, who have derived enormous wealth from the state-run economy, and the majority of the population, which now has the lowest per capita income in the Middle East by some estimates, constitutes a major challenge for Bashar's regime. Due to the uncertainty surrounding new president's personal power-base, Bashar's initial calls for reform are unlikely to materialize unless his political and personal clout is strengthened.

Another domestic fault line lies precariously between Syria's Alawite minority, which has monopolized political power in the country, and the Sunni Muslim majority which calls for a bigger share of the Syrian economic and political cake. However, the Alawite community also suffers from infighting. Bashar's main inter-Alawite opposition comes from his father's brother, Rifat al- Assad, who is now stationed in France.

Syria's key foreign policy issue continues to be the peace and stability of the Middle East region, and of particular significance is the continuing hostility and conflict between Israel and Syria. The election of the Barak administration in 1999, led to a more optimistic climate in regard to resolving the discord, but peace talks broke down since Israeli withdrawal from the Golan Heights was a requisite foundation for the success of the peace process. The Feb. 6, 2001, election of Ariel Sharon as Israel's new prime minister was very negatively received in Damascus. The Syrians, who favor multi-track negotiations, in order to avoid Israel playing Arab countries against each other, and thus weakening the Palestinian position, have rejected Sharon's invitation to talks.

The first months of Bashar al-Assad's presidency saw a dramatic change in the style and content of public discourse about Syria's political and economic future. The virtually omnipotent pictures of Hafez and Bashar al-Assad gradually became fewer, and the numerous larger-than-life portraits of the leaders were replaced by billboard ads for washing powder. In addition to the more symbolic

Syria Review 2016 Page 14 of 540 pages Syria changes, Bashar signaled serious change when he in November 2000 released more than 600 political prisoners (mostly affiliated with the Islamic and leftist opposition groups), closed down the notorious "Mazzeh" prison and declared a general amnesty. In September 2000 and January 2001, two public statements signed by Syrian intellectuals called for an end to the state of emergency and martial law, as well as extensive political reform. In addition, the establishment of two new political parties and Syria's first private newspaper were announced. In January 2002, the Syrian cabinet decided to allow privately-run radio stations to broadcast music-only programs. By March 2002, a total of five privately-run newspapers, including two that are satirical in nature, were granted licenses. A loose network of Syrian intellectuals and businessmen were allowed to hold informal meetings in private homes, and later organized under the name of "Committees for the Revival of Civil Society."

Dissent and Repression

During the first six months of his presidency, Bashar al-Assad's regime seemed to tolerate the blooming of the once-vibrant civil society. However, these positive developments were soon overshadowed several repressive acts, including the beating of poet and liberal reformer Nabil Suleiman; the filing of criminal charges against nascent opposition leader Riyad al-Sayf; and an unprecedented series of warnings from the government-including a clampdown on the independent civil forums forcing them to acquire official permits and approval of both the topic of discussion and the participants 15 days prior to the meetings. Ten political opponents were arrested from August 2001 until April 2002.

After an initial blossoming of political activity, the limits of public, political dissent were clearly pushed back, signaling a worrisome development of Syria's political climate. The abrupt change in policy raises questions about Bashar's real intentions and his ability to implement reform, and indicates a resurgence of the regime's traditional political and security barons.

Despite the conflicting signals from the Syrian regime, civic forums and salons for political debate continued to proliferate across the country, hosting speakers calling for pluralism and democracy, and strongly criticizing widespread official corruption. Nevertheless, much indicates that the activists had been too optimistic about the nature of change in the Syrian official tolerance for political dissent and public criticism. In August and September 2001, a dozen leading Syrian opposition figures, including two members of parliament, were detained.

Despite the obvious setback for political liberalization, a decisive break with the past seem to have been taken. While opposition figures continued to be detained, the Syrian regime held public trials, allowed Western observers, and released some of the detainees after pressure from international NGO watchdogs. While Bashar's initial move to expand civil liberties have definitely been overruled by security chiefs, Syria's resurgent reform movement is strengthened and will continue

Syria Review 2016 Page 15 of 540 pages Syria to press on for change. Traditional ideological differences between political leftists and capitalists have been bridged through the identification of a common language of human rights and democracy. Civil society's emerging coupling between the business community and intellectuals cannot be crushed without severe consequences for international investment.

The restrictions on the right to assembly and the right to free speech imposed on civil society in Syria has been duly criticized by international human rights organizations. Sadly, the government actions are nothing new in a country with a long and bleak record of human rights violations. While another 130 political prisoners were released in late November 2001, hundreds of prisoners of conscience and other political prisoners still remain behind bars. Several cases of death in custody, inhuman prison conditions and application of the death penalty are reported. Peaceful opposition politics or human rights monitoring is still not tolerated, and punishment for either activity is severe. All local and international press as well as Syria's limited Internet services are closely monitored, and frequently censored. Satellite dishes remain the only source for non-censured information.

On March 30, 2001, the United Nations (U.N.) Human Rights Committee, in charge of monitoring states' compliance to the International Convenant on Civil and Political Rights, examined Syria's report-initially due in 1984. While Syrian government officials flatly denied any human rights violations, international and national human rights organizations strongly opposed the official version. The fate of hundreds of people who "disappeared" in the 1970s and 1980s, remains unknown. Despite the release of more than 700 political prisoners in 2000 and 2001, hundreds remain in detention without trial or serving long sentences after unfair trials. Numerous Syrians continue to live in political exile abroad.

Political Developments from 2001 through 2002

In May 2001, Pope John Paul II went on a historic trip to Syria. The Pontiff dealt with some of the most difficult diplomatic and theological problems of his papacy during the trip, putting interfaith unity and increasing tension in the Middle East on the top of the agenda. The pope began his visit to Syria with an emotional plea to Israel and its Arab neighbors to reach out for peace, and called for respect of U.N. resolutions. Pope John Paul II visited a church in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, and became the first Pontiff to enter a mosque in Islam's 1,400-year history. A joint invocation with Muslim clerics was held at the ancient Omayyad Mosque in Old City of Damascus. President Assad used the international media attention generated by the pope's visit, to criticize Israel by comparing the suffering of Palestinians today with Jewish attacks on early Christians, and demanding the return of the occupied Golan Heights.

Syria's role and situation in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks is examined in the foreign relations section. Domestically, the attacks has hit Syria's tourism sector hard. The location of Syria in the Middle East and its place on the U.S. 'state sponsor of terrorism' list has only made

Syria Review 2016 Page 16 of 540 pages Syria the situation worse. Nearly 80 percent of reservations made by Western tourists have been called, and Syrian Airways has suffered an estimated six million dollar loss. While Syrian authorities had taken steps to liberalize exchange controls in order to boost tourism, the international aftermath of the terrorist attacks has outstripped the effect, at least in the short term. In February 2002, Syria and Lebanon signed a tourism cooperation agreement in a bid to attract foreign tourists.

Like the tourism sector, the entire Syrian economy has been in bad shape, and needs major reform. The main obstacles to economic reform are political. The current economic and political system is carefully crafted to draw support from both the elite (senior Alawite military officers and Sunni merchants) and key sectors of the population at large (the Alawite community in general, public sector workers and rural peasants.) Reforming the economic base of Syrian society will inevitably change the social fabric that holds the very same society together. In addition to the fact that the winners in the old system are likely to loose their privileges if substantial economic liberalization is implemented, comes the fact that economic liberalization is closely intertwined with political liberalization. Syria is a country where population growth outstrips economic growth, and unemployment is high (20 percent) and growing, The future scenario is a catch-22 situation: by not opening up, the regime might collapse. By opening up and abandoning the status quo, the risk of civil war is looming.

President Assad was faced with the dilemma of the need for change versus regime survival. The choice is between implementing economic and political liberalization and risk vehemently opposition from the security apparatus, or risk the chance of economic recession and political repression. Such reforms can only succeed if President Assad regains full control over his regime. The mixed developments of initial political liberalization and the subsequent security clamp downs indicates that he is not yet so. On Dec. 10, President Assad asked Prime Minster Miro to form a new government, a process in which key portfolios, including the economy post, are expected to be changed. This move signals a strengthening of President Assad reform line. However in 2002, in the face of continuing and demanding domestic challenges as well as continued regional turmoil, Syria's economic, social, and political development remains uncertain-as does Bashar al-Assad's future. Assad's only claim to legitimacy in the long run depends on his ability to succeed with systemic political and economic reform.

Syria's Reaction to the War in Iraq

In the war against Iraq, Syria claimed that a coalition bomb landed in Syrian territory killing five people and wounding ten in the early days of the war in Iraq. Meanwhile, however, the United States accused Syria of moving military equipment across the border into Iraq and supporting terrorism. United States President George Bush also accused Syria of being in possession of chemicals that could be used in the formation of chemical weaponry. Journalists asked the White House why allegations against Syria in regard to chemical weaponry were never before mentioned.

Syria Review 2016 Page 17 of 540 pages Syria

The White House Press Secretary Ari Flesicher replied that it was " a relevant fact."

Top officials from the United States, such as Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, warned Syria against continuing such activities, noting that the Middle Eastern country would be held accountable for these "hostile acts." Bolstering this apparent threat were reports of low-flying American fighter aircraft in areas close to the Syrian border.

For its part the Syrian Foreign Ministry responded with an emphatic denial that the country was involved in any support or shipments of military equipment to Iraq or the support of terrorism. Syrian officials also denied having chemical weapons.

The threat by the United States raised concern that, Syria, like Iran, might potentially face military action in the aftermath of the war against Iraq. Syria was one of the staunchest opponents of the war against Iraq. Statements denying such a possibility - by both the United States Secretary of State Colin Powell and the Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage -- did not fully dispel fears of such an outcome. Instead, reports emerged in the Spring of 2003 suggesting that there had been a cessation of quiet bilateral discussions and almost no public contact between Washington and Damascus. These developments made Syrian officials more nervous.

United States Undersecretary of State John Bolton said that the fate of Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq should be a signal to the government of Syria. Ruminations over possible military action against Syria and "regime change" in Damascus increased. Indeed, calls for "regime change" in Syria, albeit in a peaceful manner, by conservative members of the United States Congress have not helped diffuse rising tensions.

As of April 2003, although some Middle East analysts did not believe that an attack on Syria was imminent because the United States was preoccupied with Iraq, former CIA operative Robert Baer expressed the belief that with military forces already in Iraq, Syria was an inevitable target. As noted above (in the section on the United States), United States foreign policy appeared to be largely controlled by the Pentagon and as such, a hard-line approach was inevitable in regard to Syria. Nevertheless, regional experts have observed that Syria has one of the most stable legacies of political rule in the Middle East; they have warned that extirpating the regime of Syria may only exacerbate regional instability.

On the local level, the Syrian government saw a shake-up when Syrian prime minister-designate Mohammed Naji Otri formed a new cabinet on Sept. 18, 2003. Otri, a member of Syria's ruling Baath party, was entrusted to form the new government by President Bashar al-Assad after Mohammed Moustafa Miro and his cabinet resigned on September 10. Faruk al-Shareh remained in his post as foreign minister, which he has held since 1984, and Defense Minister Mustapha Tlass also kept his position.

Syria Review 2016 Page 18 of 540 pages Syria

The resignation of Miro and his cabinet came two weeks after President al-Assad announced plans in August 2003 to form a new government to introduce political and economic reforms, including allowing private universities and banks and freeing hundreds of political prisoners. Assad also promised to improve Syrians' lives by introducing accountability in government, modernizing legislation, eliminating bureaucracy and revitalizing the economy. Syria has been known traditionally for a totalitarian style of government with both political life and the economy under strict control.

The move represented the first change of government under Assad since he succeeded his late father, Hafez Assad, in July 2000 and embarked on a series of economic reforms.

In October 2003, already-dismal relations between Syria and Israel further deteriorated. Syria alleged that Israel had launched a series of air raids on a Palestinian camp close to the capital city of Damascus. Reports suggested that the camp was inhabited by Palestinian militants. Regardless, Syria accused Israel of "military aggression."

In early 2004, a decades-long history of discordant relations between Syria and Turkey proceeded down a more positive path when President Assad made an official visit to Turkey. President Assad was distinguished as the first Syrian leader to venture on an official visit to Turkey.

Political violence ensued in the spring of 2004, Altercations between security forces and the Kurdish population ensued in the north-eastern part of the country. Meanwhile, an attack on a United Nations building in Damascus left four people dead. The Syrian government said that Islamic militants were responsible for the incident.

In May 2004, steadily-deteriorating relations between Syria and the United States met a new low when the United States decided to impose economic sanctions on Syria because of its alleged support for terrorism. Relations between the two countries devolved following Syria's adamant outcry against the United States-led invasion of Iraq in 2003. Since that time, well into 2004, the United States has repeatedly accused Syria of secretly supporting terrorism and allowing radicals and militants to cross the border from Syria into Iraq. The failure to control the border with Iraq has thus, according to the United States, contributed to the ongoing violence in that country, since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. For its part, however, Syrian officials accused the United States of destabilizing the entire Middle East region by its actions in Iraq. In this regard, Syria joined Jordan in calling for a withdrawal of "occupation forces" from Iraq in mid-2004.

Syria's Relationship with Lebanon

In the fall of 2004, the United Nations Security Council narrowly passed a United States-proposed resolution demanding the withdrawal of all foreign forces from Lebanon, and full respect for

Syria Review 2016 Page 19 of 540 pages Syria

Lebanese sovereignty. Presumably, the measure was directed at Syrian forces, which first entered Lebanon as peacekeepers in the 1970s. The impetus for the United States-proposed resolution may lie primarily in its shift in policy toward Syria. Whereas Syria was viewed favorably in the 1990s for its support of the Gulf War to liberate Kuwait, it is now viewed negatively due to its opposition to the invasion of Iraq, as well as its supposed ties to Palestinian terrorist groups such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Earlier in the year, the United States went so far as to place sanctions on Syria demanding cessation of support for these groups, who often claim responsibility for attacks on Israeli citizens. For its part, Syria has viewed the situation differently and has denied support for terrorism. Instead, it has regarded current United States policy in the Middle East as an impediment to peace as noted above regarding Iraq.

Relations between Lebanon and Syria plummeted in the aftermath of the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Hariri in the first part of 2005. Relations had already soured between the two countries in 2004 when Syrian-backed President Lahoud said that he would continue his lock on power in Lebanon, to the dismay of Prime Minister Hariri who resigned in protest.

Following the assassination of Hariri in February 2005, the late prime minister's funeral was itself transformed into a spontaneous rally of Lebanese nationalism mixed with protest against Syrian's military presence in Lebanon. Such protests have continued in Lebanon since the time of the funeral.

For Syria, pressure was exerted by external factions. Notably, very soon after Hariri’s death, the United States entered the fray by calling for Syria's military withdrawal from Lebanon. Of particular significance was the decision by the United States to demand the implementation of United Nations Security Resolution 1559, which calls for the withdrawal of "all remaining foreign forces" from Lebanon. By Feb. 21, 2005, Arab League announced that plans were in the works to go forward with the withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon. The announcement followed a meeting between the leadership of the Arab League and Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad.

In March 2005, after weeks of intensifying pressure, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad announced the redeployment of Syrian troops in Lebanon. The pull-back was scheduled to begin first with redeployment to the eastern Bekaa Valley, and then to the Syrian border, as part of a phased withdrawal. Talks making official the details of the withdrawal were to commence between the Syrian and Lebanese leadership. President Bashar al-Assad said that following the redeployment, Lebanon and Syria "will have fulfilled our obligations under the Taif accord and under [United Nations Security Council] Resolution 1559". Even though United States authorities said that the redeployment did not go far enough, Lebanese and Syrian groups eschewed intervention by the Americans.

In early April 2005, United Nations envoy Terje Roed-Larsen announced that Syria would withdraw all its troops from Lebanon by the end of that very month . The announcement came

Syria Review 2016 Page 20 of 540 pages Syria after a meeting with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and Foreign Minister Farouq al-Shara. The date was viewed as something of a surprise because it indicates a rapid pace for the full withdrawal of Syrian troops, military assets and intelligence apparatus. Nevertheless, the scheduled withdrawal is intended to meet the requirement of the 1989 Taif agreement, which set the course for the end of the 1975-90 Lebanese civil war. It is also intended to fulfill the requirements set forth in United Nations Security Resolution 1559.

Note: The 1989 Taif accord, which ended the Lebanese civil war, specified a phased withdrawal, while the 2004 United Nations resolution called for the withdrawal of foreign forces from Lebanon and the disarming of militant groups.

In October 2005, Syria's Interior Minister Ghazi Kanaan committed suicide. His death came a month after he was questioned by a United Nations investigator about the murder of former Lebanese Prime Minister Hariri. Hours before apparently taking his own life, Kanaan, who had functioned as Syria's top security chief in Lebanon for several years, said in an interview that he had served Lebanon with honesty. This statement, in conjunction with the timing of his death following questioning by the United Nations, led to suspicions about how Kanaan would be represented in the United Nations report, which was to be published at the end of the month. Some suggested that Syria's intelligence community was likely to be implicated, but how Kanaan's suicide was linked with this outcome remained unknown.

The United Nations report on the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri alleged the involvement of Syria's ruling Assad family, as well as key Lebanese associates. In concluding section of paragraph 123, the report stated in strong terms that the decision to assassinate Rafik Hariri could not have been reached without approval from the very top of the Syrian security apparatus. The report also noted that Hariri's murder could not have been organized without "the collusion of their counterparts in the Lebanese security services." The report suggested that the motive for Hariri's murder was rooted in the belief that he was an enemy of Syria and its Lebanese allies. The document did not, however, foreclose a more complex constellation of rationales, including corruption and fraud.

One individual named in the report was Sheikh Ahmed Abdel-Al who seemingly telephoned Lebanese President Emile Lahoud only moments after the bomb exploded killing, Hariri and several others. Lahoud, significantly, had been at odds with Hariri and had enjoyed a strong alliance with Syria. The timing of the call, thus, was deemed to be highly suspicious. Its revelation appeared to fuel further calls for Lahoud's resignation from office. The report also named one of Lahoud's closest security advisors -- General Mustapha Hamdan, the commander of Lebanon's presidential guard -- as a witness. The report alleged that four months prior to the assassination, he claimed that Hariri was "pro-Israeli" and said, "We are going to send him on a trip; bye bye Hariri." As well, paragraph 96 of the report discussed testimony of a witness who claimed to have worked for Syrian intelligence. In that testimony, a series of apparent (but

Syria Review 2016 Page 21 of 540 pages Syria unconfirmed) meetings in Damascus between Lebanese and Syrian security officials were described, including plans for Hariri's assassination. The brother-in-law of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, Asef Shawkat, who led Syria's military intelligence, as well as Maher al-Assad, the president's own brother, were reportedly mentioned in the report as well, although their actual names were redacted. More broadly, the report criticized Syrian authorities of failing to cooperate with the investigation.

An investigator for the United Nations, Detlev Mehlis, warned that the report evoked further investigatory work, and cautioned that those named should enjoy the presumption of innocence. Nevertheless, he did not back away from the overall charges of conspiracy to commit murder, which appeared to involve key Syrian and Lebanese officials. The report has been sent to the United Nations Security Council for discussion. Before the commencement of those discussions, the United States had already demanded action against Syria. Throughout, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said that there was no evidence to suggest that Syria was involved in Hariri's death.

New Political Opposition

In March 2006, a cadre of Syrian opposition politicians in exile announced the formation of a coalition aimed at challenging President Bashar al-Assad's government. The coalition was to be composed of varied factions including the Muslim Brotherhood, Kurds, liberals and communists.

The group was to be headed by former Syrian Vice President Abdul Halim Khaddam who had served both President Assad and his son, but withdrew from the younger Assad's government in 2005.

Following a two-day meeting in Belgium, Khaddam confirmed the group's formation saying that all those participating in the opposition alliance shared the aim of regime change in Damascus. He also said a transitional government would have to be established to "fill the void" left following the end of the Assad government.

Recent Updates

On the domestic front, the government carried out a cabinet shuffle in early 2006.

By mid-2006, Syria was being implicated as a state-sponsor of Hezbollah's terrorist activities from Lebanon into Israel. The matter took on significant proportions after Hezbollah kidnapped two Israeli soldiers and carried out systematic rocket attacks on Israel, thus sparking a harsh retaliatory offensive by Israel.

Syria Review 2016 Page 22 of 540 pages Syria

The United States has likewise accused Syria of interfering in the affairs of Iraq, and also allowing militants to cross the border into Iraq, thus exacerbating the already-dire security situation on the ground in that country. The situation contributed to deteriorating relations between the two countries, made worse by the United States' decision to close off high-level talks with Syria.

For its part, however, Syrian officials have accused the United States of destabilizing the entire Middle East region by its actions in Iraq. In this regard, Syria joined Jordan in calling for a withdrawal of "occupation forces" from Iraq as early as 2004 and continuing to the present.

Meanwhile, Syrian authorities thwarted an attempted terrorist attack against the United States embassy in Damascus on Sept. 12, 2006. While a Syrian security guard was shot by the attackers, there were no other casualties. Syrian authorities then shot those responsible for the attempted terrorist attack. The scenario could easily have ended tragically since it was revealed that a car packed with explosives was found in close proximity to the embassy but was never detonated. United States Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice thanked Syrian authorities for their efforts in handling the situation. Whether or not this scenario would advance poor bilateral relations was unknown.

In May 2007, United States Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice held landmark talks with her Syrian counterpart, Foreign Minister Walid Muallem, at a summit in Egypt. It was the first high level meeting between Washington, D.C., and Damascus in several years, and came at a time when bilateral relations between the two countries had badly-devolved. The United States has accused Syria of trying to influence the political scene in both Iraq and Lebanon. It was difficult to determine whether the talks, which were held during a summit aimed at advancing stability and economic relief in Iraq, would yield positive long-term benefits. Until that point, the Bush administration in the United States had eschewed such high-level contact with Syria, and even railed against Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for meeting with the Syrians only weeks earlier.

The period (spring of 2007) also saw elections take place in Syria. The referendum on the presidency ratified the status quo, while parliamentary elections saw no change either. See "Government Structure" for precise referendum and election results.

In the third week of September 2007, Israeli opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu appeared to acknowledge Syrian claims that Israel carried out an air strike on its terrain two weeks prior. On Israeli television, Netanyahu said he had expressed kudos to Prime Minister Ehud Olmert for taking that action. He said, "When a prime minister does something that is important in my view and necessary to Israel's security... I give my backing." Netanyahu's claim was met with criticism since the Israeli government had been exercising a policy of silence on the issue, which the opposition leader violated.

Syria Review 2016 Page 23 of 540 pages Syria

Officials in Syria said that on Sept. 6, 2007, Israeli jets violated its airspace to the north of the country in what they described as "a hostile act." Witnesses observed that Israeli jets were engaged with Syrian air defense and were eventually forced out of the area, albeit after they fired weapons. Syria reported the incident to the international community and issued a complaint with the United Nations. The United States acknowledged that at least one Syrian target was hit.

In October 2007, Syria took the tough step of imposing stringent visa restrictions on Iraqis. Syrian authorities said they were taking drastic measures in response to the heavy influx of Iraqi refugees.

In the realm of regional relations, Syria played host to the Arab League summit in March 2008. However, some pro-Western nation states registered their discontent with Syrian-Lebanese relations by sending lower-level delegations.

On the domestic agenda in May 2008, President Assad announced there would be a 25 percent salary increase for public sector workers. The president said he was sanctioning the payment increase in response to the rate of inflation and to assist with the rising prices of food and heating oil.

In June 2008, the United Nations nuclear watchdog agency, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), deployed a team of inspectors to investigate claims that Syria is building a nuclear reactor. The IAEA team was expected to investigate al-Kibar in the desert region of northern Syria where Israel carried out an air raid in 2007, as discussed just above. While Israel claimed that a nuclear plant was to be constructed at al-Kibar, Syria said the site was simply an unused military location. For its part, Syria has denied Israel claims that it is constructing nuclear facilities and has cooperated with the IAEA's investigation. IAEA head Mohammed ElBaradei urged Syria to be fully compliant with the demands of the IAEA inspectors. He also noted there was little evidence suggesting that Syria possessed the human resources to create a nuclear program.

Meanwhile, June 2008 also saw Israel and Syria engage in indirect peace talks. Representatives of Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert met with a Syrian delegation in the Turkish capital city of Ankara.

Israeli President Shimon Peres signaled that the indirect talks could grow into more intense negotiations. He recounted the visit of Egypt's former leader Anwar Sadat to Israel in 1977, which heralded the peace treaty negotiations between the two countries. He also said, "If the Syrians really want peace, they must agree to a summit meeting between the Syrian president and the Israeli prime minister."

Syria Review 2016 Page 24 of 540 pages Syria unsuccessful attempt to retake the Golan Heights during the 1973 Middle East war. A year later in 1974, an armistice was signed and a United Nations observer force was established at the ceasefire line. In this way, the 1967 borders have been an enduring issue as regards Middle Eastern peace. The Syrian government has said that no peace talks can be resumed in full without a discussion of the Golan Heights. Syria has demanded that the Golan Heights be returned to its fold.

On the other side of the equation, however, Israel has insisted that Syria halt its support for militants in Lebanon and in the Palestinian territories. To that end, Syria has been linked with Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Palestinian territories. Both groups have posed a grave threat to Israel's security, and have been blamed for terror attacks against Israelis.

October 2008 saw Syrian President Bashar al-Assad initiate plans to forge diplomatic relations with Lebanon for the first time in decades. Indeed, the two Arab countries have been at odds with one another since gaining independence from France in the 1940s. The plans, which have been backed by France, includes the establishment of a Syrian embassy in the Lebanese capital of Beirut. The move would be a symbolic acknowledgment of Lebanese sovereignty after decades of what many have viewed as Syrian inteference in Lebanese affairs. On the other side of the equation, Lebanese Foreign Minister Fawzi Salloukh said that he would travel to the Syrian capital of Damascus to commence establishing ties with his Syrian counterpart ,Walid al-Moualem. That would constitute the first step in the diplomatic process, ultimately aimed at the exchange of ambassadors by the close of 2009.

The Syrian Foreign Ministry protested the violation of territorial integrity and summoned the United States envoy in Damascus for an explanation. The Syrian government also issued a statement, which read: "Syria condemns this aggressive act and holds American forces responsible for this aggression and all of its repercussions."

For its part, the United States did not confirm any such action. A spokesperson for the United States military said only, "It's a developing situation." Should this raid prove to be true, it would be the first incursion of United States forced inside Syria. The United States has repeatedly accused Syria of not doing enough to prevent militants from crossing the border into Iraq. As such, the rationale for this -- still unconfirmed -- action has been that the United States may have been chasing after a high-level militant target, as it sought to secure the border between Iraq and Syria.

On the other side of the equation, while the Syrian government has condemned the possible violation of its territorial integrity, it was not expected to take strong retaliatory action. Principally, this is because the Syrian government, led by secular Ba'athists, has not looked favorably on

Syria Review 2016 Page 25 of 540 pages Syria

Islamist militants.

In August 2009, Iraq and Syria respectively recalled their ambassadors, as a diplomatic row deepened over Baghdad's claim that Damascus was giving safe haven to militants responsible for attacks on Baghdad. At issue were a wave of particularly brutal bombings in Iraq, which targeted the foreign and finance ministries in Baghdad that left close to 100 people dead. Iraq recalled its envoy from Syria after a taped confession was broadcast, indicating that recent violent attacks in Baghdad had been ordered by Syria-based Iraqi Baathists. In retaliation for the move, Syria said it was also recalling its envoy from Iraq. Syria also rejected any involvement in the violence. Syria's declaration of innocence was somewhat bolstered by a claim of responsibility by al al-Qaida wing called Islamic States of Iraq. Turkey was set to mediate the dispute.

On March 10, 2010, Syria declared its right to participate in the global nuclear club and that it intended to pursue a civilian nuclear energy program. There had been global speculation about Syria's nuclear ambitions since 2007 when Israeli jets reportedly bombed the Dair Alzour facility -- an alleged site of a North Korean-designed nuclear reactor that has been under construction since 2001.

The announcement was made by the Syrian deputy foreign minister at an international civilian nuclear energy conference in Paris. Deputy Foreign Minister Fayssal Mikdad excoriated what he characterized as the international community's double standard on nuclear development. He said, "Some Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty member states have imposed strict conditions on export policy that hindered access of other developing countries to nuclear knowledge and energy."

Meanwhile, the Paris conference appeared to have sparked a spate of related announcements. Notably, Israel, which has refused to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), warned that it intended to pursue its own nuclear program. To date, there has never been public confirmation of an Israel nuclear program although there has been a prevailing belief that one exists. India and Pakistan have both openly acknowledged their nuclear programs and they have likewise refused to sign the NPT.

At issue was the possible indictment of members of Hezbollah by a United Nations tribunal

Syria Review 2016 Page 26 of 540 pages Syria investigating the assassination of vocal anti-Syrian former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. As noted below in the "Editor's Note," Hariri's murder marked a turning point in Lebanon's modern history, functioning as a harbinger for the Cedar Revolution that forced the Syrian military from Lebanon after a 30-year long presence there. Despite its tragic roots, the Cedar Revolution was a political victory for pro-Western and reformist forces in Lebanon, and concomitantly enflamed the passions of pro-Syrian elements in the country, many of whom were allied with Hezbollah and sought to assert their authority in Lebanon. Now, in mid-2010, the possible indictment of members of Hezbollah in Hariri's assassination, in many ways, re-opened the wounds of that period.

Still, years after Syrian forces were compelled to exit Lebanon, Syrian President al-Assad was in Lebanon for his first visit since that fateful period. While some Lebanese would likely interpret the visit as a sign of progress between the two neighboring countries, others could well view it as a rallying cry for renewed hostility between pro-Syrian and anti-Syrian factions. But the presence of Saudi King Abdullah on the scene underlined the imperative for regional powers to work in lockstep for Middle Eastern stability. To this end, both the leaders of Syria and Saudi Arabia appealed for calm during unprecedented talks in Lebanon and urged that country's rival factions to refrain from violence despite the politics of the moment. Moreover, with al-Assad and King Abdullah saying that resolution should be reached through "legal institutions," there was a message of unity and a tacit endorsement of the United Nations tribunal process.

Late May 2011 saw the emergence of a report by the United Nations watchdog nuclear agency, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), in which it was reported that a Syrian facility at Deir Alzour allegedly bombed by Israel four years prior was probably a nuclear reactor that had been constructed in covert fashion. While Syria has claimed that the building had no nuclear use, it has also eschewed IAEA efforts to inspect the site. Earlier inspections in 2008 indicated nuclear activities there. The report by the IAEA, which was compiled ahead of a meeting of the IAEA board in June 2011, were expected to be delivered to the United Nations Security Council, where that body would have to consider how to respond to the nuclear developments in Syria. The key question to be addressed would be whether Syria would be regarded as meeting its international obligations in the context of nuclear development.

On June 9, 2011, as expected, the IAEA voted in favor of rebuking Syria, and was set to refer that country to the United Nations Security Council over allegations of a covert nuclear program. According to reports by Agence France Presse, United States Ambassador Glyn Davies made the following assertion to the IAEA assembly: "Syria's apparent attempt at constructing a covert, undeclared plutonium production reactor, a reactor with no credible peaceful purpose, represents one of the most serious safeguards violations possible." He continued by speaking of the reactor at Deir Alzour as follows: "The reactor there was built for the express purpose of producing plutonium for possible use in nuclear weapons." Syrian characterized the move by the IAEA as "regrettable" and claimed that the country was "committed to its obligations." It was yet to be seen of the IAEA would impose sanctions against Syria. The conventional wisdom was that such a

Syria Review 2016 Page 27 of 540 pages Syria move would not easily occur as China and Russia -- countries with veto power on the Security Council -- had already voted against the condemnation of Syria at the IAEA assembly.

Meanwhile, at the start of June 2011, Israeli soldiers opened fired on pro-Palestinian protesters in the Golan Heights, an area of Syria occupied by Israel. According to Syrian media sources, up to 20 people were killed and more than 300 were wounded as the pro-Palestinian protesters marked the anniversary of the 1967 war. For its part, Israel said that warnings were shouted in Arabic, as well as warning shots being fired in the air, before soldiers opened fire at the legs of the protesters and used tear gas to disperse the crowds. Israeli military said that there had been only 12 injuries as a result of confrontation. A similar incident occurred the month prior as Palestinians from Syria entered the Golan Heights, sparking violence and compelling Israeli forces to fire on the protesters, leaving at least a dozen people dead at that time. Israel said at the time that there would respond to future marches of this type, and since then Israeli Prime Minister BenjaminNetanyahu warned that "extremists" would not be allowed to breach Israel's borders.

The flare of violence in that strategic region came at a time when the Assad regime in Syria was experiencing mass anti-government protests. (See below for details). There have been suggestions that the scenario unfolding at the Golan Heights might be linked with the Assad regime's desire to deflect attention from the internal strife plaguing that country. Indeed, as noted in May 2011 by an Israeli official in an interview with Agence France Presse: "Syria is a police state. Demonstrators do not randomly approach the border without the prior approval of the central government." That being said, violence had already broken out at crossing points in other areas -- in the West Bank and at the border with Lebanon, in addition to the Golan Heights. In those cases, Palestinians hurled stones atIsraeli security forces, who responded with tear gas and rubber bullets. As protesters tried to cross a checkpoint at Gaza, sparking clashes, Israeli forces opened fire. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called for the quick return of "calm and quiet" but warned that Israel's borders and sovereignty would be protected.

Special Report

Special Report on Unrest in Syria

Summary

Syria Review 2016 Page 28 of 540 pages Syria population. These moves were aimed at quelling the rising climate of unrest gripping the country. But over time, as protests continued, and as the Assad regime carried out a hardline crackdown on dissent, tensions escalated between the government and the protesters.

As of 2015, Syria was beset by two sets of intersecting challenges -- the ongoing civil war between

Syria Review 2016 Page 29 of 540 pages Syria the Assad regime and rebel forces on one end, and the horrific dangers posed by the notorious terror group, Islamic State, which had seized wide swaths of territory in Syria and left an appalling death toll. It was generally understood that the civil war conditions in Syria, to some extent, facilitated the emergence of Islamic State in that country. Syrian President Assad's priority to hold onto power, and thus the center of power in Damascus, had allowed a power chasm to flourish in other parts of the country, which Islamic State has been able to exploit. The result has been a mass exodus of Syrians fleeing the country and seeking refuge in Europe. The so-called migrant influx in Europe has raised questions as to how to legally and humanely deal with a burgeoning humanitarian refugee crisis.

President Assad's crackdown --

March 2011 saw anti-government protests spread and escalate across the Arab world, with Syria emerging as a recent addition to the list of countries experiencing unrest. In Syria, protesters initially stopped short of demanding the resignation of President Bashar al-Assad, instead demanding greater political freedom and efforts to end corruption. Not one likely to tolerate dissent, the Syrian government instead responded to the uprising with repression -- a move that only intensified the demands of the people.

When protesters gathered outside a mosque in the city of Deraa, a violent crackdown ensued. On March 18, 2011, four protesters died at the hands of security forces. Of particular significance was an incident on March 23, 2011, when protesters marched to the Omari mosque -- a gathering space for hundreds of protesters -- to register discontent over the arrest of 15 children who indulged in creating pro-democracy graffiti. While the children were ultimately released, the hard line by the Syrian authorities raised the ire of the people who took to the streets. But as they gathered at the mosque and prepared to camp out with tents outside the mosque in Deraa, authorities cut power lines and telephone service, and then security forces opened fire on the protesters killing several people.

Syrian officials placed the blame for the March 23, 2011, incident on "armed gangs" and claimed that the mosque was housing weapons. Ironically, before security forces opened fire, the United Nations Human Rights Commissioner, Navi Pillay, had urged the Syrian government to refrain from using excessive force, saying: "People have the legitimate right to express their grievances and demands to their government." But now the death toll was believed to be as high as two dozen with many others injured since the start of the unrest and the Syrian government was moving to avert further unrest by introducing a package of reforms. Of note was the pledge to examine the feasibility of ending the state of emergency, in place since 1963. As well, President Bashar al- Assad ordered the release of those detained in the unrest and promised that those responsible for the deaths of the 12 protesters would be brought to justice. That being said, the Syrian government accused the international media, specifically mentioning the BBC and CNN, of exaggerating the unrest and crackdown within its borders, and cut off Internet service.

Syria Review 2016 Page 30 of 540 pages Syria

By March 25, 2011, protests were ongoing in Syria with media reports suggesting that more people had died in demonstrations across the country. In Deraa, further unrest was said to be unfolding, while protests were also ensuing with thousands of participants in the central city of Hama and the capital of Damascus. Also on March 25, 2011, in the city of Tafas -- north of the aforementioned center of unrest in Deraa -- protests were taking place. Three protesters were reported to have been killed by security forces there.

On March 26, 2011, in the coastal city of Latakia, the situation turned deadly with at least a dozen people killed and more than 200 others injured. Snipers on rooftops were blamed for the deaths. Also in Latakia, the offices of the ruling Baath Party was reported to have been set on fire. Syrian troops were deployed to the city, located to the north west of Damascus, to try to stabilize the situation there. The government made a point of placing some blame for the chaotic situation in Latakia on a Sunni Muslim cleric in Doha, Sheik Youssef al-Qaradawi, saying that he had incited violence.

With an eye on quelling the rising climate of unrest gripping the country, President Bashar al-Assad addressed the country to announce his reform plans. President Bashar al-Assad indicated that the government would finally lift the emergency laws that had been in place for decades. President Bashar al-Assad also said that he would grant more rights to the country's disenfranchised Kurdish population and would order an investigation into the deaths of protesters in Deraa -- the flashpoint of the Syrian protest movement -- as well as the port city of Latakia. The president's announcement suggested that his government was now ready to take more decisive action in the face of mass public discontent. That being said, it soon became clear that a panel would be established to study the matter, with findings to be made available on April 25, 2011. Stated differently, rather than ending the emergency laws immediately, the government was only moving toward examining the matter, with an eye on the preparation of future legislation.

At the start of April 2011, Syrian President Bashar Assad was hoping that the formation of a new government in his country would have the effect of quelling the protest movement. The president had already accepted the resignation of his Cabinet under Prime Minister Mohammed Naji al-Otari; now attention was on the composition of the new cabinet. On April 3, 2011, President Assad designated Adel Safar, the former minister of agriculture, to form a new government. Days later, Prime Minister-designate Safar reportedly commenced consultations with an eye on forming the new government.

Meanwhile, however, anti-government protests were ongoing in Damascus, with around ten people reported to have died in the neighborhood of Douma. According to the Syrian news agency, a group or armed gunmen opened standing on rooftops opened fire on hundreds of citizens and security forces there. Outside Damascus, protests were rocking the southern town of Daraa and on April 8, 2011, more than 20 people died there following Friday prayers, reportedly at the hands of gunmen. The government placed the blame on "saboteurs and conspirators" of the protest

Syria Review 2016 Page 31 of 540 pages Syria movement, accusing them of opening fire on security forces and civilians, while protesters accused the government's forces dressed in civilian clothing of being behind the deaths.

As April entered its second week, four people -- including a security officer and three protesters -- died as a result of deadly clashes in the port city of Baniyas. Pro-government forces reportedly opened fire resulting in the deaths of the protesters while the security officer died as a result of an ambush. Clashes were also reported in Homs, Latakia, Qamishli and other Syrian cities as protesters demanded democratic reform. On April 15, 2011, Damascus saw some of its biggest protests as tens of thousands of protesters took to the streets in anti-government rallies. Security forces used batons and tear gas to disperse the crowds. On April 19, 2011, Syrian security forces were seen in videotaped footage opening fire on protesters in the western city of Homs.

Around the same time in mid-April 2011, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said he expected the state of emergency to soon be lifted. As noted above, the president had earlier introduced this idea but within the slow-moving context of creating a panel to consider how such a move might be instituted in practice. Clearly, given the ongoing protests, the president had decided to accelerate movement on this matter. In addition to the lifting of the emergency law, the newly-formed Syrian cabinet had been told to advance a series of reforms and structural changes, aimed at demonstrating the government's serious commitment to increased democratization in Syria. President Assad suggested he wanted to see Syria become an example for the region.

These promises were matched with quick action. By the third week of April 2011, Syria's government had passed a law ending the country's decades-old state of emergency, and lifting the suspension on constitutional protections. Additionally, the government also abolished the state security court, which was responsible for the administration of political prisoners. As well, the government passed new legislation authorizing peaceful protests, however, any such gatherings would have to be approved by the interior ministry. President Assad was expected to sign the new package of reform-minded legislation into law.

By late April, as weeks of anti-government protests raged on, there were at least 200 deaths, and hundreds of arrests of opposition figures, bloggers and activists, as the Syrian government took a hard line to contain dissent. The legal changes noted above constituted a significant shift in another direction for the Syrian regime of President Assad. Yet to be seen was the matter of whether or not these changes would actually affect the powerful security apparatus in Syria, which has tended to function in an extra-legal fashion. Also to be seen was the matter of whether or not these moves would assuage anti-government factions in Syria.

On April 22, 2011, in the aftermath of the decision by the Syrian government to lift the state of emergency, Syrian troops opened fire on protesters. On that day alone, about 100 people died in protest-related violence across Syria. The deaths occurred in the towns of Ezra and Hirak, located in close proximity to Deraa, which has been a flashpoint the Syrian anti-government movement. Other such incidences occurred in Homs and Damascus. The protesters took to the streets after

Syria Review 2016 Page 32 of 540 pages Syria

Muslim Holy Day prayers, and some reports indicated that demands were heard coming from some of them demanding the "overthrow of the regime." It was not known whether these calls spurred the action by Syrian troops, or, if the troops were trying to disperse the crowds.

A day later, on April 23, 2011, Syrian security forces fired on civilians as they gathered in the tens of thousands to participate in the funeral processions of those who died the day before. At least a dozen more people were killed on April 23, 2011, as a result. Meanwhile, Syrian security forces were detaining people suspected of organizing anti-government rallies and demonstrations. The hard line taken by the Syrian authorities served only to inflame the passions of protesters who were unlikely to now be assuaged by President Assad's reform overtures and, instead, called for the complete overthrow of the Assad regime in Syria.

The Syrian authorities, though, indicated that any further protests would be regarded as acts of "sabotage," aimed at undermining the stability of the country. Further, President Assad has said that the reforms that were instituted -- from ending the state of emergency to passing new laws discussed above -- constituted his "concession" to the protesters. He warned that the country was suffering from an "armed insurrection" by Salafist groups in Homs and Baniyas. Salafism is an ultra-conservative Sunni Islamic formulation, whose adherents share the extremist Jihadist ideology of the terrorist enclave, al-Qaida. Clearly, President Assad was intent on showing a sharp division between those associated with the state and those posing a threat to stability.

As April 2011 entered its final week, the death toll in Syria's season of unrest had increased precipitously, prompting the resignations of two legislators and a religious leader from Deraa in the southern part of the country. Sheikh Rizq Abdul-Rahim Abazeid, the mufti of the region, said in an interview with the Associated Press, "I cannot tolerate the blood of our innocent sons and children being shed." At issue was the siege that had been imposed on Deraa.

Meanwhile, Human Rights Watch was calling for an investigation into the bloodshed of April 23, 2011. Joe Stork, a spokesperson for the United States-based rights agency, said, "After Friday's carnage, it is no longer enough to condemn the violence. Faced with the Syrian authorities' shoot- to-kill strategy, the international community needs to impose sanctions on those ordering the shooting of protesters."

By the close of April 2011, thousands of Syrian troops were being deployed to the Damascus suburb of Douma and the town of Deraa in an apparent bid to crush the opposition movement. Most of the troops appeared to be from the security police and elite Republican Guard and took up positions at checkpoints, reportedly with the goal of arresting pro-democracy activists. These security forces have been loyal to Assad, a member of Syria's Alawite community. Analysts suggested that prevailing allegiance by these forces to Assad has been motivated by a desire to hold onto power and influence, rather than allowing a post-Assad Syria -- composed of majority Sunnis -- to take form.

Syria Review 2016 Page 33 of 540 pages Syria

In May 2011, at least 12 Syrians were killed in the central city of Homs as armored troops and tanks were deployed there. The city was a hotbed of violence as the government on May 8, 2011, accused "armed terrorists" of killing army personnel there. As discussed above, President Assad has said that Syria has been plagued by an "armed insurrection" by Salafist groups in Homs and other select Syrian cities. Now, Homs was the site of heavy shelling by government forces. Troops were also being deployed to Tafas close to Deraa.

Around the same time, Syrian nationals were crossing the border close to the Syrian village of Tal Kalakh into Lebanon to escape the crossfire of violence associated with the crackdown.

By May 11, 2011, the Syrian government was intensifying its crackdown on pro-democracy demonstrators, now widening its focus to a broader swath of the country. In addition to increased patrols and deployments of troops, there were also more checkpoints being established across Syria, presumably to scan for dissidents. Meanwhile, up to 10,000 people were subject to detainment following a program of mass arrests by the government. Days later, there were attacks on civilians in Tal Kalakh, close to the border with Lebanon; nearly 30 people died there as a result.

Meanwhile, Buthaina Shabaan, an adviser to President Assad said that government forces would stop firing on anti-government demonstrators. This move appeared to be linked to talks with opposition ranks which were aimed at ending the crisis gripping Syria in a negotiated settlement. As well, President Assad acknowledged that the uprising had not been well handled due to the lack of experience with such matters. He indicated that the Syrian crisis was in its waning stages but it was left to be seen if Syria had seen the last of the wave of bloodshed. Despite these assertions, bloodshed in Syria saw no end.

On May 20, 2011, as protests broke out across Syria, security forces opened fire on protesters in the ongoing military crackdown, killing at least 30 people. Then on May 21, 2011, security forces opened fire on a funeral in Homs, killing several people and wounding at least a dozen.

These actions came only days after United Stated President Barack Obama warned the Syrian regime to cease its aggression against the civilian protesters and to move in the democratizing direction claimed as the path of Syrian President Assad. As stated by President Obama, "The Syrian people have shown their courage in demanding a transition to democracy. President Assad now has a choice: He can lead that transition or get out of the way." Turkey entered the fray by the last week of the month, urging Syrian President Assad to act in a way that favored stability and the lives of people, but with Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu warning that, "Time is running out."

On May 27, 2011, world leaders at the G8 Summit in France condemned the brutal crackdown on protesters in Syria by the Assad regime in that country. A statement in this regard from the G8 countries demanded that the Assad regime "stop using force and intimidation" against its people.

Syria Review 2016 Page 34 of 540 pages Syria

At the close of May 2011, the death of a child -- Hamza al-Khatib -- had given the protest movement in Syria new purpose. While Syrian authorities said that there would be a full inquiry into the death of the 13-year-old boy they claimed was shot during a protest, disturbing counter- claims by the opposition were offering quite a different account. According to the opposition, Hamza al-Khatib had been abducted, tortured to death by security forces, and his mutilated body was eventually returned to his parents. These allegations were now dominating the public discourse in Syria about the protests rocking the country. Indeed, Hamza al-Khatib was becoming the "face" or symbol of the protest movement, much as the deaths of a young Iranian student, Neda Agha Soltan, and the Tunisian market seller, Mohammed Bouazizi, respectively consolidated protest movements in those two countries.

The period also saw the release of about 500 political prisoners. According to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, most of the people who were now free had been detained due to their participation in anti-government rallies and demonstrations. Further amnesty actions were expected to be in the offing with the Syrian government saying that members of the Muslim Brotherhood -- a group banned from existence in this country -- would soon be included. It was not known if these measures were intended to mitigate the negative spotlight on Syria as the protests grew more violent, and as illustrated in the tragic death of young Hamza al-Khatib. As before, the Syrian government was floating the notion of a national dialogue intended to end the unrest gripping the country.

Regardless, the international community was pointing to Hamza's death (the real cause notwithstanding) as a catalyst for Syria to transition to genuine democracy. Such an end was not expected to quickly occur.

At the start of June 2011, Syrian authorities were using artillery and tanks to bombard and strike the town of Rastan, located close to Homs, in the center of the country. Perhaps not surprisingly, the opposition was unreceptive to the concessions noted above, regarding them as illusory.

Days later on June 4, 2011, Syrian troops reportedly killed 30 protesters in the northwestern town of Jisr al-Shaghour. Snipers and security forces repeatedly opened fire on peaceful protesters and funerals goers. Human rights groups said that those killed were civilian protesters but the Syrian authorities insisted that the death toll was only four and consisted of policemen; it also characterized 20 people who they said were wounded as "armed terrorist groups." According to the government news agency SANA: "The terrorist groups spread fear in the hearts of citizens who called upon the competent authorities to intervene forcefully to protect them and bring back security and stability."

As June 2011 moved into its second week, the situation in the town of Jisr al-Shughour took a dismal turn as the government announced the death of 120 forces there. The government declined to offer a full explanation of their deaths, although it admitted that it had lost "intermittent" control

Syria Review 2016 Page 35 of 540 pages Syria of the town. On the streets, people were more willing to give accounts of what happened in Jisr al- Shughour, saying to journalists that after soldiers switched sides in protest of the hard-line crackdown on anti-government forces there, bitter fighting between the factions followed. This account was bolstered by the televised testimony of a soldier, who said he switched sides due to outrage over the bombardment of his home town. A man identifying himself as Lieutenant Abdul- Razzaq Tlass was shown on the Al-Jazeera television network, saying he was deserting the Syrian military due to the regime's "crimes." He urged follow officers to protect the Syrian people against the government saying, "Remember your duties."

Meanwhile, with the conflict in Jisr al-Shughour escalating, thousands of residents were fleeing en masse to the Turkish border, presumably out of fear of an impending harsh crackdown from the Assad regime. Indeed, the government was ominously promising decisive retaliation. The Turkish Foreign Ministry confirmed that hundreds of Syrians had sought refuge at a camp in the border region while the United Nations warned of a burgeoning humanitarian crisis. That being said, the crackdown by government forces came, as expected, and after a day of violent street fighting, as well as heavy bombardment and shelling, the Syrian army was reported to have retaken control of Jisr al-Shughour by June 12, 2011. Tanks and armored vehicles were said to have established positions throughout Jisr al-Shughour with remaining residents too afraid to leave their homes. Helicopter gunships were said to be in the sky overhead. Syrian forces were not deploying at the Turkish border, however, they were establishing checkpoints in the area.

By mid-June 2011, with the Syrian government re-asserting its authority in Jisr al-Shughour, residents were returning to their homes. At the same time, the Syrian military was expanding its campaign to crush anti-government protests and dissent; troops and tanks moved into Maarat al- Numaan, resulting in a mass exodus of thousands of people. Troops, tanks, and armored vehicles were also deploying to the city of Deir al-Zor and the town Albu Kamal on the border with Iraq. Syrian residents who were fleeing these locations to escape the crossfire of violence reported that troops and militias loyal to President Assad, known as "Shabbiha," were employing a "scorched earth" policy of burning agricultural land. In so doing, the Shabbiha fighters were delivering a strong cautionary message to those daring to oppose the Assad government.

Note that on June 17, 2011, protests were ongoing across the country and Syrian security forces were responding harshly. Reports were emerging that Syrian forces had once again opened fire on protesters in several locations, resulting in several deaths. There were reports of aerial gunning of people in the streets from the skies above.

Clearly, these moves were all part of the Assad regime's effort to repress dissent and assert its power. But along the way, international criticism against the Syrian government's hard-line and brutal tactics were on the rise. Indeed, the United Nations Human Rights Council issued a report in which it accused Syrian security forces of using brutal tactics of repression, including executions, sniper attacks on unarmed civilians, mass arrests, and torture. Meanwhile, the protest movement itself showed itself to be resilient as people continued to take to the streets, even in the face of a

Syria Review 2016 Page 36 of 540 pages Syria brutal and hard line response by the Assad regime.

Later Developments

The crackdown by the government on anti-government protesters continued at the start of July 2011 when about a dozen people were shot and killed by Syrian troops during a protest in the city of Hama. The city returned to the political fore almost thirty years after President Assad's father had carried out his own crackdown on an uprising there. Indeed, in 1982, then-President Hafez al- Assad ordered troops in to end an uprising by the Sunni opposition Muslim Brotherhood. That operation left tens of thousands of people dead.

In addition to ongoing anti-government protests plaguing Syria, by July 10, 2011, the country's capital of Damascus was also seeing pro-government rallies. While rallies showing support for the Assad regime would not generally be noteworthy, the fact that the pro-government demonstrators turned violent and went on to attack the French and United States embassies -- seemingly with the approval of the Assad regime -- was certainly a matter of concern.

In response, United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton vociferously asserted that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad had "lost legitimacy," in a statement that augured devolving relations between the two countries. The United States Department of State also summoned the Syrian charge d'affaires in Washington to demand an accounting for the "outrageous" attack against its embassy. Making clear that the United States was drawing a line in the sand and was standing on the side of the anti-government protesters, Secretary of State Clinton said, "President Assad is not indispensable and we have absolutely nothing invested in him remaining in power. Our goal is to see that the will of the Syrian people for a democratic transformation occurs."

The United States was not alone in condemning Syria for fomenting public anger and encouraging violence against diplomatic targets; France also placed blame squarely on the Assad regime for attacks on its embassy. Indeed, protesters went so far as to desecrate the French flag at the embassy and replace it with the Syrian national flag. Three embassy staffers were injured when pro-government protesters attempted to enter the French compound. It was a flagrant act, destined to violate the basic fulcrum of diplomatic relations. French Foreign Ministry spokesman, Bernard Valero, responded to the situation saying, "It is not with such illegal methods that the authorities in Damascus will turn the attention away from the fundamental problem, which is to stop the repression of the Syrian population."

Both embassy attacks occurred after diplomatic staff from the respective missions visited the northern city of Hama, which was the site of anti-government unrest at the start of July 2011. Accordingly, the general consensus was that the Assad regime in Syria was retaliating to the apparent support from the French and American government for protesters by spurring its own support base to carry out attacks on United States and French diplomatic interests.

Syria Review 2016 Page 37 of 540 pages Syria

By mid-July 2011, the pattern of Syrian security forces firing on protesters at anti-government rallies was ongoing. On July 15, 2011, more than 20 people died across the country, including at Qaboun and other suburbs of the Syrian capital city of Damascus. Other deaths and injuries were reported in Homs and Deraa, which were increasingly becoming flashpoints in the uprising against President Assad. A day later on July 16, 2011, there were reports that armed protesters stormed a police station in the northeastern city of Boukmal close to the border with Iraq. There were also reports of vandalism at various governmental establishments. On July 19, 2011, Syrian forces killed more than a dozen people in Homs including 10 mourners at a funeral. Homs' status as a major center of the anti-government protests has been partially attributable to tensions between the majority Sunni inhabitants and members of Assad's Alawite minority.

As the last week of July 2011 commenced, as Syrian forces continued its crackdown on anti- government protesters, tens of thousands of Syrians took to the streets in a mass show of defiance. Days later, the government was carrying out a raid in the town of Kanaker, close to Damascus; close to ten people died as a result in clashes that ensued, while several injuries and arrests were reported.

Meanwhile, around the same time in late July 2011, the Syrian government was moving forward with a plan to authorize the formation of multiple political parties in the country. The move would - - in theory -- open up the political process to parties other than the long-ruling Ba'ath party. However, there were limits of the types of political parties that could be formed, specifically with prohibitions on groupings based on religious, tribal, or regional affiliations. While the notion of a multi-party political system has been a central demand articulated by anti-government protesters in Syria, it was not known if this initiative to allow for new parties would quell the tide of discontent sweeping the country.

Hama returned to the fore at the start of August 2011 when after weeks of continuous protests. Syrian troops entered the city, with heavy tanks reaching the Assi Square in the central core -- the political epicenter of the anti-government rallies. In only a space of days, hundreds of people were said to have died in Hama in what some witnesses described as a massacre; however, there was a media "blackout" in force, which meant that verification of such reports was hard to find. Still, those on the scene told leading international news agencies, including the BBC and Reuters, that bodies were piling up on the sides of streets and the sound of shelling was widespread. Electrical power and water were cut off from residents in Hama, in an apparent effort to force the city to suffer a state of siege. Witnesses said that the situation in Hama in 2011 was reminiscent of 1982 when then-President Hafez al-Assad (the father of the current president) ordered troops to go to Hama and end an uprising by the Sunni opposition Muslim Brotherhood.

Protests were also taking place elsewhere in the country -- many of them erupting to show solidarity with the grim situation unfolding in Hama. In Damascus on Aug. 5, 2011, thousands of people were reported to have attended demonstrations, with many of them chanting, Hama, we are with you until death" along with anti-Assad slogans. But back in Hama on the same day, the people

Syria Review 2016 Page 38 of 540 pages Syria were still being subjected to a brutal crackdown with shelling and gunfire reported there. Days later, a violent crackdown was taking place in Deir al-Zour when Syrian military stormed the eastern city and intense shelling and gunfire ensued. At least 50 people died as a result. As August 2011 entered its second week, Syrian authorities were claiming to be in full control of Hama; they were also well on their way to securing domination of the other flashpoint city of Deir el-Zour.

On Aug. 13, 2011, the Syrian military was reported to be carrying out an assault on protesters in the northern port city of Latakia. Warships, armored vehicles, and troops were advancing on the city, which has been the site of large-scale anti-government protests for some time. This particular assault was sparking violence with explosions, gunfire, and deaths reported on the scene.

By Aug. 29, 2011, Syrian military forces were carrying out a number of aggressive operations across the country -- in Qara, a suburb of the capital of Damascus, in Rastan, to the north of Homs (a hotbed of dissent), in Sarmin in the northern province of Idlib, as well as the border regions with Lebanon. In Rastan, tanks were deployed at key points and there were reports of heavy machine-gun fire. In Sarmin in the northern province of Idlib, where troops stormed the city and at least six people were reportedly killed. The raid on the suburb of Damacus was the site of another raid by armoured vehicles and resulted in at least one death and scores of arrests. In the town of Heet, offensive operations there caused many residents to flee across the Lebanese border.

A day later on Aug. 30, 2011, several people were shot to death during the Islamic festival of Eid al-Fitr in the southern province of Deraa, which -- as a site of anti-government dissent -- had also seen much violence since the start of the uprising. In a suburb of Damascus, security forces opened fire on a group of protesters marching towards a cemetery, seriously injuring many of them. Syrian security forced additionally shot at protesters in the eastern city of Deir al-Zour.

There were some suggestions that these new assaults by the Syrian authorities had come in response to defections from Syrian troops. Regardless of the cause, there were reports that Syrian security forces were taking up positions in public places and randomly shooting people. Many demonstrators sought refuge from the crackdown in buildings deemed "safe," such as mosques; however, security forces were often undeterred and went after people regardless of the sanctity of the location. The situation took on religious tones when an influential Sunni cleric, Sheikh of Al- Azhar in Cairo, condemned attacks on anti-government protesters taking refuge in mosques.

As August 2011 was coming to an end, the Assad regime was side-stepping the pressure from the international community (discussed below) and instead concentrating on its proposed reform agenda. President Assad has asserted that the crackdown on dissent was intended to clear the country of its terrorist threats, in preparation for the establishment of political reforms. Those proposed changes included a schedule for parliamentary elections in February 2012.

International Reaction

Syria Review 2016 Page 39 of 540 pages Syria

With the latest crackdown moves included, the death toll in Syria was estimated to be in the thousands and more than 10,000 people were injured or taken into police custody. Note, though, there has been no reliable confirmation of these numbers. International criticism of the Syrian government's harsh crackdown was mounting, even leading to calls for sanctions to be levied against Syria.

At the close of April 2011, the United Nations failed to agree on a statement condemning Syria's violent crackdown against protesters. While the draft proposal was put forth by France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and Portugal, it faced opposition from Russia, which argued that the situation in Syria did not constitute a threat to global stability. Indeed, Russia's Ambassador to the United Nations, Alexander Pankin, said that a "real threat to regional security could arise from outside interference in Syria's domestic situation." Meanwhile, India and China urged dialogue as the preferred form of action in resolving the crisis.

The lack of progress on the joint statement from the United Nations notwithstanding, United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon later urged the Syrian government to consider responding affirmatively the demands of the protesters, and to refrain from using harsh force. He said, "I urge again President Assad to heed calls for reform and freedom and to desist from excessive force and mass arrest of peaceful demonstrators."

In May 2011, the European Union said it would levy sanctions against Syria, including an arms embargo as well as travel and financial restrictions on top officials in the Syrian government. It was not known if international pressure helped to spur the Syrian government to engage in negotiations (discussed above) with the opposition. That being said, bloodshed was ongoing. Accordingly, the European Union indicated that it would likely extend its sanctions on Syria to include Assad. In June 2011, the European Union presented a draft resolution to the United Nations Security Council condemning Syrian President Bashar Assad's regime for its harsh crackdown on anti-government protesters.

As well, the United States had moved to impose its own sanctions on Syrian President Bashar al- Assad for human rights abuses. Already, the United States had levied sanctions against three members of President Assad's inner circle. As well, United States President Barack Obama called on the Syrian leader to either lead the country in the democratizing effort or "get out of the way." This "lead-or-leave" call stopped short of calling for the fall of the Assad regime, yet it was clear that the United States was hardening its stance against Syria.

At the diplomatic level in June 2011, the Assad regime was losing international support as France was indicating that President Assad had lost legitimacy and the United Kingdom called for the Syrian leader to either "reform or step aside."

It should be noted that the violence in Syria was spurring a reaction from the international community. In August 2011, as the violent crackdown in Hama ensued, United Nations Secretary

Syria Review 2016 Page 40 of 540 pages Syria

General Ban Ki-moon warned that Syrian President Assad "must be aware that under international humanitarian law, this is accountable." Expressing outrage, the head of the United Nations said, "I believe that he [Assad] lost all sense of humanity." Then, in a rare show of unity, the United Nations Security Council found concurrence on a statement to condemn "the widespread violations of human rights and the use of force against civilians by the Syrian authorities" and formally adopted the measure. The United Nations Security Council also demanded that Syrian authorities "comply with their obligations under applicable international law.” Lebanon, whose pro-Hezbollah government was aligned with Syria, used a procedure to disassociate itself from the text after it was adopted.

Also in August 2011, the Arab League joined the United Nations in issuing a condemnation of Syria for its brutal repression of anti-government protesters. The Arab League expressed "alarm" over the situation unfolding in Syria and demanded an immediate end to the violence by the Assad regime. Adding to the pressure on Syria was the decision by Saudi Arabia to withdraw its ambassador. In a statement that was broadcast across the Arab world on al-Arabiya television, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia said, "The kingdom of Saudi Arabia... demands an end to the death machine and bloodshed and calls for acts of wisdom before it is too late." He continued, "What is happening in Syria is not acceptable for Saudi Arabia. Either it (Syria) chooses wisdom on its own or it will be pulled down into the depths of turmoil and loss." Kuwait and Bahrain soon joined Saudi Arabia in recalling their ambassadors from Syria, while Turkey was stepping up its own pressure against the Assad regime in Syria.

Turkey entered the fray in mid-August 2011, with Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu demanding that the Syrian government end its crackdown “immediately and unconditionally,” and intimating that deleterious consequences could be in the offing. These remarks by Turkey's top diplomat were part of an ongoing effort by that country to try to bring an end to the conflict in Turkey, who has said that he made several trips to Syria to try to achieve a negotiated conclusion. However, now at a news conference in Ankara, Davutoglu was warning, “This is our final word to the Syrian authorities: Our first expectation is that these operations stop immediately and unconditionally. If the operations do not end, there would be nothing more to discuss about steps that would be taken."

By Aug. 18, 2011, global leaders were calling for President Assad to step down from power, given the brutality of the Syrian regime's crackdown on protesters, and exemplified by its overwhelming use of military force. Indeed, the international community seemed to have launched a concerted effort to ratchet up its pressure on the Assad regime in Syria, manifest by a chorus of demands for President Assad to exit the political scene.

The United States issued a strong message with President Barack Obama saying in unambiguous terms, "The time has come for President Assad to step aside." In a written statement, the United States president asserted: "The future of Syria must be determined by its people, but President Bashar al-Assad is standing in their way. His calls for dialogue and reform have rung hollow while

Syria Review 2016 Page 41 of 540 pages Syria he is imprisoning, torturing, and slaughtering his own people." He continued, "We have consistently said that President Assad must lead a democratic transition or get out of the way. He has not led. For the sake of the Syrian people, the time has come for President Assad to step aside." Secretary of State Hillary Clinton echoed the call for the Syrian leader to exit the political scene, saying, "The transition to democracy in Syria has begun, and it is time for Assad to get out of the way."

Leaders of the United Kingdom, France, Germany, the European Union, and Canada, made the same demand, effectively closing ranks in a collective measure of pressure from the West on the Assad regime in Syria. The leaders of the United Kingdom, France and Germany issued a joint statement that declared President Assad should "leave power in the greater interests of Syria and the unity of his people." Catherine Ashton, the European Union foreign policy chief stated the following -- "The EU notes the complete loss of Bashar al-Assad's legitimacy in the eyes of the Syrian people and the necessity for him to step aside." Stephen Harper, the prime minister of Canada, called for "President Assad to vacate his position, relinquish power and step down immediately."

Meanwhile, United Nations investigators were warning that the Assad regime's use of violence in Syria "may amount to crimes against humanity." In a 22-page report to the United Nations Human Rights Council, investigators accused Syrian security forces, which have included snipers, of using deadly force against civilians in its anti-protester efforts and repressing citizens with anti- government leanings. As stated by the writers of the report: "The mission found a pattern of human rights violations that constitutes widespread or systematic attacks against the civilian population, which may amount to crimes against humanity." Investigators, therefore, called for Syria's alleged human rights abuses to be brought before the International Criminal Court.

Already, there had been calls for an emergency meeting of the United Nations Human Rights Council at the behest of all 24 members, including fellow Arab countries in the Middle East, such as Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia. On Aug. 23, 2011, the United Nations Human Rights Council ordered an investigation into violations and abuses allegedly committed by Syrian security forces during the crackdown of anti-government protesters. The council passed a resolution that demanded that the violence in Syria come to an end, and also provided for the deployment of an independent international commission of inquiry. Syria responded by calling the measure "unbalanced" and accusing certain world powers of attempting to politically undermine Syria.

At the same time, it was being announced that the United Nations would deploy a humanitarian mission to Syria to assess the humanitarian situation unfolding there.

The European Union and the United States noted that they were preparing a draft resolution that would call for United Nations sanctions against the government of Syria, with specific emphasis on President Assad, his inner coterie, and that General Intelligence Directorate. It was not likely that the resolution would be passed since Russia -- a veto-wielding member of the United Nations Security Council -- has made it clear that there was no need to go further than the already-issued

Syria Review 2016 Page 42 of 540 pages Syria condemnation of violence in Syria.

United Nations sanctions aside, the European Union moved to widen its own sanctions against Syria. As well, the Obama administration in the United States imposed new economic sanctions on Syria, including a freeze on the Syrian government's assets under United States jurisdiction and prohibitions on Americans from transactions with Assad's government.

Syria appeared to dismiss the efforts by the international community, suggesting that the sanctions would not affect the decisions made by the government. For his part, Syrian President Assad seemed unaffected by global pressures and was dismissing international criticism of his regime's harsh tactics. He asserted that his government would continue its thrust to crush "terrorist groups" in the country for the purpose of national security. In an address to a meeting of his Ba'ath Party, President Assad defiantly maintained the view that Syria would retain its "nationalist, resisting positions" -- an apparent reference to his ongoing tactics against anti-government protesters. At the same time, Syrian authorities were also saying that once the country had been cleared of such threats, it could move forward with a political reform agenda.

At the start of October 2011, the anti-government opposition of Syria was at the forefront of the political scene as they joined forces to launch the Syrian National Council (SNC). The objectives of the SNC were to challenge President Assad and to reconstitute a new and democratic Syria. While the formation of a united political opposition in Syria should be regarded as a significant milestone on the national scene, the development came as pro-government forces retook control of the central town of Rastan, which was embroiled in clashes between military defectors and pro- Assad military forces for several days. It was apparent that the Assad regime still held a strong grip on the country despite the protests sweeping Syria for several months of the so-called "Arab Spring."

At the diplomatic level, a prevailing United Nations Security Council resolution condemning Syria over its crackdown on anti-government protesters could not gain passage as China and Russia – both permanent Security Council members -- used their veto power. The resolution gained affirmative votes from the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Portugal, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Colombia, Gabon, Nigeria. India, Brazil, South Africa, and Lebanon abstained from the vote.

Despite the fact that much of the power in the resolution was removed, specifically with regard to a reference to sanctions against Damascus, the resolution was still subject to veto. Beijing and Moscow argued that the draft resolution failed to include a provision that would foreclose external military intervention in Syria. For its part, the United States expressed "outrage" over the outcome of the vote, with United States Ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, walking out of the room following the vote tally after the Syrian contingent made disparaging remarks about the United States’ allegiance to Israel. Ambassador Rice herself issued a scathing condemnation of

Syria Review 2016 Page 43 of 540 pages Syria

Russia and China, saying that opposition to the resolution was a "cheap ruse by those who would rather sell arms to the Syrian regime than stand with the Syrian people." France ambassador to the United Nations, Gerard Araud, said the vetoes by China and Russia displayed "disdain for the legitimate interests that have been fought for in Syria" since the start of the protests in that country.

At the close of October 2011, the United States withdrew its ambassador, Robert Ford, from Syria. A month earlier, Ford had been attacked by pro-government supporters as he met with an opposition figure. According to Hassan Abdul Azim -- the head of the banned Arab Socialist Democratic Union -- close to 100 loyalists of President Bashir al-Assad attempted to enter his office as Envoy Ford arrived. Azim said the crowd managed to trap them both. Envoy Ford was unharmed as the weapons of choice were eggs and tomatoes; however, the action itself was clearly marked with hostility and bode only negatively for United States-Syria relations. In response, United States Secretary of State vociferously condemned the attack, calling it "wholly unjustified," and demanded that the Syrian government protect diplomatic staff.

Now, the United States was moving to withdraw Ford from Syria out of an abundance of caution regarding his safety, given revelations about "credible threats" against the envoy. Mark Toner, a spokesman for the United States Department of State said that Ford's return to Syria would be dependent on an "assessment of Syrian regime-led incitement and the security situation on the ground." Although it was not a formal withdrawal of diplomatic personnel, Syria responded by recalling its ambassador from Washington D.C. for "consultations." It should be noted that Ford was the first American ambassador to Syria in five years.

For his part, Envoy Ford -- an Arabic speaker -- has been something of a lightning rod to pro- government elements as he visited the city of Hama, which has been a flashpoint in anti- government protests sweeping across Syria in the so-called "Arab Spring." He also was among a group of Western diplomats who paid condolences to the family of a human rights activist reportedly tortured and killed by the Syrian authorities. Moreover, Ford has expressed solidarity with the protesters.

Relations between Syria and the United States devolved further when, at the close of October 2011, the United States Department of States advised Syrian protesters not to surrender despite the Syria government's announcement of an amnesty for people relinquishing their weapons. The Syrian Foreign Ministry characterized the United States' stance as "irresponsible" and accused that country of fomenting dissent in Syria. However, State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland said via an interview with reporters: "I wouldn't advise anybody to turn themselves in to the (Syrian) authorities at the moment. This would be about the fourth amnesty that they've offered since I took this job about five months ago. So we'll see if it has any more traction than it's had."

At the close of October 2011, Syrian President Bashir al-Assad warned the international community, and particularly, the West, against intervening into the affairs of his country. In an

Syria Review 2016 Page 44 of 540 pages Syria interview with the United Kingdom's Sunday Telegraph newspaper, President Assad said that external involvement could transform Syria into "another Afghanistan." Indeed, Syria has sectarian differences between Sunnis, Shi'as, and Alawites; it also has ethnic challenges between Arabs and Kurds. By contrast, Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya -- the countries where the "Arab Spring" all of which ended in victory for rebellious anti-government elements -- the demography was far less complicated. Syria is additionally located in a complicated geopolitical position sharing borders with Israel, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq and Turkey.

These remarks by the Syrian leader came at a time when world opinion -- already negative -- was turning more sharply against Assad in Syria for his ongoing harsh crackdown on anti-government protesters. China -- one of the veto-wielding countries on the United Nations Security Council that refused to endorse international sanctions against Syria -- was now warning Assad that the situation in that country was untenable. Moreover, the United Nations was renewing its demand for the Assad's regimes climate of violent repression to end. The Arab League also entered the fray when it issued a sharp reprimand against the Assad regime for its military response to civilian demonstrators.

In response to this pressure, Syria reached an agreement with the Arab League for a peace plan at the start of November 2011. The peace deal called for the cessation of violence, the withdrawal of military tanks and armored vehicles from Syrian streets plagued by violence, the release of some 70,000 detainees apprehended in the crackdown, and the convening of talks between the Syrian authorities and opposition forces at the headquarters of the Arab League in Cairo. Arab monitors would also enter Syria to maintain the peace.

Meanwhile, the climate of violent repression in Syria persisted. On Oct. 29, 2011, as many as 50 civilians and members of the Syrian security forces were killed. In the flashpoint city of Homs, more than 20 people died when army tanks shelled a historic district. The volatile town of Hama also saw violence at the hands of Syrian troops, although the Syrian authorities emphasized the deaths of soldiers, claiming that demonstrators (whom they have characterized as terrorists and armed gangs) were responsible for those deaths. By Nov. 3, 2011, the violence and unrest was ongoing in Homs with the death of another 20 people during military operations the Bab-Amro area of that restive city. These deaths, in addition to the deaths that occurred in the previous days including civilian and military victims, meant that Homs had experienced a death toll of about 75 persons in a short space of time. On Nov. 6, 2011, anti-government protests by dissidents in Syria were ongoing as was the government's crackdown against them, yielding the use of tear gas and bloodshed on the hold day of Eid al-Ayad. Moreover, by Nov. 8, 2011, Syrian forces were reported to be renewing a massive assault on Homs.

Ironically, this spate of violence occurred after Syria had agreed to the aforementioned peace deal, brokered by the Arab League. Not surprisingly, the Arab League called for an emergency meeting out of concern that Syrian authorities had failed to implement any of the measures outlined in the agreement. As stated by Qatari Prime Minister Sheik Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani, the meeting was

Syria Review 2016 Page 45 of 540 pages Syria needed because of "the continuation of violence and because the Syrian government did not implement its commitments in the Arab plan to resolve the Syrian crisis." The Qatari leader continued, "If Syria does not respect its commitments, the [Arab] ministerial committee will meet again and take the necessary decisions." It was yet to be seen if the Assad regime in Syria would heed this warning, or if the Arab League's warning would turn out to be toothless.

On Nov. 12, 2011, in response to Syria's failure to end its harsh crackdown against protesters, the Arab League showed that its warnings had teeth, as the majority of its member countries voted to suspend Syria from its body. Eighteen Arab League member states voted in favor of suspension, with Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen voting against the measure, and Iraq abstaining. The Arab League also called on member states to withdraw ambassadors from Syria, levied sanctions against that country, and demanded once again that Syria end its campaign of violence against anti-government demonstrators. The Arab League additionally issued a deadline to Syria to end its crackdown and sign onto a protocol to institute an observer mission in Syria. Moreover, the Arab League invited opposition supporters to Arab League headquarters in Cairo to coalesce a united front against the ruling regime of Syria.

Collectively, these moves constituted unprecedented action by the Arab League against Syria, and thus drew applause from the Obama administration in the United States. The United States, which has signaled strong support for the opposition ranks in Syria, also demanded an end to the violence and bloodshed at the hands of the government in that country. With Arab countries withdrawing diplomatic personnel from Syria, it came as no surprise that Western powers, such as France, traversed the same path. Already, the United States had withdrawn its ambassador temporarily (Ambassador Ford was to be redeployed in December 2011) and now the United Kingdom was reviewing its diplomatic ties with Syria. As well, the European Union and the United States had levied their own set of unilateral sanctions against Syria in response to the Assad regime's brutal crackdown on anti-government protesters. Accordingly, Syria was now well on its path to global isolation.

Meanwhile, the Syrian government railed against these moves, accusing the Arab League of "serving a Western and American agenda." The Assad regime was supported by pro-government Syrians, who attacked embassies of other Middle Eastern countries, including Saudi Arabia, which voted in favor of Syria's suspension from the Arab League. But that kind of unrestrained and government-sanctioned violence itself served to strengthen the resolve of other Arab League countries.

Indeed, Jordanian King Abdullah took the significant additional step of expressly calling for President Assad to leave power. In an interview with BBC News, the Jordanian king said, "If Bashar [al-Assad] has the interest of his country [at heart] he would step down.” King Abdullah continued by noting that "regime change" would not be enough in Syria, and that there was a need for fundamental systemic change in the political life blood of that country.

Syria Review 2016 Page 46 of 540 pages Syria

While it was unknown if these moves could or would presage any kind of hard line action in Syria, it was worth noting that the Arab League's unprecedented condemnation of Qadhafi's campaign of violence in Libya set the stage for the establishment of a United Nations Security Council resolution protecting civilians. That resolution was followed by a NATO-led mission, which ultimately helped facilitate the end of Qadhafi's time in power in Libya. Could Syria's Assad see a similar fate? Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Hamad Bin Jassim warned that if the violence and bloodshed did not stop in Syria, the Arab League would reach out to the United Nations and "set a vision for the appropriate measures to stop that bloodshed." Prime Minister Jassim made sure, though, to note that there was no move towards international intervention in Syria.

Internally, further pressure rained down on the Assad regime when on Nov. 16, 2011, members of the military defected to the opposition, and even began to launch attacks on military units still loyal to the ruling powers. Yet despite these significant developments, the government assault on anti- government protesters continued, with the flashpoint city of Homs being subjected to further bloodshed on Nov. 13, 2011. Damascus also saw uprisings followed by mass arrests. Days later, there were reports of a grenade attack on a building of the ruling party in the capital Damascus. The Free Syrian Army -- a group of military defectors -- claimed responsibility. As well, the death toll rose as clashes between protesters, protester-aligned military defectors, and pro-government forces continued to rage in Syria.

By Nov. 20, 2011, a deadline imposed by the Arab League passed without Syria ending its crackdown on protesters. Syria was making it clear that it would not acquiesce to world opinion. In an interview with the Sunday Times, President Assad said: "The conflict will continue and the pressure to subjugate Syria will continue." Indeed, the Syrian leader was further demanding that the Arab League amend its proposed plan, specifically targeting the provision for a 500-strong observer mission in Syria. The Arab League reacted by rejecting the demand, and in so doing, the regional body affirmed its strong stance against the Assad regime in Damascus.

On Nov. 27, 2011, the Arab League took the unprecedented step of approving sanctions against Syria in response to President Assad's harsh and unrelenting crackdown on anti-government protesters. The vote in Cairo of Arab League foreign ministers was overwhelmingly in favor of sanctions, which augmented the previous measure of suspending Syria from the regional body. Only two member states that share borders with Syria -- Iraq and Lebanon -- chose to abstain from the vote. Included in the sanctions by the Arab League was a freeze on assets related to Assad's government, an embargo in investment in Syria, the curtailment of transactions with the Syrian central bank, and a travel ban on senior Syrian officials traveling to other Arab countries. Turkey, which is not a member of the Arab League, but which attended the meeting in Cairo as an observer, said that it would adhere to the sanctions as well.

For its part, Syria -- a founding member of the Arab League -- condemned the sanctions, characterizing the vote as a betrayal of pan-Arab solidarity, and accusing the regional body of

Syria Review 2016 Page 47 of 540 pages Syria attempting to "internationalize" the scenario. But leaders of Arab League countries noted that it was precisely out of a desire not to internationalize the situation that member states believed that they had to take responsible action against the Syrian authorities in Damascus.

The case against Syria was only heightened on Nov. 28, 2011, when a report by an independent United Nations panel was released, which detailed gross and disturbing human rights violations by the Assad regime. That report included accusations that Syrian security forces committed systematic "crimes against humanity" in their crackdown on anti-government protesters. The scathing list of alleged crimes included summary executions, arbitrary arrests, and enforced disappearances of protesters. Moreover, the report charged Syrian authorities with carrying out the murder, sexual assault, and torture of civilians, including children. Research for the report relied on interviews with over 200 victims, witnesses, and army defectors, although independent verification of the claims was not possible due to restrictions on foreign media in Syria.

By the start of December 2011, the United Nations Human Rights Council issued a strong condemnation of the violence in Syria, and indicated that it would appoint a special investigator to look into the crackdown on anti-government protesters. Those findings of that investigation would be reported to the United Nations Secretary General. United Nations human rights chief, Navi Pillay, delivered an "urgent" call for action in Syria to protect civilians in Syria.

United States Vice President Joe Biden, speaking from Istanbul in Turkey, welcomed the United Nations Human Rights Council's condemnation of the violence in Syria. He characterized the Syrian government's actions against anti-government protesters as a "brutal repression." Vice President Biden also joined the chorus of calls urging President Assad to leave power. "We stand with Turkey and a growing chorus of nations in calling for President Assad to step aside," he said.

Later in the month, a report by Human Rights Watch was released. According to that report, Syrian military defectors provided the names of leaders in the Assad regime who directly ordered the killing of anti-government protesters and even bystanders in that country. Given the fact that several Syrian leaders were implicated in such alleged crimes, Anna Neistat, the associate director for emergencies at Human Rights Watch, called for the United Nations to exact accountability in the realm of international jurisprudence. She said, "The U.N. Security Council should ensure accountability by referring Syria to the International Criminal Court."

Despite the increasing pressure being brought to bear on Syria, violence and unrest continued to be the norm in Syria. The flashpoint city of Homs saw further deaths, although the bloodshed was spread across the country. On Nov. 27, 2011, alone, more than 20 people died in clashes across the country. By the start of December 2011, about two dozen people had died as the clashes between army defectors and pro-Assad troops escalated. On Dec 9, 2011, fresh clashes left at least 18 people dead across Syria as opposition activists called a general strike. As the month went on, Syria saw no peace with the crackdown on protesters continuing. Indeed, by Dec. 21, 2011, with Syrian forces battling army defectors and anti-government activists, the death toll in only a few

Syria Review 2016 Page 48 of 540 pages Syria days exceeded 200 people.

In late 2011, the Assad regime in Syria assented to the demands of the Arab League and agreed to allow Arab League observers into its terrain to monitor the ongoing unrest on a so-called "fact finding mission." The protocol provided for an Arab League observer mission, which would be tasked with ensuring the Syrian government complies with a peace agreement that includes the mandated withdrawal of Syrian troops from the streets. The protocol also included amendments to protect Syria's national sovereignty. The Syrian opposition dismissed the signing of the peace protocol as "mere prevarication," however, it was apparent that the Syrian authorities were trying to foreclose the further internationalization of the crisis rocking the country. Indeed, the Arab League had warned that if Syrian had not signed on to the agreement, it would call on the United Nations Security Council to act against Syria. Of course, the government's crackdown on protesters went on regardless of the signing of the agreement.

The security landscape in Syria on Dec. 23, 2011, took a particularly grim turn when two suicide bombings rocked the heart of the Syrian capital of Damascus, killing more than 45 people and injuring at least 150 others. State television in Syria placed the blame for the blasts on al-Qaida terrorists, pointing to the fact that two security bases in the Kafr Sousa zone had been the apparent targets. The attacks shocked the nation, which although being the site of ongoing unrest as discussed here, has not been seriously subject to acts of terrorism on its soil. Activists and opposition members blamed the government for the violence. They accused the government of orchestrating the bombings in order to convince incoming Arab League observers that its harsh crackdown on protesters was justified, given the pressing threat of terrorism.

It should be noted that in recent times, attention has been on the rise of the opposition in Syria. Months earlier, previously-disorganized anti-government opposition factions joined forces to launch the Syrian National Council (SNC). The objectives of the SNC were to challenge President Assad and to reconstitute a new and democratic Syria. While the formation of a united political opposition in Syria should be regarded as a significant milestone on the national scene, as of late 2011, the SNC has not seen much progress in advancing the end of the Assad regime in Syria. One key problem has been the fact that the SNC has not embraced the defected Syrian army officers. But the SNC has argued that the Free Syrian Army espouses an aggressive military approach, which only bolsters the Syrian government's claims that the opposition has ties to extremists and foreign interests. Dual suicide bombings in Damascus in December 2011 only added to the Syria government's argument that its crackdown on anti-government activists was justified, given the threat of terrorism.

Update as of 2012:

At the start of 2012, the Arab Parliament -- an advisory body to the Arab League -- urged that its observers operating in Syria be withdrawn from that country due to the ongoing crackdown on

Syria Review 2016 Page 49 of 540 pages Syria protests. Despite the fact that Syria signed onto a protocol aimed at calming the crisis rocking that country, the Assad regime was continuing its assault on anti-government protesters. According to human rights activists, hundreds of people had been killed since the observers from the Arab league arrived in Syria.

With this reality in mind, the Speaker of the Arab Parliament, Salem al-Diqbassi, issued a statement on the prevailing political climate of repression in Syria, charging that "the presence of Arab monitors has roused the anger of Arab people and negates the purpose of sending a fact- finding mission." Diqbassi continued, "This [fact-finding mission] is giving the Syrian regime an Arab cover for continuing its inhumane actions under the eyes and ears of the Arab League."

In actuality, the Arab Parliament has had only limited influence over the Arab League itself; however, this statement by its chief underscored the overall distaste in the Arab world for the hardline actions of the Assad regime in Syria.

It was soon announced that observers from the Arab League would remain in Syria despite a call from Diqbassi to remove them from the country. Nevertheless, the Syrian opposition challenged the Arab mission to prove itself or exit Syria. In an interview with BBC News, Syrian opposition leader Burhan Ghalioun urged the international community to establish a safe area within the country and enforce a no-fly zone over the most volatile regions of Syria. Ghalioun said he did not want Syria to become the new Libya; he instead advocated limited intervention that would support -- rather than replace -- the revolutionary thrust in Syria.

The start of 2012 was also marked by ongoing violence and repression by the Assad regime on protesters, with further casualties adding to the death toll in Syria, and with all signs pointing toward a protracted and bloody conflict. As before, the Syrian government justified its hard line approach against dissidents and protesters by characterizing them as terrorists that pose a threat to national security.

Regional Pressure Points:

With the crackdown by the Syrian authorities continuing - despite the prevailing Arab League protocol and irrespective of the presence of Arab League monitors - Qatari leader Sheik Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani took the unprecedented step of calling for the intervention of Arab troops in Syria with the objective of "stopping the killing" that was going on in that country. The Qatari ruler -- a one-time ally of Syrian President Assad -- issued this call during an interview on the CBS news show "60 Minutes." During that broadcast, Sheik Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani made clear that his support was with the protesters and activists of the Arab world who were seeking "justice and dignity."

Not surprisingly, Syrian authorities rejected the Qatari Emir's call for the deployment of Arab troops to Syria to help quell the violence there. A statement from the Syrian Foreign Ministry

Syria Review 2016 Page 50 of 540 pages Syria declared that the government "rejects all kinds of foreign intervention in its affairs, under any title, and would confront any attempt to infringe upon Syria's sovereignty and integrity of its territories."

As January 2012 entered its final week, the member states of the Arab League met to discuss the next line of action. Under consideration would be the call by Qatari leader Sheik Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani for Arab troops to enter Syria with the intent on stabilizing the situation there. Also under consideration was a transition of power plan. To that latter end, the Arab League was calling for President Bashar al-Assad to step aside, hand over power to his deputy, and establish a unity government with the opposition over the course of a few months. The plan would also offer a pathway to multi-party elections in the future, to be overseen by international observers. Not surprisingly, the Assad regime in Syria wasted no time in rejecting this plan, and going so far as to characterize it as "flagrant interference" in Syria's internal affairs.

Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia announced it was withdrawing its forces from the monitoring mission in Syria, citing the fact that Damascus consistently broke its pledges associated with the peace protocol. Specifically, Saudi Arabia pointed to the ongoing deadly violence rocking Syria. Intensifying its pressure, Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal called on the international community to enter the fray and add its voice to the call for the Assad regime to ends its violent crackdown.

On Jan. 26, 2012, after the head of the Syrian Arab Red Crescent Society was killed while driving in a clearly-marked red crescent emblem, there was increasing pressure on the international community to act to prevent the further escalation of the violent scene in Syria. Specifically, Italian Foreign Minister Giulio Terzi issued a statement in which he said the death of Abd-al-Razzaq Jbeiro, along with a Christian priest, made clear that members of the international community "spare no effort" to prevent the crisis from escalating further.

The international community appeared cognizant of Syria's decline into chaos. Indeed, the United States announced it was closing its embassy in Damascus. The United States pointed towards the national security situation and said that unless the Assad regime reversed its current course, or showed that it would provide additional security, then it had no choice but to close the facility. In addition to the conflict between the government and the protesters in Syria, the country was also being plagued by suicide attacks. In the space of only days in late January 2012, Syria saw a spate of car bombings. The White House said the current slide into chaos in Syria pointed to the fact that Assad was losing his grip on power and that "his fall was inevitable."

International Action and Inaction:

As January 2012 came to a close, the Arab League announced it would suspend its mission in Syria because of increased violence across the country. Indeed, around 300 people died in Syria at the hands of government forces in a period of only a few days in the last week of the month of January 2012. Secretary General Nabil el-Arabi said in a statement: "It has been decided to

Syria Review 2016 Page 51 of 540 pages Syria immediately stop the work of the Arab League's mission to Syria."

Having halted its mission, the Arab League nonetheless called on the United Nations Security Council to intervene in Syria's violent crackdown on protesters. This move by the Arab League recalled a similar level of urgency in Libya when the former Qadhafi regime promised to attack its own people, and the Arab body called for international action. In the case of Syria, however, the Arab League was advocating a transition of power in which Assad would resign and authority would be taken up by a vice president at the helm of an interim "national unity" government. Not surprisingly, authorities in Damascus soundly rejected this proposed plan, casting it as an unwelcome political intervention into sovereign affairs of Syria.

Meanwhile, Western member states of the United Nations Security Council were putting together a draft resolution aimed at achieving a transition of power in Syria. The draft resolution was expected to receive immediate opposition from Russia, which has been allied with Assad-led Syria, and China, a typical antagonist to international action. Russia signaled that it would block the draft resolution since it "left open the possibility of intervention" in Syrian internal affairs.

In contrast, the United States took a strong stance against the Assad regime. Significantly, the Obama administration's Deputy National Security Adviser for Strategic Communications, Ben Rhodes, emphasized that there was no scenario whereby embattled Syrian President Assad could hold onto power. That being said, Rhodes acknowledged the United States would likely meet resistance from members of the United Nations Security Council who would not endorse a strong resolution against Syria. Joint international action aside, the United States was also looking for alternative means of placing pressure on Syria. To this end, Rhodes noted that the unilateral sanctions imposed by the United States, the European Union, and other countries would directly impact the Syrian economy, making it more financially burdensome for the Syrian government to maintain its ongoing crackdown on protesters. As such, the United States intended to call on other countries of the international community to pressure Syria by levying even further sanctions.

Meanwhile, Syrian authorities remained undeterred as the government continued its crackdown on anti-government protesters. On Jan. 30, 2012, Syrian troops reclaimed territory in the Damascus suburbs, subduing the anti-government elements there.Hard line action by Syrian troops against protesters continued in various parts of Syria. By the start of February 2012, at least 260 civilians were killed across the country in one day.

On Feb. 4, 2012, the United Nations Security Council finally took up the draft resolution on Syria. Ahead of the vote, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said his country was dissatisfied by the language of the draft and warned that letting the vote go forward would cause a "scandal" on the Security Council. Observers noted that Russia's continued resistance to strong action against Syria resided in the fact that it has been a weapons supplier to that country and, therefore, had its own (arguably self-serving) reasons for opposing regime change in Syria. Likewise, Russia had its own justification for opposing the imposition of either an arms embargo or economic sanctions . For its

Syria Review 2016 Page 52 of 540 pages Syria part, Russia has claimed that it simply does not want to take sides in a civil war in Syria. China argued that placing pressure on the Syrian government or "imposing a solution" would not aid in resolving the Syrian crisis.

The final draft, which was respectively backed by Western powers and by the Arab League, instead used broad language in (1) condemning the Syrian government’s crackdown on protests, (2) demanding that the government of Syria guarantee the right of citizens to participate in peaceful demonstrations, (3) mandating that the government of Syria permit the delivery of humanitarian aid, and (4) calling for the implementation of an "inclusive Syrian-led political process" in that country.

Despite the fact that the revised version excluded the Arab League's provisions for President Assad's power to be delegated to a deputy and the formation of a transitional unity government, and even though it left out the imposition of sanctions, Russia and China exercised the right of veto and rejected unified international action against Syria.. The 13 other countries on the United Nations Security Council (including permanent members -- the United States, the United Kingdom, and France) voted in favor of the resolution. Since both Russia and China are permanent veto- wielding members of the body, their veto action thrust a death knell into the draft resolution.

In response, United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon wasted no time in expressing his displeasure with the situation. Indeed, he characterized the vote as "a great disappointment to the people of Syria and the Middle East." In a statement, Ban Ki-moon said: "As Syria's crisis deepens, bringing escalating violence and suffering to the Syrian people, the Security Council has lost an opportunity to take unified action that could help end this crisis and forge a peaceful future, with democracy and dignity, for all of the Syrian people." He reiterated his call for an end to the bloodshed, asserting: "All violence and human rights violations, especially those carried out by the Syrian authorities, must end immediately."

Western countries added their voices to the chorus of displeasure over the veto action by Russia and China. United States Ambassador Susan Rice condemned the veto as "shameful," and accused Russia and China of "selling out the Syrian people and shielding a craven tyrant." Rice was not restrained in placing the blame for the failure of the resolution on Russia and China as she declared, "For months this council has been held hostage by a couple of members." She warned, "Any further bloodshed that flows will be on their hands."

A spokesman for British Prime Minister David Cameron sounded a similar theme, saying: "Russia and China are protecting a regime that is killing thousands of people. We find their position incomprehensible and inexcusable." As well,the United Kingdom's Foreign Secretary William Hague said that Russia and China "let the Syrian people down, and will only encourage President Assad's brutal regime to increase the killing."

French President Nicolas Sarkozy "strongly deplored" the veto and promised to continue to search

Syria Review 2016 Page 53 of 540 pages Syria for a solution to the Syrian crisis. Following a meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, the French president said: "France and Germany will not abandon the Syrian people. We will not accept that the international community remains blocked."

Outside the West -- indeed, from within the Arab world -- there was similar sentiment. Mohammed Loulichki, Morocco's ambassador to the United Nations expressed "great regret and disappointment" that Russia and China had chosen to kill the draft resolution. (Note that Morocco was the only Arab member of the Security Council at this time.) Tunisia -- the first country in the region to experience the fruits of the so-called "Arab Spring" -- also entered the fray. Tunisian Prime Minister Hamadi Jebali called on other countries to expel Syrian ambassadors and diplomatic personnel in protest of the Syrian government's "bloody repression" against its people. As stated by Jebali, "The very least we can do is to sever our relations with the Syrian regime." Following the lead of Tunisia, Egypt soon moved to withdraw its ambassador from Damascus, in protest at the Syrian government's action against protesters. Turkey, which had already broken its ties with Syria, called for accountability.

Illustrative of the widening effects of the Syrian crisis, Israel also entered the debate, noting that Hezbollah and Iran were supplying arms to the Syrian regime, in order to assist the government in suppressing opposition activists. As stated by the Israeli head of military intelligence, Aviv Kochavi, in an interview with The Jerusalem Post: "As time passes Iran and Hezbollah increase the efforts to help the Assad regime survive by providing knowledge, weaponry and other capabilities." Hezbollah seemed to add to this claim of its strong alliance with Syria when it asserted that it was ready to attack Israel if the West took any action against the Assad regime.

Anti-Assad activists attacked Syrian embassies around the world to register their own discontent. However, the Assad regime found its own support base with some residents of Damascus cheering the action by Russia and China, and affirming their desire for the international community to stay out of Syria's domestic affairs. As well, Russia was blaming the Syrian opposition for the failure to forge a resolution in that country due to the opposition's refusal to enter talks with the government. Russia also returned rhetorical fire to the West by accusing Western leaders of being an "accomplice" to the current farrago.

Meanwhile, United States President Barack Obama made clear that his country would use unilateral power to pressure the Assad regime. In an interview on NBC news, he said his government would apply unilateral sanctions to Syria. As discussed above, economic sanctions could have an effect on financing of the crackdown, which has been going on for a year. President Obama added, "I think it is very important for us to try to resolve this without recourse to outside military intervention. And I think that's possible." It should be noted that with or without a resolution at hand, the United States had closed its embassy in Damascus for security reasons.

Crackdown in Syria

Syria Review 2016 Page 54 of 540 pages Syria

It should be noted that as the vote was taking place in the Security Council, Syrian troops were opening fire on civilians in Homs -- a flashpoint city in the anti-government campaign -- with scores of people reported to have died at the time. By Feb. 5, 2012, shelling and gunfire was being widely reported in Homs as government forces pressed forward with a relentless offensive on protesters there. The death toll had risen alarmingly over the course of only a few days, according to opposition sources. At first, Damascus denied that its security forces attacked Homs; however, on Feb. 6, 2012, news reports appeared to verify accounts that the government was carrying out a brutal assault on the restive city.

Days later, there were explosions in the northern Syrian city of Aleppo, which were attributed by state television to terrorists' car bombings. But a spokesman for the Free Syria Army, an opposition group of military defectors, denied involvement in attacks in Aleppo, instead placing the blame on the government.

By Feb. 10, 2012, the crackdown on Homs was ongoing and relentless, with the death toll now estimated to be in the hundreds in just the space of days. On Feb. 12, 2012, the scene was not improved as the violence in Homs continued and the death toll was ever-increasing. Of course, accurate death toll numbers were difficult to procure due to media restrictions on international journalists imposed by the Assad regime. Nevertheless, reports from the ground indicated that Homs had been subject to shelling and non-stop bombardment in the space of only days. Indeed, the residents on Homs were reported to be under siege, with food and medical supplies decreasing. As well, people were forced to hide in the dark of night as they buried the bodies of their dead relatives, out of fear that they might be killed by government snipers.

The scene in Homs led United States President Barack Obama to issue a strong condemnation of the "outrageous bloodshed." Then, as the assault on Homs continued, United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton deplored the actions of the Syrian authorities, making note that artillery and tank fire were used against civilians.

Days later, Syrian forces continued to shell the flashpoint city of Homs and violence continued elsewhere in Syria -- from Hama to Damascus. In the capital city, Syrian troops fired on mourners at a funeral when the gathering turned into a mass demonstration.

As February 2012 was drawing to an end, and even as a regional conference gathered in Tunisia (discussed below) to end the violence and bloodshed in Syria, the crackdown by the Assad continued. Anti-Assad protests spread across the country, including in the flashpoint city Homs, but also including Qamishili, Aleppo, Idlib, Deraa, and the suburbs of Damascus. The death toll in Syria was therefore rising although the besieged city of Homs was definitely the most hard hit by violence.

The Homs' neighborhood of Bab Amr took on a particularly negative level of notoriety on Feb. 22, 2012, when two foreign journalists -- Marie Colvin (an American working for the United

Syria Review 2016 Page 55 of 540 pages Syria

Kingdom's Sunday Times) and Remi Ochlik (a French national working for IP3) -- were killed in a rocket attack on a media center. Edith Bouvier, a reporter for French daily Le Figaro, and Paul Conroy, a Sunday Times photographer, were wounded in the same attack. These journalists were covering the siege of Homs at the time of the attack. A third foreign journalist, Khafier Espinosa of Spain, also died in Syria. It should be noted that the Red Cross failed to reach an agreement for a brief break in fighting in Homs, in order to retrieve the bodies Colvin and Ochlik, and to give care to Bouvier and Conroy. (Note that the injured reporters eventually escaped Syria.)

By Feb. 26, 2012 -- even as Syrians elsewhere in the country prepared to vote in a constitutional referendum (discussed below), at least 100 people died in Homs and Hama. On Feb. 27, 2012, the Syrian military was reportedly carrying out a new offensive, using artillery, mortars, and anti- aircraft guns, against opposition-held towns in the northwestern province of Idlib. Further deaths were reported there as a result, with a continuing death toll in Homs where the brutal crackdown by Syrian troops was ongoing.

Note that as March 2012 began, the Syrian army was carrying out its continuing assault on Homs. Given its concerns for the safety of civilians, and the increasingly harsh tactics being used by the military, the insurgent Free Syrian Army said that it was moving into retreat mode in the particular Bab Amr neighborhood of Homs. The Washington Post said that there were unconfirmed reports of government forces hunting down activists there. Human rights groups went further and said that activists are civilians had been subject to the most gruesome deaths, such as hacking and beheading. The International Committee of the Red Cross announced that after long last, its personnel was finally being allowed the enter the Homs neighborhood to provide aid and facilitate an evacuation.

At the start of March 2012, an aid entourage from the Red Cross was denied access to the Homs neighborhood of Baba Amr because booby traps and mines were not yet cleared. It should be noted that the Red Cross was allowed into other parts of Homs. Meanwhile, even as rebels withdrew from that neighborhood, there were reports of revenge killings and summary executions from that devastated area, which was already suffering from a lack of power, food, water and medical supplies. Elsewhere in Syria, the state media reported that a suicide car bomb attack had taken place in the southern city of Daraa. In the central city of Rastan, a rocket or mortar attack killed at least 12 people, including children.

By March 6, 2012, at least 35 people died at the hands of government forces as they tried to escape to Lebanon. This report came from Syrian opposition groups. Still, even as Syrian forces bombarded a key bridge en route to Lebanon, at least 2,000 Syrians were reported to have fled into Lebanese territory to escape the crossfire of violence, according to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.

As the first week of March 2012 came to an end, Syrian security forces were broadening their assault against civilians, opposition activists, across the country from the flashpoint city of Homs,

Syria Review 2016 Page 56 of 540 pages Syria but including aforementioned cities of Daraa and Rastan.

On March 11, 2012, the flashpoint area of Homs saw no lapse in violence as at least 45 people, including women and children, were stabbed to death and burned in their homes. A spokesman for the Syrian Revolution General Council said during an interview with CNN that "Syrian forces and thugs" were responsible for orchestrating the massacre. It should be noted that CNN would not independently confirm this claim due to restrictions on news coverage in Syria. On the same day, violence in Syria took the lives of at least 15 other victims across the country. Two days later on March 13, 2012, Homs continued to see violence as more than 40 victims died there in further violence attributed to "armed groups." There were also reports of kidnappings in the Homs neighborhood of Karm al-Zaitoun neighborhood, and close to 20 other deaths in the al-Qarabis neighborhood. The opposition Baba Amr neighborhood of Homs had already fallen to government hands week before following a brutal assault there.

By March 14, 2012, Syrian government forces had retaken control of the opposition stronghold of Idlib. The government was able to re-establish control in Idlib after a four-day assault on that city, located close to the border with Turkey. According to the official al-Watan newspaper, the fall of Idlib occurred in "record time with army units wrapping up search operations during which dozens of armed men and fugitives were killed." Activist groups said tanks, helicopters, artillery, rockets, and mortars were used to bombard Idlib. The assault was so acute that hundreds of residents fled the crossfire of violence, seeking refuge across the border in Turkey and Lebanon.

By the middle of March 2012, around 40 people had died in Idlib although more deaths were reported elsewhere in the country, including Damascus, as opposition forces clashes with government forces. As well, Syrian forces were reported to be targeting the southern city of Deraa, another opposition stronghold which was now about to be subject to assault by Assad's forces.

On March 17, 2012, there were reports of car bombs exploding in Damascus, and a day later in a Christian neighborhood of Aleppo. The rebel/opposition Free Syria Army blamed the Assad regime for the explosions. Captain Ammar al-Wawi of the Free Syria Army said in an interview on CNN: "This is the regime's game. This is how they play their dirty tricks. They carry out these types of explosions from time to time to get more international support and compassion. They are desperately trying to prove to the world that they are fighting against armed gangs, but the reality is they are the ones who are doing all the killings."

Also on March 18, 2012, a battle was reported to have erupted in the Syrian capital of Damascus between the opposition Free Syria Army and the pro-Assad security forces of the country. There were reports of the sound of persistent machine gun fire, explosions, as well as rocket-propelled grenades emanating from the district of al-Mezze. Of significance was the fact that the central Damascus district is home to several heavily-guarded security facilities and has been the site of several anti-government protests. The area was home to the notorious Mazzeh Prison until 2000 where widespread human-rights abuses and torture were reported committed. As well, the

Syria Review 2016 Page 57 of 540 pages Syria presidential palace in on the top of Mount Mazzeh, overlooking Damascus. But violence was reported elsewhere in the capital including suburban Dummar and Keswa. The death toll across Syria on March 18, 2012, alone was said to be more than 65 although it was not possible to confirm casualty reports due to restrictions on the international press.

On March 20, 2012, renewed shelling and bombardment of Homs yielded further bloodshed, including the killing of one of the key organizers of the anti-government uprising -- Abdul Rahman Orfalli. There were several other deaths reported in Homs and across Syria on that day.

On March 21, 2012, attention was on the Syrian city of Hama, which was experiencing harsh clashes between the Free Syrian Army and pro-government security forces. The next day, Hama -- an opposition stronghold -- was being "heavily shelled" by government tanks. Fierce fighting was being reported in the Arbaeen quarter of the city. The death toll was on the increase in Hama. The violence was yielding a number of deaths and injuries, as well as destruction to buildings.

Note that as March 2012 drew to an end, the crackdown was ongoing in Syria against anti- government protesters. On March 27, 2012, the Assad government in Syria said that it had submitted written acceptance of Envoy Annan's six-point peace plan, which has been endorsed by the United Nations Security Council. Included in the plan was a demand for the cessation of armed violence in all its forms by all parties. That very week, though, Syrian troops assaulted anti- government activists in the suburbs of Damascus, while shelling was reported in Homs and fighting was reported in Deir al-Zour and Quriya. The death toll was continuing to rise and now included two journalists in during the last week of March 2012 as they were trying to enter Syria from Turkey

Update on Efforts by International Community:

Meanwhile, on Feb. 12, 2012, with the failure of the action in the United Nations Security Council, the United Nations General Assembly was reportedly working towards a draft resolution demanding the resignation of Syrian President Bashar Assad and ending the violence in that country.

On Feb. 17, 2012, the draft was put to a vote in the United Nations General Assembly. The resolution officially condemned Syria for its brutal crackdown on anti-government protesters and was passed by an overwhelming margin. Indeed, only 12 countries voted against the non-binding resolution. President Assad's announcement of Feb. 26, 2012, constitutional referendum appeared to have little effect on the opinions of most countries of the international community, as exemplified by the result of the vote. United States Ambassador Susan Rice asserted in a statement: "Today, the U.N. General Assembly sent a clear message to the people of Syria: the world is with you. Bashar al-Assad has never been more isolated. A rapid transition to democracy in Syria has garnered the resounding support of the international community. Change must now

Syria Review 2016 Page 58 of 540 pages Syria come."

Adding to Syria's isolation was the decision by the Arab League to end its mission in Syria, scrap its observer team, and cease all diplomatic cooperation with Syria. The Arab League not only moved to encourage member states to cut ties with Syria, it also urged the establishment of a peacekeeping mission (including the United Nations in this role) in Syria. Furthermore, the Arab League called for support for the Syrian opposition. Not surprisingly, the Assad regime in Syria rejected these proposals by the Arab League.

These moves by the United Nations General Assembly and the Arab League might not immediately bring about the end of the Assad regime or an end to the violence; however, they could serve to catapult Syria officially into pariah status on the global scene. Indeed, the aforementioned vote in the United Nations General Assembly -- while largely symbolic -- was a vociferous declaration that the global community stood together in opposing the Assad regime in Syria. Indeed, France was reportedly crafting a new resolution to be brought before the United Nations Security Council.

In a related development, United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, speaking on behalf of the Obama administration, made clear that her country would work with allies countries to keep putting pressure on the Assad regime. At the same time, she acknowledged that the opposition in Syria, including the Syrian National Council, remained somewhat fragmented in nature. Unlike the Transitional National Council in Libya, which offered the West an alternate base with which to deal during the anti-Qadhafi uprising in that country, there was no such equivalent entity in Syria. Nevertheless, United State President Barack Obama promised to use "every tool available" to end the violence and bloodshed ongoing in Syria.

On Feb. 24, 2012, participants and delegates from some 60-70 countries and regions across the world gathered in Tunisia. Participants came together at the "Friends of Syria" conference convened in the Tunisian capital city of Tunis and called for an immediate ceasefire in Syria in order to allow humanitarian aid to get into the country. Conspicuously absent from the "Friends of Syria" conference were China and Russia, who were making it clear that they strenuously opposed international intervention in Syria.

Despite Secretary Clinton's aforementioned acknowledgment of the disorganization of the Syrian opposition, the "Friends of Syria" group nonetheless recognized the Syrian National Council as the "legitimate representative" for the Syrian people. For its part, the Syrian National Council (SNC) outlined its vision for a post-Assad Syria with an interim presidential council of national leaders at the helm of government. The leader of the SNC, Burhan Ghalioun, further asserted that the anti- Assad uprising would go on until Assad can be removed from power, or, until he acted in accordance with the Arab League transfer of power plan.

Saudi Arabia and Qatar respectively called for further intervention against the Assad regime.

Syria Review 2016 Page 59 of 540 pages Syria

Specifically, Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal advocated the arming of opposition fighters, while Qatari Foreign Minister Hamad bin Jassim al-Thani called for the creation of an Arab force to stabilize Syria and open corridors for the transportation of humanitarian aid. Tunisian President Moncef Marzouki expressed support for the notion of an Arab peacekeeping force, but suggested that President Assad and his family be granted exile and immunity from prosecution in the interests of Syrian stability.

Meanwhile, former United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan was tapped by the international organization to be a joint special envoy of the United Nations and the Arab League; he was tasked with brokering a resolution to the crisis gripping Syria.

The appointment of Annan appeared to be applauded by several countries regardless of their position on the Syrian conflict. For example, Turkey -- which has been anti-Assad in orientation as a result of the government crackdown -- characterized Annan as a "wise man with great experience" and urged Damascus to cooperate with him. A statement from the Turkish foreign ministry read as follows: "All sides, particularly the Syrian administration, should cooperate with Annan's goodwill mission for a peaceful solution to the crisis in Syria to be carried out effectively." Russia, which has opposed international intervention into the Syrian crisis, welcomed Annan's appointment and called for an immediate ceasefire to evacuate injured victims from the city of Homs. The Russian foreign ministry statement was as follows: "We hope that the work of this respected statesman will assist in solving the acute political and humanitarian problems in Syria. The Russian side will be ready for close cooperation with him in the search for mutually acceptable paths to solutions for these tasks."

As February came to a close, the European Union announced further sanctions against Syria in an effort to pressure the Assad regime. Then, at the start of March 2012, the United Kingdom announced that it was closing its embassy in Syria and withdrawing all its personnel from that country. Meanwhile, given the aforementioned brutal assault on places such as Homs, by the start of March 2012, the United Nations Human Rights Council voted to condemn Syrian President Bashar Assad and his government for widespread and systematic violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms. The non-binding measure was approved by 37 countries but opposed by Russia, China, and Cuba.

During a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing in the first week of March 2012, the head of United States Central Command, General James Mattis, warned a that President Bashar Assad's forces remained viable and that Assad would continue his assault on civilians. He said, "He will continue to employ heavier and heavier weapons on his people. I think it will get worse before it gets better."

As the first week of March 2012 came to an end, United Nations Undersecretary-General for humanitarian affairs and emergency relief, Valerie Amos, were permitted to visit Syria. In addition, Syria was anticipating a visit from newly designated United Nations-Arab League Envoy Kofi

Syria Review 2016 Page 60 of 540 pages Syria

Annan.

Meanwhile, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urged the international community to band together to pressure Syria to stop its campaign of violence against its own people. Speaking at the General Assembly, Ban said: "The international community must urgently find unity in pressing the Syrian authorities and all other parties to stop the violence. It must insist, with one voice, that the Syrian authorities give access to international humanitarian workers as an essential first step towards a peaceful solution." However, Ban eschewed the idea of "further militarization of the Syrian opposition," suggesting that path was "not the answer."

In the realm of international relations, the United States and Russia were arguing in favor of separate paths at the United Nations Security Council. while both world powers called for an end to the violence in Syria, they had respectively different prescriptions for the ailment of repression and bloodshed. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spoke on behalf of the United States and urged the Security Council not to "stand silent when governments massacre their own people, threatening regional peace and security in the process." Her Russian counterpart, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, said that "hasty demands for regime change (were) risky recipes of geopolitical engineering which can only result in further conflict."

The impasse between the United States and Russia has been ongoing for some time and has led to inaction at the Security Council with Russia moving to veto strong action against Syria, which the United States has championed. It should be noted that Russia has a close relationship with Syria. According to critics, that close relationship has contributed to Russia's unwillingness to take Syria to task for its brutal actions against its own citizens. But Russia has seemed undeterred by criticism of this nature, instead confirming openly that it will continue to sell weapons to the Assad regime in Syria even as it laments the slow pace of reform in that country.

Irrespective of Russia's intransigence, the global community continued to try to advance action against the Assad regime in Syria. To that end, members of the Arab League met with Russian envoys in Egypt to try to forge a peace plan that could gain support from all quarters. This peace proposal would call for an end to the fighting while expressly foreclosing foreign intervention. Russian spokespersons said it was distinct from a United Nations proposal (which it vetoed) because it applied to both the pro-Assad Syrian military and opposition forces. That being said, this plan was not being met with great support from among certain Arab countries. Specifically, Qatar and Saudi Arabia objected to the suggestion that the Syrian opposition was "hijacked" by al- Qaida; further, these two countries were frustrated by the failure to stop Assad's brutal crackdown and instead advocated the path of foreign intervention.

Hostility by Arab countries to the Assad regime in Syria was on an upward swing as four more Gulf states closed their embassies in Syria. Specifically, Oman, Kuwait, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates joined Saudi Arabia and Bahrain by closing their embassies in the Syrian capital of Damascus. Outside the Arab world, Turkey announced it was closing its embassy in Damascus

Syria Review 2016 Page 61 of 540 pages Syria while Norway withdrew its own diplomatic staff.

Business as Usual?

As the state of crisis continued in Syria, the authorities in that country went forward with a national referendum. That vote aimed at ratifying a draft constitution, which President Assad said would facilitate multiparty participation in Syria. Included in the reforms was a plan for term limits for president; however, this change would not apply to Assad, since the change would go into effect only after the sitting president completes his current tenure.

According to the Syrian authorities on voting day, there was a high level of participation by Syrian citizens in an exercise they claimed would properly reform the political system in the country. The counterpoint to this claim was the position of anti-Assad critics, who cast the referendum as a sham aimed at distracting people from the reality that Syria was slipping into a state of civil war. Indeed, violence in Syria prevented large swaths of people from voting in flashpoint cities such as Homs and Hama.

United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton herself referred to the referendum as "a ploy." In an interview with CBS News, she said, "It's a phony referendum that is going to be used by Assad to justify what he is doing to other Syrians. So it's a cynical ploy to say the least." British Foreign Secretary William Hague registered similar sentiment saying in a media interview from Belgium, "The referendum vote has fooled nobody. To open polling stations but continue to open fire on the civilians of the country has no credibility in the eyes of the world."

Nevertheless, after the referendum, the Syrian government claimed victory and pointed to the fact that close to 90 percent of voters ratified the proposed draft constitution.

In an apparent bid to show that he was going down the path of reform, Syrian President Assad also announced a timetable for parliamentary elections in the forthcoming months. The United States wasted little time in dismissing the news as pointless. State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said: "Parliamentary elections for a rubber-stamp Parliament in the middle of the kind of violence that we're seeing across the country is ridiculous." Her response indicated that many Western powers were unlikely to soften their sharp criticisms of the ongoing crackdown by the Assad regime in Syria, and they were unlikely to back away from their calls for Assad to step down from the reins of power.

The Spring of 2012:

In the spring of 2012, former United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan, who had been appointed jointly by the United Nations and Arab League to act as an envoy to Syria, called on the United Nations Security Council to speak with "one voice" when it came to Syria. His call

Syria Review 2016 Page 62 of 540 pages Syria appeared to be a tacit rebuke of the ongoing political stalemate between Western and Eastern powers of the veto-wielding, permanent member bloc of the Security Council. Annan also announced that he would be deploying monitors to Syria saying, "I will be sending teams in this weekend to pursue the discussions on the proposals we left on the table." Annan said the objective of his mission would be to establish an immediate cease-fire, initiate political dialogue, and facilitate access for humanitarian organizations. Syria offered qualified cooperation in response to Annan's announcement, saying it would work with the envoy while adhering to its ongoing battle against "the terrorists."

On March 21, 2012, the United Nations Security Council officially backed the special envoy Kofi Annan's proposed mission to end the violence in Syria. At stake was Annan's six-point plan which included demands that President Assad cease his violent campaign against opposition protesters, the withdrawal of all fighters and heavy weapons from cities, access to humanitarian agencies, the free movement of journalists, the release of detainees, and the commencement of talks with opposition leaders about the concerns and aspirations of the Syrian people.

Specifically, the Security Council issued a statement expressing its full support for Annan's efforts "to bring an end to all violence and human rights violations, secure humanitarian access and facilitate a Syrian-led political transition to a democratic, plural political system." The statement continued, "The Security Council calls upon the Syrian government and opposition to work in good faith with the envoy towards a peaceful settlement of the Syrian crisis and to implement fully and immediately his initial six-point proposal." The Security Council made clear it would consider "further steps as appropriate" based on Annan's report.

There were cautious hopes that concurrence on this matter (vis a vis formal condemnation of the Assad regime which has been opposed by China and Russia) could bring about productive results.

Meanwhile, the European Union sought to intensify the pressure against the Assad regime by issuing sanctions against the wife, mother, sister and sister-in-law of Syrian President Bashar Assad. These sanctions would involve travel bans of Assad family members to the countries of the European Union, as well as the freezing of assets in the European bloc. Concurrent with this measure was the decision by the United States to impose a travel ban and asset freeze on further senior Syrian officials.

Note that on March 27, 2012, the Assad government in Syria said it had submitted written acceptance of Envoy Annan's six-point peace plan, which has been endorsed by the United Nations Security Council. Included in the plan was a demand for the cessation of armed violence in all its forms by all parties. That very week, though, Syrian troops assaulted anti-government activists in the suburbs of Damascus, while shelling was reported in Homs and fighting was reported in Deir al-Zour and Quriya. The death toll was continuing to rise and now included two journalists in during the last week of March 2012, who were killed as they were trying to enter Syria from Turkey.

Syria Review 2016 Page 63 of 540 pages Syria

As March 2012 came to a close, Annan demanded that the Assad regime put the new plan into effect. As noted by Annan's spokesman, Ahmed Fawzi: "The deadline is now." Fawzi also warned that it was obvious that there was no "cessation of hostilities on the ground" in Syria despite the government's acceptance of the Annan peace plan. At a news conference in Geneva, he said, "This is our great concern. We expect [President Bashar al-Assad] to implement this plan immediately."

For his part, though, Assad was in no hurry to do so. Instead, he said that although he welcomed Annan's peace plan, it remained "necessary to obtain commitments from other parties to halt the terrorist acts by the armed groups and to withdraw the weapons of these groups and call on them to stop their terrorist acts." This statement appeared to undermine the fact that his government had already officially accepted the measures set forth in the peace plan.

Perhaps not surprisingly, the global community was mobilizing alternative efforts. To that end, several countries said they would contribute funds aimed at funding the opposition Syrian National Council (SNC), which many countries said was now recognized as the "legitimate representative" of Syrians. Funding the SNC could include provisions for members of the Free Syrian Army, while stopping short of all and out arming rebels. The decision to provide funding for the opposition, including rebel fighters, was regarded as something of a compromise since the United States and Turkey have expressed worries that the outright provision of weapons would only contribute to the slide into civil war. That being said, many Arab countries in the Gulf were now advocating the outright arming of Syrian rebels in the fight against the Assad regime.

It should be noted that the United States agreed to send satellite communications equipment to help the Syrian rebels organize itself, connect with the outside world, and also evade attacks by the Assad regime. United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton confirmed this commitment during a "Friends of Syria" conference in Turkey. It should also be noted that the on April 10, 2012, the United States made clear that although it would not arm Syrian insurgents, it would not block Arab countries in the region from doing so. The stance straddled the ground between restraint from further entanglement in the Middle East, while offering tacit support to regional powers intent on helping the Syrian opposition fight the Assad regime.

The first week of April 2012 was marked by ongoing violence in Syria. On April 4, 2012, alone, more than 60 people were killed across the country. According to the Syrian Human Rights Observatory, tanks shelled the Damascus suburb of Douma. Heavy weaponry assaulted the northern part of the country, close to the border with Turkey. As before, the opposition stronghold of Homs was subject to ongoing military offensive by Syrian forces.

With no end to the bloodshed in sight, a deadline of April 10, 2012, was put in place by which the Assad regime was expected to withdraw its troops from population centers and end its use of heavy weapons to attack residential areas. These measures would presumably, set the path for the

Syria Review 2016 Page 64 of 540 pages Syria general ceasefire negotiated by Envoy Annan. There was also a plan in the works for the deployment of a team of United Nations observers to Syria to monitor the ceasefire.

For their part, Western powers vowed to ensure that Syria held fast to that April 10, 2012, deadline; however, such promises have been viewed with skepticism. For a year, the Assad regime in Syria has been allowed to enact its brutal crackdown on its own people with impunity. Adding to the climate of doubt was the publication of satellite imagery by United States Ambassador to Syria, Robert Ford. Ambassador Ford's photographs showed Syrian artillery and tanks still located in close proximity to populated areas. Ambassador Ford observed, "This is not the reduction in offensive Syrian government security operations that all agree must be the first step for the Annan initiative to succeed." He continued, "The regime and the Syrian people should know that we are watching. The regime cannot hide the truth."

Accordingly, Envoy Annan urged the United Nations Security Council to publicly endorse the April 10, 2012, deadline as a measure of pressure on the Assad regime. To that end, a statement was being circulated among the 15 members of the United Nations Security Council. That statement, which was drafted by diplomatic teams from the United Kingdom, the United States, and France, warned of consequences, should the Syrian regime fail to comply with the mandate that Syrian forces be withdrawn from major population centers and that heavy weapons cease being used in residential areas.

With an eye on adding further pressure on Syria, the United Nations General Assembly unanimously adopted a non-binding "presidential statement," which demanded that the Assad regime "urgently and visibly" honor its commitments "in their entirety." The United Nations General Assembly warned of "further steps" if Damascus failed to abide by the provisions of the peace agreement it had already accepted.

Complicating matters were new wrinkles introduced by Bashar Jaafari, Syria's ambassador to the United Nations, on April 6, 2012. Jaafari said his country would not abide by the already-accepted peace plan unless external powers pledged in writing to stop aiding rebel fighters. Jaafari said his country required "a crystal-cut commitment" in writing from the United States, France, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar -- countries he claimed supported the Free Syrian Army. Syria also desired written guarantees from the rebels that they would end their attacks. As well, Jaafari observed that the withdrawal of forces from population centers would not include Syrian police. According to Syrian authorities, the agreement did not apply to police forces, which were needed to protect civilians from terrorism. Of course, in reality Syrian military as well as Syrian police have been responsible for the deaths of thousands of Syrian civilians in the year-long crackdown, which was clearly aimed at obliterating the reformist opposition movement.

Placing the ceasefire deal at risk was a further statement by the foreign ministry of Syria that placed the very notion of pulling back from key areas in doubt. Foreign Ministry spokesman Jihad Makdissi, said: "Syria has a plan for military pullback already in place and being implemented, but

Syria Review 2016 Page 65 of 540 pages Syria completing and achieving the main goal would definitely require the guarantees from the other side and those supporting them."

These new provisions introduced by Syria -- after already accepting the Annan plan -- raised the ire of the Syrian opposition. The Free Syrian Army accused the Assad regime of trying to derail the peace process with these "last minute demands."

In a news conference with journalists, United States Ambassador to the United Nations, Dr. Susan Rice, pointed to Syria's unreliable record of adherence to public pledges. She said, "We have seen over the course of the last months promises made and promises broken. Past experience would lead us to be skeptical and to worry that over the next several days that, rather than a diminution of violence, we might yet again see an escalation of the violence."

Ambassador Rice's may have been something of a prescient warning. As the month of April entered its second week, the wave of violence saw no ebb as Syrian forces continued to batter opposition strongholds across the country. In fact, the death toll far exceeded 100 on April 7, 2012 -- just days ahead of the supposed ceasefire deadline. A day later on April 8, 2012, the death toll was at least 70. Reports from secret monitors on the ground in Syria said that Latamneh, a suburb of Hama, was subject to shelling. In the Deir al-Baalba quarter of Homs, tanks and artillery were pounding targets there and adding to the death toll. There were reports of a videotaped mass execution of more than a dozen victims in Homs; the actual video was yet to surface.

As some Syrians tried to flee in a bus across the border into Lebanon, they were struck down by rocket fire. In a related development, Voice of America reported that a Lebanese cameraman was shot and killed on the Lebanese side of the border by gunfire coming from Syria. Turkey was also protesting a shooting incident emanating from Syria in which two Turks and four Syrians were killed. Their deaths appeared to be a tragic occurrence as thousands of people sought refuge from the violence in Syria across the border. Turkey responded with outrage to the incident. Indeed, the Turkish Foreign Ministry issued a statement noting that Syrians seeking shelter in Turkey would receive the country's "full protection" and warning Syria that "necessary measures" would be implemented if such incidents [cross-border shootings] were repeated. The government of President Assad offered no immediate response to Turkey -- one of its former allies.

United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon condemned Syria for the violence, including the fresh military attacks, and accused the Assad regime of using the impending truce as "an excuse" for further killing. Indeed, the death toll on April 9, 2012, alone exceeded 150. Meanwhile, Envoy Annan condemned the escalation of violence and urged the Syrian government to abide by its commitments. He said, "This is a time when we must all urgently work towards a full cessation of hostilities, providing the space for humanitarian access and creating the conditions for a political process."

April 10, 2012 -- the deadline for the cessation of violence as set forth in the United Nations-

Syria Review 2016 Page 66 of 540 pages Syria brokered peace plan -- passed with no signs that the Assad regime was complying with the deal. Instead, fighting was ongoing in several cities. Even as the Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Mualem was claiming that government forces had withdrawn from parts of the besieged city of Homs, opposition forces were counter-claiming that more than 100 people died in fighting in Homs on that very day. For its part, though, the opposition Syrian National Council umbrella group, which includes the Free Syrian Army, said it was ready to respect the ceasefire although it was clear that the Assad regime was not cooperating in good faith.

A day later on April 11, 2012, joint United Nations-Arab League envoy Kofi Annan said the Syrian government dispatched communication claiming that it would "cease all military fighting" by the morning of April 12, 2012. That message, however, included a caveat that Syria reserved "the right to respond proportionately to any attacks carried out by armed terrorist groups against civilians, government forces or public and private property." Annan noted that the new conditions were not part of the original agreement. Russia -- a close ally of Syria -- was forced to acknowledge that the Assad government had been far from decisive in implementing the peace plan.

By April 14, 2012, the United Nations Security Council moved to deploy ceasefire monitors to Syria. The monitors' mission would be to verify the implementation of Envoy Annan's peace plan. Members of the United Nations Security Council -- including Russia and China -- voted unanimously in favor of a joint Western-Arab draft resolution, despite previous objections by Russia regarding some aspects of the text. The resolution was illustrative of growing international consensus on the need to bring an end to the violence in Syria. It was also illustrative of the increasing isolation of the Assad regime. With the resolution passed, the first batch of monitors departed for Syria within days. The first of these monitors embarked on their first mission in Deraa in the south of the country, with the advance team admitting that its mission would be extremely difficult.

Even as these developments were taking place on the diplomatic front, the violence in Syria continued in an unrelenting manner. On April 15, 2012, the hard-hit rebel stronghold of Homs was the site of further turmoil as Syrian military forces used artillery to relentlessly bombard the city. Mortar attacks and gunfire plagued other parts of the country dominated by anti-government activists. Two days later on April 17, 2012, opposition held areas of Syria -- including Homs, Khaldiya, and Bayada -- saw no relief, with scores more people reported to have died in this period as a result of bombardment by Syrian forces. As well, Syrian army tanks reportedly shelled the pro-Free Syrian Army southern town of Basr al-Harir, while Syrian military forces used mortars and machine guns to pound targets in the northern province of Idlib.

On April 18, 2012, United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon observed that Syria failed to comply with its peace plan obligations to withdraw security forces from urban areas; accordingly, he called for 300 more observers to be deployed to Syria.

Syria Review 2016 Page 67 of 540 pages Syria

Answering that call on was the unanimous vote at the United Nations Security Council on April 21, 2012 to expand the number of observers in Syria to 300 from 30. The resolution also demanded an immediate end to the ever-continuing violence in Syria, in violation of the prevailing ceasefire agreement.

Jay Carney, White House spokesperson in the United States said that the Obama administration supported the monitoring mission, while understanding "the sobering challenge it represents in the atmosphere that has been created by the Assad regime." He said the United States will work with its "partners and allies to continue to pressure and isolate the Assad regime, to make clear to everyone internationally that siding with the Assad regime is a folly because Assad will go down as a brutal dictator who brutally murdered his own people -- not the kind of friend you really want in the world."

Meanwhile, as April 2012 entered its final week, the crackdown in Syria continued with the Assad regime using surreptitious means to try to conceal its tactics. According to a report by BBC News, government tanks had been hidden out of sight while advance United Nations observers were in Homs. These efforts notwithstanding, it was clear that violence was ongoing in Syria. Government forces opened fire on civilians in Hama only a day after crowds gathered in that city to greet the United Nation peace monitors, according to a report by the Wall Street Journal. Protesters interviewed by the Wall Street Journal said it seemed as if the Assad regime was punishing people for coming out in droves to meet the monitors.

On April 27, 2012, it was clear that the ceasefire in Syria was an illusion as about ten people, including civilians and law enforcement personnel, died in a suicide bombing close to a mosque in Damascus. The bombing ensued near the Zein al-Abidin Mosque and Aisha School in the al- Meidan quarter, and occurred only a day after United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said he was "gravely alarmed" by opposition reports that the government was shelling the city of Hama. Activists in Hama said that the shelling caused the collapse of several homes in the impoverished Mashaa al-Tayar neighborhood of the city. It was apparent, as noted by Ban, that the Assad regime was "in contravention" of the prevailing Annan ceasefire agreement.

It seemed that violations of the agreement were occurring on both sides. On April 28, 2012, the situation continued to be conflict-ridden as clashes broke out at Lattakia -- just south of the Turkish border on the Mediterranean coast -- when possible rebels launched an amphibious assault using inflatable boats. The clashes left people dead on both sides, although the Syrian government blamed the violence on "an armed terrorist group."

From Turkey, the Syrian National Council (SNC) -- the main opposition group in exile -- issued a statement calling on the United Nations Security Council to do more to protect Syrian civilians. Included in the statement was the following admonishment: "The world continues to wait while the regime continues to massacre the Syrian people."

Syria Review 2016 Page 68 of 540 pages Syria

The scene in Syria turned particularly disturbing in mid-May 2012 when deadly suicide bombs struck Damascus. The attacks took place near a military intelligence building in the middle of the morning rush hour; more than 55 people died and scores more were injured as a result.

As has been the trend, the Assad regime blamed terrorists for the attacks, while opposition activists accused the government of orchestrating the explosions. The competing accusations on both sides were silenced days later when the Islamist group, al-Nusra Front, posted a video online in which its claimed responsibility for the Damascus blasts. According to the Associated Press, the video broadcast a distorted voice saying: "We fulfilled our promise to respond with strikes and explosions. We tell this regime: Stop your massacres against the Sunni people. If not, you will bear the sin of the Alawites" -- an apparent reference to the Shi'a denomination to which President Assad belongs. The video also contained a warning for Sunnis to avoid frequenting places close to security buildings and government offices. It should be noted that al-Nusra Front has said that it was behind a number of other recent episodes of violence in Syria, including at attack on police headquarters and air force intelligence offices in March 2012.

While the occurrence of such clear acts of terrorism was a dire and disturbing development on the Syrian scene, they also likely had an effect in the realm of geopolitics. Members of the international community, many of whom have decried the Assad regime and have advocated some sort of action against it, were now likely to eschew increased support for the opposition. At issue was the mounting evidence that significant swaths of anti-government activists were aligned with insurgent movements willing to use terrorism to accomplish its objectives. The choice, therefore, between the harsh and autocratic regime of Assad, and the disorganized opposition, imbued and influenced by violent insurgent groups, was not a good one.

Clashes between the government and opposition forces saw no end in mid-May 2012 when 30 people died in clashes in central Syria. As well, with the government crackdown ongoing, it was made clear that the brokered ceasefire was just an exercise in theory. On May 15, 2012, in the town of Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib province, more than 20 people died when Syrian security forces opened fire on a funeral procession. Ironically, the violence occurred during a visit of United Nations monitors and left a number of their vehicles damaged. One day before, on May 14, 2012, United Nations monitors were struck by gunfire during a battle in the town of al Rastan. A week prior, the convoy of another United Nations team was hit in Deraa.

By the third week of the month (May 2012), opposition activists said that President Assad's forces were carrying out an extended offensive in the central province of Hama. The northern Idlib and Aleppo provinces was also seeing violence as rebels clashed with pro-government forces. Human rights groups reported that scores of people had been killed collectively as a result of the ongoing assault in only a space of a few days.

For its part, Syria was dismissing claims that it was violating the prevailing (but seemingly ineffectual) peace plan, pointing to recent constitutional change and parliamentary elections as

Syria Review 2016 Page 69 of 540 pages Syria proof of that it was charting the path of reform.

International pressure builds against Syria following Houla and Qubair massacres

In late May 2012, a massacre ensued in the Syrian region of Houla. Various accounts depicted a cadre of fighters armed with heavy weaponry, including mortars and anti-tank weapons, attacking the region. The United Nations confirmed the deaths of at least 100 people in Houla, including 32 children. Interviews by the international media of survivors in Houla recounted horrifying stories of pro-Assad regime forces forcibly entering their homes and killing family members. Several survivors said they were alive only because they hid or "played dead" in order to save their own lives. They also said that cries for help during the massacre went unanswered.

For its part, the Syrian government denied that its army was involved in the incident and instead placed the blame on Islamist militants and "terrorists." Furthermore, Syria dismissed claims that it was violating the prevailing (but seemingly ineffective) peace plan, pointing to recent constitutional changes and parliamentary elections as proof that it was charting the path of reform. In many senses, the very existence of the peace plans and limited government electoral processes were now being used by the Syrian government to argue that it was traveling the path of reform.

At the heart of the issue was the ceasefire agreement brokered by joint United Nations/Arab League envoy Kofi Annan. The six-point plan was intended to bring an end to the violence plaguing Syria for more than a year. The agreement included demands that President Assad cease his violent campaign against opposition protesters, the withdrawal of all fighters and heavy weapons from cities, access to humanitarian agencies, the free movement of journalists, the release of detainees, and the commencement of talks with opposition leaders about the concerns and aspirations of the Syrian people. The plan was agreed to by the Assad regime as well as the opposition Free Syrian Army (FSA) in the spring of 2012, and about 200 United Nations monitors were soon deployed to Syria to witness adherence to the ceasefire agreement. Clearly, the Houla massacre laid bare the reality that bloodshed and mass killings were still going on in Syria, irrespective of the existence of the prevailing ceasefire agreement or the presence of United Nations monitors.

At first, the head of the United Nations observer mission in Syria, Major General Robert Mood, characterized the massacre in Houla as a "brutal tragedy," but stopped short of blaming any one group for the brutal bloodshed. However, following a visit to "ground zero" of the massacre, United Nations monitors were able to confirm "the use of small arms, machine gun, artillery and tanks" in the assault. It should be noted that Syrian rebels do not have access to artillery and tanks. This particular weaponry, along with evidence of shelling by armed forces, appeared to coincide with the claims by civilian victims that pro-Assad fighters were behind some of the killings. Stated differently, United Nations monitors were able to corroborate the early assessment that pro-Assad forces were certainly responsible for some of the mass deaths of the Houla

Syria Review 2016 Page 70 of 540 pages Syria civilians. It should also be noted that United Nations monitors also confirmed that some of the victims had been killed by close-range gunfire or knife attacks. The nature of those killings coincided with claims by activists that other victims were executed by a pro-regime militia known as the "shabiha."

United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and United Nations-Arab League envoy Kofi Annan issued a joint statement in which they characterized the assault in Houla as "flagrant violation of international law." Further, they noted that the assault involved "indiscriminate and disproportionate use of force" and violated commitments by Syria's government. Left unstated was the fact that the Annan ceasefire was clearly not being respected in any form.

For his part, Envoy Annan was to travel to Damascus on May 29, 2012, presumably to revitalize the ceasefire agreement. However, that deal was likely now dead in the de facto sense. To that end, the opposition Free Syrian Army (FSA) said it could no longer go along with an agreement that failed to protect civilians. In a statement, the FSA wasted few words in noting that mass murder was taking place in Syria "under the eyes of the U.N. observers," and further asserting that if urgent steps were not taken, the Annan ceasefire plan was "going to hell."

Countries of the West were in a state of shock and horror after the Houla massacre, issuing a loud chorus of condemnation and argued vociferously for a forceful response. Indeed, the United States called for an end to President Bashar al-Assad's regime. In a statement on May 26, 2012, United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called the mass deaths an "atrocity" and warned that the Obama administration intended to increase pressure on "Assad and his cronies" to give up power. In a vituperative turn of phrase, Secretary of State Clinton said that Assad's "rule by murder and fear must come to an end."

The office of newly-elected French President Francois Hollande also seized upon the lexicon of murder in its statement that read as follows: "The murderous folly of the Damascus regime represents a threat for regional security and its leaders will have to answer for their acts." France additionally said it would convene another meeting of the so-called Friends of Syria group.

United Kingdom Foreign Minister William Hague called for an emergency meeting at the United Nations Security Council and said that he would lobby Russia -- one of the veto-wielding countries on the United Nations Security Council likely to block decisive action against Syria -- to change its stance. In an interview with BBC News, Hague said, "Time is running out for the Assad regime to adopt the [Kofi Annan peace] plan, implement that plan and stop the torture, abuse and murder of their own people." Separately on Twitter, Hague said: "Will call on Russia to support rapid and unequivocal pressure on Assad regime and accountability for crimes."

This task to lobby Russia promised to be difficult since Moscow was saying that both sides (pro- regime and opposition) bore responsibility for the massacre. Of course, Russia has twice blocked

Syria Review 2016 Page 71 of 540 pages Syria

United Nations Security Council resolutions backing strong action against President Bashar al- Assad's regime.

Meanwhile, on May 29, 2012, the United Nations Security Council passed a non-binding condemnation of the use of artillery and tanks. Russia and China -- countries that consider Syrian President Assad an ally -- have long blocked serious action against the ruling Syrian regime, but went along with this non-binding resolution. It was yet to be seen if the massacre in Houla would in fact have any impact on Russia and China, who have been unwilling to take a hard line stance against Assad. That being said, several countries wasted little time in taking unilateral action against the Syrian regime. To that end, senior Syrian diplomats were expelled by the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Canada, Australia, the Netherlands, and Switzerland.

In the backdrop of these developments, pressure was building for the international community to act more decisively and resolutely against the Assad regime in Syria, and to bring an end to the bloodshed in that country.

On May 31, 2012, factions of the opposition Free Syrian Army (FSA) offered slightly different views of the status of the Annan ceasefire agreement. Colonel Qassim Saadeddine in Homs issued a deadline of June 1, 2012, at which time the Assad government was supposed to have adhered to the agreement. No response from the Syrian regime by that time would mean that the ceasefire was no longer in effect. The head of the FSA, General Riyad Asaad, said there was no deadline because the ceasefire existed in name only. He also called on Envoy Annan to issue a statement declaring his peace plan to have failed.

Note that on June 3, 2012, President Assad insisted that government forces had no role in the Houla massacre. In a televised address to parliament, Assad said, "What happened in Houla and elsewhere (in Syria) are brutal massacres which even monsters would not have carried out." Of course, with such brutality being beyond the scope of even monsters, left unspecified was the matter of who was actually responsible for the summary executions that occurred in Houla. For his part, Assad focused his ire on "terrorists" and "foreign meddling," which he said were responsible for instigating discord and creating Syria's current crisis.

A day later on June 4, 2012, the Annan ceasefire plan was officially declared to be dead by the opposition Free Syrian Army (FSA). A spokesperson for the FSA, Sami al-Kurdi, said in an interview with Reuters that its troops would not target government forces in an effort to "defend our people." Making good on that promise, scored of Syrian soldiers died in a violent offensive by the FSA at the start of June 2012. The scene had all the hallmarks of a burgeoning civil war inside Syria. The claim by United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon that the Annan's plan "remains central" to resolving the Syrian crisis, held little resonance among Syrians on the ground. Curiously, Envoy Annan insisted that the peace deal remained viable.

Syria Review 2016 Page 72 of 540 pages Syria

A new opposition entity, the Syrian Rebels Front, was announced during a news conference in Turkey, presumably with an eye on filling the gap now left in the wake of the Free Syrian Army's exit from the peace process. It was not known if the Syrian Rebels Front would itself advance a peace agenda. As the representative entity of 12,000 fighters, the group's mission was to "rein in Assad from his crimes."

The political opposition of Syria meanwhile sought new leadership, as the Paris-based president of the Syrian National Council (SNC), Burhan Ghalioun, resigned from that post. To that end, on June 10, 2012, Abdulbaset Sieda, a Kurdish dissident living in exile in Sweden, was chosen to lead the SNC. The change in leadership was applauded by many Syrian dissidents who complained that the SNC was too dominated by Islamists.

Meanwhile, the first part of June 2012 was marked by further bloodshed and brutality in Syria. On June 6, 2012, yet another massacre was reported in the village of Qubair. There, United Nations monitors found the village close to the western city of Hama deserted and its buildings burned to utter destruction, along with the charred bodies of scores of people. As well, the monitors discovered evidence that some homes were subject to tank rounds and small arms fire. The Syrian opposition placed the blame for the Qubair massacre on Assad-allied "Shabiha" militias while the Assad government blamed the killings on "terrorists." For his part, United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon warned of the danger of civil war in Syria as a result; however, many observers have suggested that Syria may well have already slipped into a de facto civil war. By the second week of June 2012, the discussion of Syria's slippage into civil war took on new resonance when Herve Ladsous, the head of peacekeeping for the United Nations, suggested that the Syrian conflict was tantamount to a civil war.

Earlier in Damascus on June 8, 2012, there were unconfirmed reports of explosions. There were suggestions that the explosions were caused by either bomb blasts or shell-fire; there was also a plume of black smoke reported above the Syrian capital. Car bombs apparently went off in the northwestern city of Idlib, killing two police officers and three civilians, and in Rif Dimashq, killing three police officers. On that same day, heavy shelling by Syrian security forces left at least 40 people dead across the country. On June 9, 2012, shelling by government forces was reported in the southern town of Deraa, leaving close to 20 people dead. Human rights groups said that most of the victims were women. The coastal city of Latakia was seeing violent battles between rebels and government forces. Meanwhile, heavy shelling was reported in Homs, according to United Nations monitors who were there at the time but clearly having no effect on curbing the violence. By June 10, 2012, Syrian government forces were renewing their active offensive operations aimed at quelling rebels in the area and the death toll there was on the rise. Around the same period, United Nations monitors were also able to verify that Syrian forces were using attack helicopters to bombard rebels.

Syria Review 2016 Page 73 of 540 pages Syria

In the face of this violence, and despite the evidence of two massacres and ongoing bloodshed in only the space of one week, Russia maintained its stance of non-action. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said his country was increasingly concerned by the situation in Syria, but "will not sanction the use of force at the United Nations Security Council." He continued, "If the Syrians agree [about Assad's exit] between each other, we will only be happy to support such a solution. But we believe it is unacceptable to impose the conditions for such a dialogue from outside."

The Russian angle in the ongoing Syrian crisis became more complicated by June 12, 2012, when United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton accused Moscow of supplying Damascus with attack helicopters. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov vehemently denied the charge and asserted that his country was "not supplying Syria or any other country with items which can be used against peaceful protesters unlike the United States, which regularly supplies weapons to the region." Russia and the United States then devolved into a contretemps. Russia claimed that its arms shipments to Syria were unrelated to the conflict, and, indeed, the helicopters had been returned from Russia where they were sent for routine repairs and refurbishing. For its part, the United States rebuffed Russian claims that it was supplying weapons to the region; United States officials said that while it was aware of the anti-tank missiles supplied by Turkey using funds from Saudi Arabia and Qatar, it was not involved in the weapons transfer.

By June 13, 2012, French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius was calling for the United Nations Security Council to mandate the application of the Annan ceasefire in Syria peace, under the aegis of the United Nations Chapter Seven provision. Fabius promised that he would seek to see the Annan plan go forward "under pain of very heavy sanctions." The Syrian opposition has echoed France's position, by calling on the United Nations Security Council to put the Annan plan into place using Chapter Seven power. Whether or not such an end would transpire was yet to be seen, as the United Nations Security Council was set to consider its options for the Syrian crisis at a meeting in the days ahead.

Of course, it should be noted that the Chapter Seven provision provides for enforcement by force, but was unlikely to be supported by either Russia or China. Nevertheless, Secretary Clinton warned that Russian interests in the region would be negatively affected if the country did not act more constructively. To that end, the United States' top diplomat was urging a "managed transition" of the current Assad regime from the leadership of Syria.

The Security Situation in mid-2012

On that day, violence went on in Syria with government forces seizing control of the western mountain town of Haffa after a fierce battle with rebels. The rebel Free Syrian Army said it withdrew its fighters from the area to prevent residents being harmed by further bombardments. Across the country, the death toll rose as scores of people died as a result of attacks by helicopters and artillery close to Homs.

Syria Review 2016 Page 74 of 540 pages Syria

On June 15, 2012, MSNBC News reported that Russia was sending a small contingent of armed troops to Syria. United States military officials said the combat forces were being sent to the Syrian city of Tartus to protect Russia’s deep-water port and military base there. The move was regarded as provocative and would surely complicate the already-difficult task of finding a resolution to the ongoing Syrian crisis.

By mid-June 2012, the flashpoint city of Homs was under intense shelling and bombardment from government forces, leaving civilians inside the city virtually trapped and running low on essential supplies. Human rights groups were urging Syrian authorities to allow families to evacuate the conflict zone; however, on June 17, 2012, witnesses were telling international media that most of the city was under attack.

Days later, the crackdown in Syria was continuing with explosions heard across Homs, shelling reported in the Damascus suburb of Douma, clashes between soldiers and rebels said to be ongoing in northern Aleppo province near the border with Turkey.

Meanwhile, in a related development, the United Nations announced on June 16, 2012, that it was suspending its monitoring mission in Syria, citing the increased violence in the country as the main cause for that decision. The head of observer mission, Major General Robert Mood, issued a statement noting that the violence and bloodshed poses a serious threat to the safety and security of the observers, essentially making it impossible for them to carry out their mission. This decision was the latest sign that the Annan plan was no longer being regarded as a viable resolution for Syria.

Despite their frequent complaints about the ineffective nature of the observer mission, activist and opposition groups in Syria expressed dismay over the news. From their perspective, Syrian civilians would now lose the one layer of protection that existed in the country against the assault by the Assad regime. That being said, United Nations monitors for Syria made it clear during a briefing with the United Nations Security Council that observers had been violently targeted and subjected repeatedly to gunfire at close range. General Robert Mood of Norway, the chief United Nations monitor for Syria, made it clear that the environment in Syria was unsafe and there was no adherence to the so-called ceasefire.

By June 19, 2012, there were vague signs that the schism between Russia and the West was narrowing to some degree, following a meeting of G-20 leaders in Mexico. There, United States President Barack Obama met with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, and both countries expressed the view that Syria could not be allowed to slip into a civil war.

A day later on June 20, 2012, British Prime Minister David Cameron indicated that while Russia remained committed to preserving its relationship with Syria, Russian President Putin was moving

Syria Review 2016 Page 75 of 540 pages Syria away from protecting Assad's presidency and was looking towards a transition of power in Syria. As noted by Prime Minister Cameron in an interview with the international media, "There remain differences over sequencing and the shape of how the transition takes place but it is welcome that President Putin has been explicit that he does not want Assad remaining in charge in Syria." Cameron continued, "What we need next is an agreement on a transitional leadership which can move Syria to a democratic future that protects the rights of all its communities." For his part, though, President Putin offered quite a different view saying, "I feel like I have to repeat our position. We believe that nobody has the right to decide for other nations who should be brought to power, who should be removed from power." Putin's statement suggested that the Russian leader in fact had shifted very little in his stance. Indeed, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov went so far as to suggest that Cameron's view "does not correspond to reality."

On June 30, 2012, a United Nations-backed meeting of world powers took place in Geneva, Switzerland, during which the leaders discussed the situation in Syria. At issue was a ceasefire and transition of power plan for the country that could usher an end to the Assad regime, while gaining sanction from Russia and China at the international level. Hopes for such a plan were somewhat dashed when Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said, "We are not supporting and will not support any external meddling. External players must not dictate... to Syrians." It should be noted that the Syrian opposition also expressed little support for the ceasefire and transition of power plan, suggesting that it was too ambiguous and left open the possibility for Assad to remain in some sort of internal leadership role.

Meanwhile, as June 2012 was coming to a close, the unrest in Syria saw no end as explosions rocked the main court complex, leaving at least three people wounded. Arab news media reported that the explosion were due to "sticky bombs" that were attached under vehicles. The Syrian authorities blamed rebel fighters for the attack, which observers said was a symbolic attack on President Assad's power base. The rest of the country saw more deaths, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, as the de facto civil war continued to plague the country. In particular, government forces used artillery bombardment to recapture the Damascus suburb of Douma -- an opposition stronghold -- with catastrophic consequences for residents, according to pro-rebel activists on the scene.

These developments occurred even as a slate of Syrian military officers defected from that country to Turkey and reports emerged of a Turkish jet being shot down by Syria. On the matter of the defections, the last week of June 2012 saw several high-ranking Syrian military figures defecting to Turkey. One general, two colonels, two majors, and dozens of other soldiers were reported to have crossed the Syrian-Turkish border into Hatay province on the night of June 24, 2012. Days earlier, the pilot of a fighter jet on a training mission flew his MiG-21 warplane to Jordan; he requested political asylum and landed his plane at King Hussein Air Base in that country. Jordan granted him asylum on on "humanitarian grounds" since he would likely be tortured or killed if he returned home. In the first week of July 2012, in a blow to the Syrian regime, a Syrian general

Syria Review 2016 Page 76 of 540 pages Syria fled the country via Turkey. Brigadier General Manaf Tlas -- a stalwart of President Assad -- left Syria via Turkey, according to his family. The news of the highest-level defection since the start of Syria's unrest suggested that the upper echelons of the regime knew that its grip on power might be unsustainable.

See below for information to the situation with Turkey.

Syria shoots down Turkish fighter jet

On June 22, 2012, a Turkish fighter jet was shot down by Syrian air defense forces. The F-4 Phantom lost radio contact as it was flying over Hatay province on what Turkey said was a training flight to test Turkish radar capabilities. Syria said the jet violated its air space and its forces engaged the Turkish aircraft "according to the laws that govern such situations" before it burst into flames and crashed into the Mediterranean Sea. Both countries deployed coastguard to try to find the two missing crew members from the Turkish jet.

Turkish President Gul was at first tempered and restrained in his reaction to the scenario. He appeared to acknowledge there was a possibility the Turkish jet, which was reportedly on a reconnaissance mission, may have strayed into Syrian air space. He said, "It is routine for jet fighters to sometimes fly in and out over [national] borders... when you consider their speed over the sea." At the same time, the Turkish leader said that his country could not ignore the fact that Syria had shot down a Turkish aircraft. In an interview with the Turkish state news agency, Anatolia, President Gul said: "It is not possible to cover over a thing like this, whatever is necessary will be done." Turkey did, in fact, recall its envoy from Syria over the incident, but was careful to characterize that decision as being for "security reasons." Turkey also indicated it would soon make a decision on how to deal with the incident.

By June 24, 2012, the geopolitical climate shifted dramatically as Turkish authorities in Ankara were now issuing an ostensible challenge to Syria's account of what transpired on June 22, 2012. Even though Turkish President Gul had entertained the possibility that the F-4 Phantom jet had strayed into Syrian air space, now the Turkish authorities in Ankara were asserting that the jet was actually in international airspace when it was shot down. Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said in an interview with Turkish state television, TRT, "According to our conclusions, our plane was shot down in international airspace, 13 nautical miles (24km) from Syria." Since international law specifies that a country's air space extends 12 nautical miles from its coastline, corresponding with its territorial waters, the position of the Turkish fighter jet was in a neutral territory -- international waters -- when it was shot down by Syrian forces. The Turkish foreign minister went further in noting that the jet had not "shown any hostility," and was clearly marked as Turkish -- effectively contradicting the statement by the Syrian military that the jet's identity was unknown. Of course, this view was at odds with the Syrian account that the jet was an "unidentified aircraft" that penetrated Syrian air space and was engaged appropriately, before being

Syria Review 2016 Page 77 of 540 pages Syria shot down.

Clearly, the two contrary accounts could potentially spur an international crisis, perhaps explaining Turkey's decision to move forward more assertively in response to the situation. To that end, Turkey issued a diplomatic protest against Syria. As well, Turkish authorities in Ankara called a meeting of NATO member states under the aegis of Article Four of NATO's charter. Charter Four provides for consultations when a NATO member state believes its security is threatened. It was apparent that Turkey was now attempting to secure assurances from NATO that the transnational body would support its official response to the downing of its fighter jet by Syria.

The United States and the United Kingdom -- both NATO member states -- issued condemnation of Syria. United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said, "The United States condemns this brazen and unacceptable act in the strongest possible terms. It is yet another reflection of the Syrian authorities' callous disregard for international norms, human life, and peace and security." United Kingdom Foreign Secretary William Hague characterized the actions of the Syrian military as "outrageous" and emphasized "how far beyond accepted behavior the Syrian regime has put itself." Meanwhile, the European Union and Australia respectively levied fresh sanctions on the Assad’s regime in Syria.

By June 24, 2012, Turkey had dispatched a letter to the United Nations Security Council, in which it decried the "hostile act by the Syrian authorities against Turkey's national security." Turkey further charged that it had captured radio communications suggesting that Syria was cognizant of the circumstances and ownership of the reconnaissance aircraft when it shot down the Turkish jet. “Radio communication among Syrian authorities clearly demonstrates that the Syrian units were fully aware of the circumstances and the fact that the aircraft belonged to Turkey,” wrote Ertugrul Apakan, Turkey’s representative to the United Nations in the letter to United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon. Accordingly, Turkey asserted that Syria posed "a serious threat to peace and security in the region."

On June 25, 2012, Turkey invoked Article Five of the NATO charter. In an interview with the media, Bulent Arinc, Turkey’s deputy prime minister, made clear that his country was invoking Article Five because: "To target an aircraft in this fashion without any warning is a hostile act of the highest order." It should be noted that Article Five is the provision that states an attack on one NATO state is an attack on all member states. As with the invocation of Article Four, it was apparent that Turkey was shoring up NATO support and solidarity in its response to Syria.

That response was unlikely to be of a military nature, as Deputy Prime Minister Arinc said his country was instead considering whether or not to cut electricity exports to Syria. To date, Turkey has eschewed such action on the basis of "humanitarian reasons." Moreover, General Knud Bartels, the chairman of NATO's military committee, made clear that no military actions by the North Atlantic security body would be taken "until all political means to achieve a political solution

Syria Review 2016 Page 78 of 540 pages Syria are used."

As June 2012 came to a close, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan announced that his country would reinforce its border with Syria. In a speech to parliament, the Turkish head of government characterized Syria as a "clear and present threat" and warned that any "military element" that approached the Turkish border from Syria would be treated as a military target. Accordingly, Turkey soon deployed columns of military vehicles, rocket launchers, and anti- aircraft guns along its border with Syria. The state of heightened tensions was illustrated on June 30, 2012, when Turkey scrambled six F-16 fighter jets near its border with Syria. The action was taken soon after Syrian helicopters approached the border with Turkey.

These developments occurred even as a slate of Syrian military officers defected from that country to Turkey and reports emerged of a second Turkish jet being shot at by Syria. On the latter matter, Turkey said that Syria fired on one of its planes participating in the rescue operation for a reconnaissance jet shot down by Syria days prior. Deputy Prime Minister Arinc the rescue aircraft was not brought down, and that Syrians had stopped firing following a warning from Turkish forces; however, Arinc promised that Syria's "hostile action" would "not go unpunished.

In the past, Turkey and Syria enjoyed close ties; however, since the brutal crackdown by the Assad regime in Syria, Turkey has been a strong and vociferous critic of the Syrian government, and Turkey has seen an influx of more than 30,000 Syrian refugees fleeing the crossfire of violence in Syria between government forces and opposition fighters. No doubt, this imbroglio over the downing of the Turkish jet marked a new low in bilateral relations between the two countries, although it was apparent that bilateral relations were on an overall downward trajectory.

Civil War in Syria?

In July 2012, the United Nations accused Syrian forces of using heavy artillery, tanks and helicopters against opponents. If proved to be true, the use of heavy weapons would be a violation of the ceasefire agreement made with joint United Nations-Arab League Envoy Kofi Annan. For its part, the Assad regime denied these claims.

By mid-July 2012, Syria was embroiled in ongoing violence. On July 15, 2012, intense fighting was reported in the capital city of Damascus, with tanks and mortars apparently in use, and residents attempting to flee the crossfire of violence. That being said, fighting was not limited to that area.

Indeed, the fighting was so widespread that the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) characterized the situation in Syria as a civil war. Until this time, the ICRC had viewed only specific areas, such as Homs, Hama, and Idlib, as war zones. The shift in status to Syria being in a civil war would have serious consequences in the realm of international jurisprudence. Specifically,

Syria Review 2016 Page 79 of 540 pages Syria combatants would now be subject to the Geneva Conventions. At issue would be indiscriminate attacks on civilians, attacks on medical personnel, the destruction of infrastructure services such as water or electricity, which are prohibited under the Geneva Conventions, and could open participants in the conflict up to war crimes prosecutions.

ICRC spokesperson Hicham Hassan explained: "What matters is that international humanitarian law applies wherever hostilities between government forces and opposition groups are taking place across the country."

On July 18, 2012, intimations of a Syrian civil war found resonance when the Syrian defense minister and other key security officials were assassinated in a bombing in Damascus. Unconfirmed reports from Syria on that day suggested that the bomb was planted by a trusted bodyguard and detonated while the members of the Assad regime were meeting with key security personnel at the national security building in Damascus. Other reports indicated that the explosion was actually caused by a suicide bombing carried out by the bodyguard, rather than by a planted bomb. (Note that a day after the bombing, it remained unclear as to whether it was due to a suicide bombing or a remotely detonated explosive that was planted in a conference room of the National Security Bureau.)

Among the dead were Defense Minister Daoud Rajih, General Assef Shawkat, a security chief and President Assad's own brother in law, and General Hassan Turkomani, who was leading the crisis team. Meanwhile, Hisham Ikhtiar, the director of the National Security Bureau, and Interior Minister Mohammad Ibrahim al-Shaar, were respectively reported to have been injured in the blast. (Note that by July 20, 2012, the death toll among President Assad's security team rose to four when Isham Ikhtiar, Syria's national security chief, succumbed to the injuries received during the fateful bombing of the National Security Bureau.)

Two groups issued competing claims of responsibility for the bombing at the National Security Bureau -- the rebel Free Syrian Army (FSA) as well as an Islamist jihadist group, the Lord of the Martyrs Brigade. Later reports, though, seemed to point to a collaborative operation between the Free Syrian Army and bodyguards as well as other personnel in Assad's inner circle. Regardless of the actual mastermind, there was no doubt that Syrian rebels and opposition forces were now feeling particularly empowered, given the fact that an attack had successfully targeted the Assad regime's inner security circle. In fact, the very core of Syria's crisis command authorities had been eliminated.

On the day of the fatal assassination attack, there was no word from President Assad himself. Indeed, despite the deaths of his brother in law, his defense minister, and his crisis team leader, President Assad offered neither a public appearance nor an official statement on the matter. The silence from Assad was fueling speculation that he might have been injured in the blast and raised questions about his grip on power. A day after the bombing, conflicting reports emerged regarding

Syria Review 2016 Page 80 of 540 pages Syria the location of President Assad. According to Reuters' quotes from Syrian opposition sources and one Western diplomat, Assad was thought to be in the coastal city of Latakia. A Lebanese publication, As-Safir, however, cited official Syrian sources as saying that Assad remained in Damascus. Assad was finally shown at the swearing in-ceremony for the new defense chief, although the site of the event remained unknown.

It should be noted that at the time of the bombing, rebels were already carrying out an offensive on the capital of Damascus, which had come to be known as "Operation Damascus Volcano." The violence in Damascus was ongoing on July 19, 2012, with intense fighting reported at that time. Notably, battles were taking place between soldiers from the military and rebel fighters across Syria, leaving an ever-increasing death toll.

For its part, the armed forces of Syria insisted they would not relent in their fight against terrorism, which for them translated into the opposition forces. To this end, pro-government forces were poised to launch a brutal operation aimed at ousting rebels from the capital city as tanks, helicopters, and artillery were said to have been deployed across Damascus. But the military itself was not unified as illustrated by the reports of further military defections of top officers taking refuge in Turkey. Moreover, the rebels themselves seemed undeterred and were buoyed by the bombing the day before, which struck at the core of Assad's security circle. Accordingly, they said they would keep up their efforts and promised that the fall of the regime was imminent.

With the situation in Syria spilling out of control, a scheduled vote on a Western-backed resolution aimed at levying harsh sanctions against Syria was postponed at the United Nations Security Council.

For his part, Joint United Nations-Arab League Envoy Kofi Annan called on the United Nations Security Council to take decisive action to deal with the bloodshed and chaos in Syria. Likewise, United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon urged the United Nations Security Council to "shoulder its responsibility and take collective and effective action." He continued, "Time is of the essence. The Syrian people have suffered for too long. The bloodshed must end now."

Also on the agenda for the United Nations Security Council was the proposal to extend the United Nations' observer mission in Syria, which was set to expire on July 20, 2012, and place the Annan peace plan under the aegis of the United Nations Charter's Chapter 7 provision, which could set the path to authorize the use of force in Syria. Undoubtedly, the notion of approving Chapter 7 of the United Nations charter would not appeal to the likes of Russia.

United States President Barack Obama was said to have had a telephone conversation with Russian President Vladimir Putin in which he characterized the scenario in Syria as being "out of control." It was yet to be seen if the current landscape of chaos would sway Russia to stand with the West in tackling the Syrian crisis. There was no sign that the latest developments were actually

Syria Review 2016 Page 81 of 540 pages Syria impacting Russia's stance. According to the Interfax news agency, President Obama and President Putin found no common ground on the matter of how to deal with Syria.

As expected, when a United Nations Security Council resolution was finally brought forward for a vote on July 19, 2012, it was vetoed by the usual suspects -- Russia and China. The vetoes spurred incensed responses from Western powers on the council. Notably, the United Kingdom, the United States, and France excoriated the United Nations for failing to help end the suffering of the Syrian people. British Foreign Secretary William Hague condemned the action by Russia and China as "inexcusable and indefensible." He added, "They have turned their back on the people of Syria in their darkest hour." France accused the veto-wielding Russia of moving to extend the Assad regime's grip on power. For its part, the United States warned that it would to work outside the United Nations Security Council to pressure Syria.

The veto of the aforementioned resolution aside, the United Nations Security Council did agree to extend the monitoring mission in Syria for an additional 30 days. Still, the presence of a largely ineffectual mission was not likely to do much to quell the violence plaguing to the country.

Pro-Assad loyalist forces intensified their bombardment of Damascus on July 20, 2012, as they used their weapons advantage using artillery, mortar, tanks, and helicopters to attack several neighborhoods of the capital city. The fighting was ongoing on July 22, 2012, with additional clashes reported to be taking place in the northern city of Aleppo. There, the rebels declared their intent to "free the city from government troops." But the Syrian military also reiterated its own commitment to "clear the homeland of the armed terrorist groups," which has long been the government's characterization of the fight against anti-Assad rebels.

It should be noted that despite the rebels' efforts to take Damascus ended in failure as government forces were ultimately able to overcome the anti-government fighters in the capital.

Nevertheless, the rebels enjoyed momentum in their mission to liberate Syria from the Assad regime when they gained control of several crossings into Iraq and Turkey. The seizure of these border posts were a strategic victory for the rebels since they could potentially move arms in and out of the country, and prevent Assad forces from fleeing Syria.

Meanwhile, elsewhere in Syria, pro-Assad forces opened fire on worshipers attending evening prayers at a mosque in a village close to Hama -- one of the flashpoint cities in the Syrian conflict. At least 20 people died as a result. At a jail in Homs, more than a dozen people died in a prison revolt. Violence was also reported in Deraa.

In the last week of July 2012, rebels launched an offensive on one of the country's largest cities -- Aleppo -- with an eye on taking control there. President Assad's military, though, was preparing to hit back, with the intention of holding sway over Syria's second most important city in the country.

Syria Review 2016 Page 82 of 540 pages Syria

On July 24, 2012, Aleppo was hit by artillery fire as well as shelling; the city was also relentlessly bombarded by fighter jets in what was the first apparent use of aerial power by the Assad government against its own people in an urban center. The scenario in Aleppo marked a clear escalation in the conflict in Syria. More than one hundred people were killed in the space of a day as a result. By July 26, 2012, the Syrian army had deployed an armored column to advance on Aleppo. Clearly, the Assad regime was intent on regaining control of the city, fearing that if it fell into rebel hands, it might well become Syria's Benghazi -- a reference to the eastern stronghold of the Libyan rebels who went onto liberate that country.

The fight for Aleppo continued days later, prompting United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki- Moon to demand an end to the "slaughter" in Syria. In a speech, he said: "I make a plea to the world: 'Do not delay... Act now to stop the slaughter."

By July 30, 2012, fierce and brutal fighting in Aleppo was ongoing and about 200,000 people fled from the crossfire of violence in and around that city. The United Kingdom-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights characterized the scenario as "a full-scale street war." Despite the superior military might of pro-Assad forces, which included the use of air power, tanks, and bombs, the Free Syrian Army continued its the battle for Aleppo.

United States Defense Secretary Leon Panetta warned that the Syrian military's relentless assault on Aleppo could well spell political disaster for the Assad regime. He explained, "If they [government forces] continue this kind of tragic attack on their own people... I think it ultimately will be a nail in Assad's coffin. What Assad has been doing to his own people and what he continues to do to his own people makes clear that his regime is coming to an end. It's lost all legitimacy." He continued, "It's no longer a question of whether he's coming to an end, it's when."

But President Assad clearly was not backing down from a confrontation with anti-government rebels. On Aug. 1, 2012, he dispatched statement praising the military for its efforts to crush the rebels, whom he described as "armed terrorist gangs."

Meanwhile, government forces were being condemned for human right violations. A report by Amnesty International said that Syrian security forces and the pro-government militia called "shabiha" has fired on civilians and peaceful protesters, including children. Amnesty International also said that medical teams and first responders have been detained and sometimes tortured by the Assad regime. The rebels were also under fire as videotaped footage surfaced showing the execution of four men in Aleppo, supposedly Assad loyalists from the Berri clan. Not surprisingly, human rights activists expressed condemnation of such action. A spokesperson from the British- based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights described the killings as a criminal actions of revenge.

With the Assad government claiming that it had subdued Damascus, its attention was now on

Syria Review 2016 Page 83 of 540 pages Syria

Aleppo. Syrian state television at the start of August 2012 was claiming that government forces had inflicted heavy losses on the rebels there, while United Nations observers confirmed that fighter jets were seen firing heavy machine fire from the air on Aleppo. That being said, the rebels themselves remained defiant and insisted that they still held sway in Aleppo. There were reports that the opposition fighters had captured tanks and had access to heavy artillery, which could well help in their efforts. Still, with the Syrian army using jet fighters, the reality was that the military advantage was with the Assad regime against the opposition. Compounding the challenge for the rebels was the fact that the Assad regime was reportedly amassing government troops with the aim of a massive assault on Aleppo.

Prospects for peace dimmed on Aug. 2, 2012, when Kofi Annan - special envoy for the United Nations and Arab League - announced that he was resigning from his role in a mission that was increasingly appearing to be impossible. That is to say, the likelihood of finding a peaceful resolution in Syria appeared to be extremely low due to the downward spiral of violence in that country.

The role of the international community, and specifically the United Nations, in trying to resolve the Syrian civil war has itself been subject to harsh criticism. Russia's insistence in blocking the passage of resolutions in the United Nations Security Council that could place pressure on the Assad regime has been broadly regarded as the biggest obstacle by Western countries and Arab nation states alike. In a move to circumvent the Security Council, while demonstrating international consensus on the Syrian conflict, the United Nations General Assembly passed a Saudi-sponsored resolution that condemned Syria and called for a political transition. The vote in the United Nations' main body was overwhelming with 133 votes in favor of the resolution, 12 against it, and 31 abstentions. Russia reacted to the passage of the resolution arguing that the resolution was one-sided in its support for the opposition, and that it would undermine peace efforts. But with Annan stepping down from his role as peace envoy, it was difficult to detect whether or not there actually was a viable peace effort going on at the start of August 2012.

Nevertheless, veteran Algerian diplomat Lakhdar Brahimi was set to be appointed as the new United Nations-Arab League envoy for Syria. Brahimi's credentials included the fact that as a senior Arab League official, he brokered an end to the Lebanese civil war. He has also worked as a diplomat in crisis scenarios in Afghanistan, South Africa, and Haiti. It was yet to be seen if Brahimi would see more success than Annan.

In another blow to the Assad regime's authority, Aug. 6, 2012, saw the state media headquarters attacked with a bombing that destroyed the third floor of the building housing Syrian state television and radio. While not as devastating as the attack on the heart of the Syrian security apparatus, this bombing was a symbolic attack on the regime's mouthpiece, which has been used to assure Syrian citizens that President Assad has remained in full control of the country.

Syria Review 2016 Page 84 of 540 pages Syria

There were some signs that the Assad regime was having its own challenges internally when on Aug. 7, 2012, it was reported that Syria's prime minister Riyad Farid Hijab had decided to defect from the government and join the rebel movement. The move was reportedly made in coordination with the opposition Free Syrian Army and facilitated the transportation of the prime minister, his wife, and children, across the border to Jordan. Hijab then offered a statement from the Jordanian capital of Amman, leaving no doubt about his intentions, asserting: "I announce today my defection from the killing and terrorist regime and I announce that I have joined the ranks of the freedom and dignity revolution."

Hijab, who was appointed as the Syrian prime minister in June 2012 following parliamentary elections, was supposedly offered two options -- to either take the office of prime minister or be killed. A spokesperson for Hijab made this claim during an interview with to the Qatar-based news outfit, al-Jazeera. The spokesperson continued, "He [Hijab] had a third option in mind -- to plan his own defection in order to direct a blow to the regime from within."

For its part, Syrian authorities downplayed the development with Syrian state television reporting that Hijab had been fired and that Omar Ibrahim Ghalawanji, another cabinet member, would take over the duties of the head of government on a caretaker basis. Soon thereafter, a more permanent selection was made when Wael al-Halki was appointed as the new prime minister.

At a news conference days later, former Prime Minister Hijab was claiming that the Assad regime was collapsing from within and, in fact, only in control of one-third of the country. Hijab also lauded King Abdullah II of Jordan along with other regional leaders for rejecting the Syrian government's descent into tyranny and for their support of the rebels.

But complicating matters was the fact that Western powers were now wary of the infiltration of the Syrian opposition by Islamic radicals, specifically indicating doubts about the exile-centered Syrian National Council. Now, Western powers were seeking to forge ties with opposition groups operating inside Syria. Part of the shift in orientation came as a result of the reports of brutality by rebel forces and intimations of a growing Salafi Muslim jihadist influence.

At the diplomatic level, following the decision of Annan to resign from his peacemaker role, the United Nations announced on Aug. 16, 2012, that it was ending its monitoring mission in Syria -- ahead of expiration of its mandate. Following a meeting of the United Nations Security Council, the French Ambassador to the United Nations explained the rationale for the decision, saying, "The conditions to continue [the mission] were not filled." Illustrating the fact that continuing violence has prevented the monitors from carrying out their duties, a bomb exploded close to hotel used by United Nations monitors on Aug. 15, 2012.

Meanwhile, fighting had escalated in Aleppo as the rebels were being subject to aerial bombardment. The efforts by the Syrian forces were having an effect as Syrian rebel commanders

Syria Review 2016 Page 85 of 540 pages Syria from the Free Syrian Army acknowledged losing control of the strategic Salah al-Din district of Aleppo. Clashes were continuing across the city and the death toll was rising as a result of the brutal violence. On Aug. 16, 2012 alone, 200 people died across the country.

On Aug. 20, 2012, United States President Barack Obama warned the Syrian regime against using its reported stockpile of chemical weapons, which includes Sarin nerve agent and mustard gas. Speaking about the limited international intervention into the Syrian conflict and particularly the United States' decision to provide only ancillary assistance to opposition forces in Syria, President Obama explained that his country's stance might change if the Assad regime used chemical weapons. Explaining his "red line" of sorts, President Obama said, "It [the potential deployment of chemical weapons] concerns us. We cannot have a situation where chemical or biological weapons are falling into the hands of the wrong people." President Obama also reiterated his country's position that Assad should step down from power.

In a related development, Russia made it known that the Kremlin was not involved in supplying chemical weapons to Syria. Chinese state media entered the fray by accusing the United States of using Syria's chemical weapons as a rationale for intervening militarily into that country. While this view from the news agency, Xinhua, was not an official statement from the Chinese government, it did illuminate likely concerns emanating from Beijing. That being said, it appeared unlikely that the Obama administration was interested in military engagement in Syria a few months ahead of a contested general election.

Earlier on Aug. 26, 2012, Syrian opposition activists said that scores of bodies were discovered close to the capital city of Damascus, and accused Syrian government forces of carrying out a massacre. The opposition activists placed the number of victims as high as 300 although that claim could not be independently verified. That being said, Syrian opposition activists also noted that those killed in Darayya appeared to be victims of execution-style killings that they said occurred during house-to-house raids by government troops.

The discovery of the bodies was the latest manifestation of brutality in the ongoing civil war in Syria between forces loyal to President Bashar al-Assad and opposition forces. For its part, Syrian state media made no reference to claims of a massacre in Darayya, although it confirmed that the town was subject to a major bombardment and was being "cleansed of terrorist remnants." The assault was part of a wider offensive in the area of Damascus intended to regain the upper hand there.

International powers warned that if the reports proved to be true, the massacre would constitute a new level of atrocity in Syria. Nevertheless, by Aug. 29, 2012, President Assad defiantly asserted that his government would continue its hard-line policy against opposition elements and required further time to "win the battle" against rebel forces. He dismissed the notion of humanitarian buffer zones, which was being suggested by Turkey, casting that idea as "unrealistic." Assad

Syria Review 2016 Page 86 of 540 pages Syria additionally accused the international community of participating in an anti-Syria conspiracy. To these ends, Assad said in an interview with the media: "Talk of buffer zones firstly is not on the table and secondly it is an unrealistic idea by hostile countries and the enemies of Syria."

It should be noted that on Aug. 30, 2012, Egypt's newly-elected President Mohamed Morsi added his voice to the condemnation of the Assad regime in Syria. At a Non-Aligned Movement summit in Iran, the Egyptian president condemned the Syrian government, characterizing it as “an “oppressive regime that has lost its legitimacy.” He called for aid to the Syrian opposition, saying, “It is a moral obligation, and a political and strategic step that comes in our belief of a new independent Syria."

Elsewhere in Syria, fighting raged on in the last week of August 2012 with the lion's share of battles taking place in the areas around Damascus and Aleppo, as well as the northwestern province of Idlib.

In the first week of September 2012, the violence was relentless. Scores of people were reported to have died in that week across the country. On Sept. 7 2012, a bomb explosion in the Rukn al- Din area of Damascus left at least five members of the Syrian security forces dead and several more wounded, while a car bomb struck Mazzeh district of the capital city. Elsewhere in Damascus, government forces carried out an assault on the southern districts of Daf al-Shouk and Tadamon, and shelled the Yarmouk Palestinian refugee camp. The death toll in these cases included people five at the refugee camp and an aid worker for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency.

Meanwhile, the new United Nations envoy to Syria, Lakhdar Brahimi, described his task as "nearly impossible," as he discussed the prospects of ending the conflict rocking the country. That disclosure did not augur a successful resolution to the chaos and bloodshed plaguing Syria. In a rare bit of good news, the head of the International Committee of the Red Cross, Peter Maurer, characterized his discussions with President Bashar al-Assad as being "positive," and noted that they had looked at facilitating easier delivery of humanitarian aid. But even this news could not vitiate the fact that the Syria was now embroiled in a civil war, with a rising death toll and millions of people facing a humanitarian crisis as a result.

At the close of September 2012, the battle for Aleppo was ongoing with the collateral damage of the violence between government forces and rebels including one of the country's cultural landmarks. To that end, a raging fire burned and destroyed hundreds of shops in the ancient marketplace of Aleppo. The fire was sparked by shelling and gunfire, according to reports from Syria. Known as Aleppo's "Souk al-Madina" the ancient marketplace in Aleppo's Old City has been regarded as one of the region's most well-preserved historic landmarks, and has been recognized by UNESCO as a world heritage site.

The battles continued not only in Aleppo's Old City but also the Arkub district, the Neirab military

Syria Review 2016 Page 87 of 540 pages Syria base at the stone gateway to the Old City known as Bab Antakya, as well as the rebel stronghold of Salaheddin.

Geopolitical Complications

Even as the battle was ongoing in Syria for control over the country, there were geopolitical dynamics taking place as a result of the Syrian de facto civil war. At the start of October 2012, mortar fire from Syria killed five civilians in a Turkish town of Akcakale on the border of Syria. Among the dead were two women and three children.

At the international level, NATO -- of which Turkey is a member state -- held an emergency meeting. As well , the United Nations condemned Syria for the deadly shelling of the Turkish village "in the strongest terms." The United Nations Security Council demanded that the Syrian government "fully respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of its neighbors" and noted that the killing of the five Turkish citizens "highlighted the grave impact the crisis in Syria has on the security of its neighbors and on regional peace and stability."

Syria's envoy, to the United Nations Bashar Jaafari, said his country offered condolences to Turkey over their deaths; however, he noted that Syria was not offering an apology since an investigation into the incident was ongoing. Accordingly, Turkey wasted little time in taking retaliatory action and fired at targets inside Syrian territory. The office of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan released the following statement: “This atrocious attack was immediately responded to adequately by our armed forces in the border region, in accordance with rules of engagement. Targets were shelled in locations identified by radar. Turkey, in accordance with the rules of engagement and international law, will never leave such provocations by the Syrian regime against our national security unrequited.” Syrian authorities said that two army officials were injured as a result of shelling by Turkey.

The Turkish parliament moved to authorize military action against Syria in response to the deaths of the Turkish civilians by mortar fire. The legislation authorized the Turkish military to launch cross-border operations against Syria and strike against Syrian targets for a period of up to one year. For his part, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan insisted that the authorization was for deterrence purposes and that his country had no desire to enter into a war with Syria. Still, the Turkish head of government warned Syria not to test his country's intent with further provocation. To this end, he said: "The Turkish Republic is a state capable of defending its citizens and borders. Nobody should try and test our determination on this subject." The Turkish head of government also challenged Syria's claim that the mortar attack on Akcakale was an isolated event and an accident. He pointed to various other cases of Syrian shells falling in Turkish territory saying, "One time is an accident... but how is this an accident when it happens eight times?" As if to underscore his point, on Oct. 5, 2012, a new round of Syria mortar fire landed on Turkish soil prompting the Turkish military returned fire across the border. Then, on Oct. 7, 2012, mortar fire from Syria again landed in the border town of Akcakale where five people had already died.

Syria Review 2016 Page 88 of 540 pages Syria

There were no casualties as the area had been evacuated of civilians. As before, Turkish artillery has returned fire on Syria. In fact, Turkey was now firing daily into Syria in response to a constant volley of stray mortar fire into its territory.

A week later on Oct.10, 2012, Turkish fighter jets forced a Syrian aircraft, which was suspected of carrying weapons, to land in the Turkish capital city of Ankara. The two Turkish jets escorted the aircraft, which was traveling from the Russian capital of Moscow to the Syrian capital of Damascus, to the Esenboga airport for security inspection. It should be noted that the Syrian Air A320 Airbus was carrying around 30 passengers -- significantly less than its 180 passenger capacity -- as well as crew. Turkey said that its decision to force the aircraft to land was motivated by an intelligence tip about the questionable nature of cargo aboard the plane and its commitment to preventing the passage of weapons through its airspace into Syria. Although the Syrian Air A320 Airbus was subsequently permitted to depart, Turkey delivered the message that the intercepted plane was carrying Russian-made defense equipment, clearly intended for delivery to Syria.

For its part, Russia has denied any involvement in the the alleged transportation of illegal cargo and criticized Turkey for placing the passengers and crew at risk by forcing the Syrian Air flight to land. Further, Russia's arms export agency, Rosoboronexport, entered the fray saying that it had no information about the aircraft's cargo. On Oct. 12, 2012, the Russian Foreign Ministry said the plane was transporting a legal shipment of radar equipment. Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said, "There were no weapons on the plane." Meanwhile, Syrian Transport Minister Mahmoud Saeed, speaking on behalf of his government, condemned Turkey for carrying out "air piracy." Moreover, Syria's foreign ministry accused the Turkish prime minister of lying "to justify his government's hostile attitude towards Syria." Via state media, the Syrian foreign ministry issued the following statement: "The plane's cargo was documented in detail on the bill of lading and the plane did not carry any illegal material or any weapons."

On Oct. 13, 2012, the United Nations-Arab League envoy for Syria, Lakhdar Brahimi, was scheduled to convene talks in Turkey, regarding the escalating crisis between Ankara and Damascus. Brahimi was to expected to be in meetings with Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu to seek that country's perspective on the situation, with an eye on moderating tensions. There were some suggestions that the United Nations would ask Brahimi to convene talks in Syria if there was progress made during the meetings in Turkey. However, there were no breakthroughs reported at that meeting. Meanwhile, on the same day, Syria announced that it was prohibiting Turkish civilian planes from flying over Syria. Authorities in Damascus said the ban was being instituted in response to similar measures by Turkey.

The Scene in Late 2012

Meanwhile, in the first part of October 2012, even as the imbroglio between Turkey and Syria went on, there were unconfirmed reports that the rebels had captured a government outpost near the Turkish border province of Hatay. On Oct. 12, 2012, reports were emerging that rebel fighters

Syria Review 2016 Page 89 of 540 pages Syria took control of a government air defense base located close to Aleppo. On Oct. 13, 2012, Syrian rebels said they had shot down a Syrian fighter jet just outside Aleppo. Videotaped footage of the wreckage of a burning jet surfaced, although there was no independent confirmation that the claim made by the rebels was true. Meanwhile, Human Rights Watch accused the Assad government of dropping a number of cluster bombs into populated areas. By the last week of October, 2012, a bomb had exploded in Damascus, killing six people and injuring 20 others. As well, war planes were reported to be flying over the Syrian capital, participating in aerial attacks on certain areas of Damascus.

Nevertheless, by the last week of October 2012, there were high hopes that an agreement could be forged to implement a ceasefire between the Syrian government and the rebels during the Eid al- Adha holiday. The United Nations peace envoy, Lakhdar Brahimi, indicated that Syria's government and most opposition groups had agreed to the arrangement. Speaking from the Egyptian capital of Cairo, he said: "There is agreement from the Syrian government for a ceasefire during the Eid. Other factions in Syria that we were able to contact - heads of fighting groups - most of them also agree on the principle of the ceasefire." Brahimi also said that he hoped that the cessation of violence would provide the impetus to "discuss a longer and more effective ceasefire." Of course, it should be noted that no sooner than the news broke about the truce, Syria's foreign ministry said that there was no final decision on the matter. Meanwhile, not all rebel entities were promising to observe the ceasefire, with the jihadist al-Nusra Front declaring that it would not be manipulated into playing "filthy games."

Note that by Oct. 26, 2012, the ceasefire was in effect, despite the aforementioned statements by detractors. Perhaps, as expected, it was not long before the truce was violated as Damascus was struck by a car-bomb attack. Five people were killed and more than 30 were wounded, according to Syrian authorities. Elsewhere across the country, there was additional evidence that the ceasefire was being violated. As noted by the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, close to 50 people had been killed throughout Syria on Oct. 26, 2012, alone, and 120 people died the day before. By Oct. 29, 2012, all evidence of a truce was gone as two car bombs exploded in Damascus, killing at least 10 people, including women and children. As well, government jets was said to be carrying air raids on the Harasta district, according to anti-government activists.

At the start of November 2012, a truce marking the Islamic Eid holiday was no longer a consideration as rebels in Syria carried out an offensive on the strategically located Taftanaz base in the northern part of the country. Government forces were said to be repelling the attack on Taftanaz, which was a vital venue for government supply lines into northern Syria.

Complicating the situation was the declaration from the International Committee of the Red Cross that the violence in Syria was so bad that it "could not cope" with the situation, the increasing number victims, and a logistical inability to reach those victims or delivery aid, given the dynamic nature of the conflict. The Red Cross was particularly concerned about victims in Aleppo, which

Syria Review 2016 Page 90 of 540 pages Syria had been terribly struck by violence between the two sides in recent times.

Also at the start of November 2012, attention was focused on the recalibration of the Syrian opposition. Specifically, opposition groups were set to convene a meeting in Qatar, with an eye on replacing the Syrian National Council (SNC), the main opposition body in exile and creating a unitary and credible opposition entity that bridged the external and internal opposition divide. One key participant at the talks would be a well-known dissident, Riad Seif, whom Western countries favored as a possible head of a new government-in-exile. That new government-in-exile or leadership body was experimentally being referred to as the Syrian National Initiative. The United States, in particular, was hoping for the establishment of a new -- or at least, a re-calibrated -- opposition body, given its expressed concerns that the rebel movement in Syria was being infiltrated by Islamic extremist elements.

That meeting in Qatar, which was organized under the auspices of the Arab League, ended with an initial agreement to form a coalition. The new "Syrian National Coalition for Opposition and Revolutionary Forces" was to be composed of opposition groups outside Syria, as well as activists and rebel commanders from inside the country. Attendees at the meeting elected Maath al-Khatib, a moderate Islamic preacher with a dissident history, as the coalition president, while the aforementioned Riad Seif, along with Suheir Atassi (another prominent dissident), were selected to be the vice presidents. Pending international approval, the coalition would form an interim government in exile, set an agenda for a national conference, an move towards negotiations with the Assad regime. The Syrian government dismissed these moves as "political folly."

Meanwhile, President Assad also said in an interview with Russian media that he had no intention of escaping into exile. On the Russia Today television channel, in an apparent response to a suggestion by British Prime Minister David Cameron that Assad might depart Syria, the Syrian leader said, "I am not a puppet, I wasn't made by the West. I'm Syrian... and I have to live and die in Syria."

Note that in mid-November 2012, Syrian rebels claimed to have captured the Hamdan airport in Deir al-Zour province close to the border with Iraq. Since the government of Syria had used the airport for military purposes, its capture could well be regarded as a strategic victory for the rebels. By Nov. 25, 2012, rebels claimed to have captured a military airbase at Marj al-Sultan, close to Damascus, although it was not clear if they were able to hold onto control of the facility. Days before, rebels took control of an air defense battalion base at Hajar al-Aswad, to the south of Damascus, but were not able to hold sway there on a sustainable basis. However, rebels have had more success in holding onto conquered interests in the Euphrates Valley. The trend indicated that rebels were making an impact in their efforts in certain parts of the country, but government forces remained dominant around Damascus.

On Nov. 26, 2012, videotaped footage was released on the Internet showing the bodies of children,

Syria Review 2016 Page 91 of 540 pages Syria allegedly killed after a Syrian MiG fighter plane dropped cluster bombs on a playground in the village of Deir al-Asafir, to the east of Damascus. While ferocious fighting between government forces and rebels has continued, the dropping of cluster bombs would raise the level of crisis in Syria to a new level. It should be noted that the International Red Cross (ICRC) was not immediately able to confirm the attack, although the group Human Rights Watch has reported an increase in evidence, such as online videotaped footage, suggesting the use of cluster bombs in the Syrian conflict. In this particular case, if the use of a cluster bomb on a playground was eventually confirmed, the attack would be violation of the Geneva Convention, which prohibits attacks on non-military targets. For its part, the government of Syria has dismissed accusations of this sort, saying that it did not even possess such weapons.

On Nov. 28, 2012, twin bomb blasts shook the southeastern suburbs of Damascus, leaving more than 40 people dead and many more injured. The attacks in Jaramana -- inhabited mainly by Druze and Christians, as well as Iraqi and Palestinian refugees -- appeared to have been caused by car bombs. It should be noted that the residents of Jaramana have not been particularly opposed to the secular Assad regime, which many minority communities view as less dangerous to their own personal interests as the possibility of an Islamist regime supported by the rebels.

Around the same period of late November 2012, fierce fighting between government forces and rebels was ongoing in various parts of the country. Rebel forces seemed to be enjoying some battle success with reports emerging about a helicopter being brought down by rebel forces. As well, videotaped footage showed a government warplane being shot down by rebels in the northern province of Aleppo. These reports might indicate that the rebels' weapons capacity and battle abilities were improving in the fight against the government. That being said, Syrian fighter jets were nonetheless bombarding rebel positions in western Damascus. In addition, Syrian forces were shelling the mountain town of Zabadani to the north of the capital, as well as targets in Idlib province. Furthermore, the rebels were actually losing ground in eastern Syria and areas close to Aleppo.

On Nov. 29, 2012, as the government launched a major offensive into eastern Damascus, phone and Internet connections went down across the country. It was unclear if the Syrian authorities cut off telecommunications access -- as it has in the past -- due to its military operations. In fact, the government was blaming "terrorists" for the outage. Meanwhile there was fierce fighting at the Damascus airport, which seemed to have been spurred by a rebel offensive on that target.

By the start of December 2012, Internet access resumed in Damascus, although there was no confirmation if online access was available in other parts of the country. As well, the airport was re-opened although there were no flights actually landing or departing Damascus. Meanwhile, rebel-held areas of the capital were undergoing massive aerial bombardment by government forces. Around the same period of early December 2012, the joint United Nations-Arab League envoy for Syria, Lakhdar Brahimi, warned that Syria was turning into a failed state and only a negotiated political solution supported by the United Nations Security Council could re-establish

Syria Review 2016 Page 92 of 540 pages Syria peace in Syria.

Also in the first week of December 2012, Syrian forces were moving forward with a counter- offensive against rebel fighters near Damascus. But opposition forces were at that time showing strength at the area of the Damascus International Airport, as well as the strategically important Wadi al-Deif military base close to Maarat al-Numaan. But as noted above, although the rebels were enjoying some military success, they were also enduring setbacks in other areas of the country. Nevertheless, as reported by the Washington Post, the rebels were seeing some degree of battle success. This success was partially due to the deteriorating supplies and low morale within the Syrian army, but also attributable to better funding and weaponry from donor nations in the region. The Syrian regime was itself dealing with internal fissures, as exemplified by the defection of the former Syrian Foreign Ministry spokesman Jihad Makdissi to the United States.

Meanwhile, global powers, such as the United States, were raising the alarm about the Assad regime possibly using chemical weapons against the opposition forces. At issue were reports that the Syrian military loaded active deadly sarin gas into aerial bombs on jets and was awaiting a final order from Assad to use the chemical weapons.

On Dec. 4, 2012, White House spokesman Jay Carney suggested that a desperate Assad might resort to such measures, saying: "As the regime has lost all legitimacy to lead Syria, and the opposition grows in strength, our concern about the regime's intentions regarding its chemical weapons stockpiles has increased." Carney warned that the United States and the international community would hold the Syrian government accountable if it used chemical weapons against its own people. That threat from the White House was augmented by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's following statement: "Our concerns are that an increasingly desperate Assad regime might turn to chemical weapons, or might lose control of them to one of the many groups that are now operating within Syria. We have sent an unmistakable message that this would cross a red line and those responsible would be held to account."

In Europe, NATO also expressed "grave concern" about the emerging intimations that Syria might be poised to use chemical weapons. NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen warned that such a path would result in an "immediate" international response. He said: "The possible use of chemical weapons would be completely unacceptable for the whole international community and if anybody resorts to these terrible weapons I would expect an immediate reaction from the international community."

Meanwhile on the ground in Syria, the news outfit al-Arabiya said that there were messages from Syrian opposition groups advising people on how to protect themselves from a chemical weapons attack. The advisory read as follows: "Nerve gases are heavier than air, therefore, it is recommended to ascend to the highest floor of a building. However, in case the chemicals were outside the building, all windows and doors should be shut immediately."

Syria Review 2016 Page 93 of 540 pages Syria

While the Assad regime in Syria had earlier said it would not use chemical weapons against its own people, there were now growing anxieties that an embattled and desperate Assad who declared he would "die in Syria" might eventually decide he had nothing left to lose.

Another alternative exit strategy available to Assad would be exile or political asylum. To that end, the Israeli newspaper, Haaretz, reported Assad could seek asylum for himself and his family in some part of Latin America. Assad had already dismissed offers of asylum in Russia or other Arab countries.

On Dec. 11, 2012 -- almost two years after the start of this violent struggle in Syria -- the United States gave a political boost to the Syrian opposition. United States President Barack Obama said during an interview with ABC News that the United States would formally recognize the Syrian opposition coalition groups as that country’s legitimate representative. The announcement intimated a post-Assad Syria, by symbolically blessing the now-coalesced Syrian opposition. Analysts were meanwhile suggesting that the rebels were gaining strength. Russia -- one of Syria's closer allies to date -- fueled that view when it acknowledged that Assad was losing control of his country and the rebels might potentially win the civil war.

But the Assad regime was not about to go quietly into the history books. On Dec. 12, 2012, news media outlets reported that the Syrian government forces had fired Scud missiles at rebel fighters. The missiles appeared to have been fired from the Damascus area at targets in northern Syria, specifically into stronghold areas of the main armed rebel group, the Free Syrian Army. A report in the New York Times noted that the Assad regime may have been making the calculation that it could deploy Scud missiles with some degree of impunity since the United States was already on the record drawing a "red line" at the use of chemical weapons.

As the year 2012 drew to a close, the Syrian civil war between the Assad regime and the rebel movement was ongoing with no end in sight and with both sides flexing their respective muscles. On one end of the spectrum, Syrian rebels destroyed one of the country's major natural gas pipelines, to the north of Dair Alzour. As well, the rebels were taking control of oil fields and attacking other strategic interests, presumably with an eye on hurting the Syrian government financially. On the other end of the crisis, pro-Assad Syrian forces were battling the rebels in Aleppo, as the Syrian army worked to take control of the area around the airport. Meanwhile, Syrian forces were launching air strikes on on several suburbs of Damascus, shelling was taking place in the the Old City district of Homs in central Syria, and fighting was ongoing in the northwestern province of Idlib.

The Scene at the start of 2013

At the start of January 2013, United Nations special envoy Lakhdar Brahimi said he would continue to try to find an end to the conflict, although a previous peace plan collapsed in the spring

Syria Review 2016 Page 94 of 540 pages Syria of 2012 and despite his own admission that the crisis in Syria was "getting worse by the day." Still, Brahimi was expected to meet with representatives from Russia and the United States in January 2013, with the goal of forging a peace deal.

That goal seemed particularly elusive on Jan. 6, 2013, when Syrian President Bashar Assad delivered his first public speech in months and cast the conflict in his country as a holy war of sorts. In an address broadcast on state television, Assad said: "This is a conflict of those who wanted to take revenge against the people, to fragment Syria, Those are the enemies of the people and the enemies of God. And the enemies of God will go to hell." He urged his fellow Syrian citizens to join the fight, saying, "We are in a state of real war, in every aspect of the words. And when we're in a state of war, all of our politics has to be concentrated on winning this war." Seeking to redefine the terms of the conflict, Assad asserted that the war was not between the government and opposition, but between national patriots and enemies of the state. To that end, he declared: "Many have fallen on the trap that the conflict is between the government and the opposition. ... The conflict, ladies and gentlemen, is between the homeland and its enemies -- between the people and the killers and the criminals."

Assad also defiantly dismissed the idea of peace talks with rebels, asking the question: "Who should we negotiate with -- terrorists?" He additionally cast aside the notion of negotiations with international power brokers, referring to that group as "puppets made by the West." From Assad's point of view, the only grounds for discussion would have to begin with a cessation of funding for the opposition. At that point, Assad said that some military operations would end although he reserved the right to defend national interests militarily. He was willing to entertain the notion of a conference of national dialogue between "Syrian individuals and political parties." That conference would start the process of forming a national charter and establishing a new government.

According to media reports, Assad's speech was met by cheering crowds in the streets, with supporters chanting "God, Bashar and Syria is enough." The main opposition umbrella group, the Syrian National Coalition (SNC), which has been recognized by the United States and the European Union, made it clear that the group would accept nothing other than the exit of the Assad regime from government. Other elements of the opposition decried Assad's address as an exercise in arrogance, and rejected his call for a conference, accusing him of being out of touch with the civil war rocking the country. The United States Department of State echoed this tone, noting that Assad's proposal was "detached from reality" and "another attempt by the regime to cling to power." The European Union gave no credibility to Assad's proposal and instead reiterated its position that the Syrian president must "step aside and allow for a political transition."

Envoy Brahimi's goal of peace became more difficult on Jan. 10, 2013, when Syria denounced him as being "flagrantly biased." The characterization from the Syrian Foreign Ministry was made in response to remarks by Brahimi about a future role for President Assad on the Syrian political scene. At issue was Brahimi's stance foreclosing Assad's presence in a transitional

Syria Review 2016 Page 95 of 540 pages Syria government and calling for an end to the Assad regime. In an interview with BBC News, Brahimi said: "In Syria...what people are saying is that a family ruling for 40 years is a little bit too long. President Assad could take the lead in responding to the aspiration of his people rather than resisting it."

But Assad continued to enjoy the support of Russia. Various international media sources including the Saudi Al-Watan newspaper were reporting that Assad and his family were now living on a warship in the Mediterranean Sea, with security provided by Russia. Assad apparently was traveling by helicopter and landing at undisclosed locations on the Syrian mainland. Although there was no official acknowledgment about this arrangement, Assad's new base on a Russian-protected warship indicated that the Syrian had lost faith in local security resources to protect him. But it also suggested that he retained the backing of Russia, which was providing de facto safe haven for Assad. Russia's support was further outlined by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov's comment on Jan. 13, 2013, that Assad's removal from office was "impossible to implement."

Note that on Jan. 18, 2013, twin suicide car bombs exploded in Daara, killing many civilians -- some of whom were worshipers departing from a mosque after weekly prayers. Accusation rested on the al-Qaida-affiliated entity known as Nusra Front. These attacks followed a rocket attack, presumably carried out by rebels, in the city of Aleppo. But the government was not relaxing its efforts against the rebels, as it intensified its assault in Damascus as January 2013 came to a close, using warplanes and artillery to bombard rebel targets.

Meanwhile, there were meetings scheduled to take place in the French capital of Paris between the main opposition group in exile and civilian opposition leaders. It was yet to be seen if those talks would yield results. Certainly, as January 2013 came to a close, the international effort to halt the bloodshed and conflict in Syria appeared to have stalled.

This lack of action by international power brokers raised the ire of Syrian rebel leaders who pointed an international coalition intervening into Mali to deal with al-Qaida affiliated terrorists in Mali. United States President Barack Obama offered a response to their outrage during an interview with the New Republic. He said: "In a situation like Syria, I have to ask, can we make a difference in that situation? Would a military intervention have an impact? How would it affect our ability to support troops who are still in Afghanistan? What would be the aftermath of our involvement on the ground? Could it trigger even worse violence or the use of chemical weapons? What offers the best prospect of a stable post-Assad regime? And how do I weigh tens of thousands who've been killed in Syria versus the tens of thousands who are currently being killed in the Congo? Those are not simple questions."

An international intervention into Syria occurred at the close of January 2013, albeit not of the kind sought by either the Syrian regime or even the rebels. At issue was an apparent air strike by the Israeli military on a weapons convoy and research center in Jamraya, to the northwest of

Syria Review 2016 Page 96 of 540 pages Syria

Damascus. According to the news service, Haaretz, the research center was used for the manufacture of unconventional weapons. Other news reports indicated that the weapons convoy was carrying Russian-made missiles to Hezbollah in Lebanon. Meanwhile, unspecified United States sources were connecting these two threads to note that the convoy hit in the strike was carrying SA-17 surface-to-air missiles to Lebanon from a military complex, which was suspected of housing chemical weapons.

Israel had long accused both Syrian President Bashar Assad and Iran of arming the Lebanon- based extremist militant enclave, Hezbollah, which fought a war against Israel in 2006. Since the start of the Syrian conflict in 2011, Israel has further warned that Syria's store of chemical weapons could well end up in the possession of Hezbollah militant extremists. To that end, Israel has also made it clear that it would do whatever was necessary to prevent such an occurrence, emphasizing that it would not allow Hezbollah to strengthen its efforts to launch attacks on Israeli territory. While Israel was not officially acknowledging that it was behind the air strike on Syria, it was certainly offering an indirect claim of responsibility. At a security conference in Germany on Feb. 3, 2013, Israeli Defense Secretary Ehud Barak pugnaciously declared that the air strike was "proof that when we say something we mean it." By way of explanation for his country's actions, he said: "We don't think [Syria] should be allowed to bring advanced weapons systems into Lebanon."

For his part, Syrian President Bashar Assad responded with outrage and accused Israel of trying to destabilize Syria. As reported in Syria's state news agency, SANA, Assad made the assertion during a meeting with Iranian officials, who were reportedly in the country to offer support to the Assad regime. Undoubtedly, Iranian support for the Assad regime only served to underline Israel's justification for carrying out the air strike in the interests of its own national security. The alleged transport of weapons to Hezbollah in Lebanon was being viewed by the Israeli government as reason enough for it to take action, as noted above. Yet to be seen was whether or not Syria would retaliate, or, if other Middle Eastern powers would enter the fray. Already, an Iranian army general, Brigadier General Masoud Jazayeri was suggesting that an anti-Israeli resistance movement was also considering "retaliatory measures" against Israel.

UN investigators say time has come for Syria to face International Criminal Court

On Feb. 18, 2013, investigators from the United Nations said the time had come for Syrian leaders to face the International Criminal Court (ICC). The investigators said they had identified a cadre of Syrian leaders as suspected war criminal and called on the United Nations Security Council to "act urgently to ensure accountability" for violations, including murder and torture. They noted that atrocities had been committed by both sides in the unrest and ensuing civil war that left more than 60,000 people dead since 2011. As stated in a report on the Syrian crisis: "Government forces and affiliated militias have committed extra-judicial executions, breaching international human rights law. This conduct also constitutes the war crime of murder. Where

Syria Review 2016 Page 97 of 540 pages Syria murder was committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack against a civilian population, with knowledge of that attack, it is a crime against humanity."

At a media briefing in the Swiss city of Geneva, Carla del Ponte -- a former ICC chief prosecutor who was now on the United Nations investigations team -- said: "Now really it's time ... We have a permanent court, the International Criminal Court, who would be ready to take this case." In tacit reference to the fact that the United Nations Security Council would have to refer the Syrian case to the ICC, she continued: "We cannot decide. But we pressure the international community to decide because it's time to act." Del Ponte stopped short of identifying the particular individuals suspected to be war criminals, although she noted, "Of course we were able to identify high-level perpetrators... these were people in command responsibility...deciding, organizing, planning and aiding and abetting the commission of crimes." She continued, "We have crimes committed against children, rape and sexual violence. We have grave concerns. That is also one reason why an international body of justice must act because it is terrible."

That action was not likely to come easily since Russia, a veto-wielding member of the United Nations Security Council, has refused to relax its support of the Assad regime in Syria, irrespective of the mounting record of human rights violations and abuses. It was not known if the report's apparent inclusion of allegations against both the Assad regime and the insurgent bloc would influence a shift in perspective. Paulo Pinheiro, the expert head of the teams investigating the crisis in Syria, with an eye on establishing criminal responsibility and building the case for future prosecution, offered his view of the problem on the Security Council. He said: "We are in very close dialogue with all the five permanent members and with all the members of the Security Council, but we don't have the key that will open the path to cooperation inside the Security Council."

Plans were afoot to convene international talks of the "Friends of Syria" group in the Italian capital of Rome, which would seek to end the Syrian conflict. Those plans were in jeopardy of never realizing any meaningful results when the opposition Syrian National Coalition withdrew from the venture in the last week of February 2013. The opposition Syrian National Coalition sai there was no point to the talks if Russia continued to supply weapons to the Syrian regime. In a statement, the opposition Syrian National Coalition said, "The international silence on the crimes committed every day against our people amounts to participating in two years of killings. The Russian leadership especially bears moral and political responsibility for supplying the regime with weapons." Of particular concern for the opposition was the fact that Russia was supplying the Assad regime with Scud missiles, which were being used to launch brutal attacks on Aleppo, and kill civilians.

But following a pledge of foreign aid, the Syrian opposition reversed its position and said representatives would attend the international summit after all. The opposition appeared to have been assuaged after a meeting with British Foreign Minister William Hague and United States

Syria Review 2016 Page 98 of 540 pages Syria

Secretary of State John Kerry. There, apparent promises from the governments of those two countries were made to offer more support to the Syria opposition.

Violence was also continuing in Damascus where a massive explosion was reported on Feb. 25, 2013. The final days of February 2013 were marked by continuing unrest in Syria. In first days of March 2013, the opposition rebels made strategic gains in the northern city of Raqqa, located on the Euphrates River close to the Turkish border. The city was a makeshift refuge for Syrians trying to escape the crossfire of violence in the country. Accordingly, both long-term residents and refugees were highly concerned about the presence of opposition rebels in the city, fearing that government forces might now target it for attack. That unfortunate outcome occurred as Syrian warplanes soon pounded Raqqa in an act of clear retaliation for the rebels' success there. As well, the battle for control over Aleppo's international airport as well as the military bases in the north continued well into start of March 2013.

Around the same period of early March 2013, President Assad was signaling that he had no reason or intention to leave the country, despite the fact that many international powers were looking towards a post-Assad Syria. The latest addition to this chorus was the newly appointed United States Secretary of State John Kerry, who said he was drafting diplomatic proposals to persuade Assad to relinquish power. To that end, Kerry was on a trip through the Middle East region to meet with leaders and forge a course intended to "ease Assad out." Assad appeared to foreclose the idea that such an end could be accomplished, and case Kerry's task as an exercise in futility. Assad said of Kerry's effort, "Any Syrian subject wouldn't be raised with any foreigners. We only discuss it with Syrians within Syria so I am not going to discuss it with anyone who is coming from abroad." Assad continued, "We have friends, we listen to their advice but at the end, it's our decision as Syrians to make what's good for our country."

Meanwhile, in an interview with the United Kingdom-based newspaper, the Sunday Times, Assad said, "No patriotic person will think about living outside his country. I am like any other patriotic Syrian." Assad additionally emphasized his view that his departure from Syria would not end the conflict rocking the country. He dismissed as "nonsense" the notion that the Syrian civil war conflict centered on his presence or absence as president. He declared, "Clearly this is absurd, and recent precedents in Libya, Yemen and Egypt bear witness to this." Still, by mid-March 2013, a top intelligence official in the United States suggested that Assad's grip on power was tenuous, irrespective of his bluster. In testimony before a Senate Intelligence Committee, James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, characterized Assad as "increasingly beleaguered."

Note that in mid-March 2013, rebels had captured a military intelligence compound in the southern Hauran Plain of Syria close to the Golan Heights. The development marked a strategic gain for the rebels against pro-Assad government forces in Syria.

On March 20, 2013, the international community responded with skepticism to competing claims

Syria Review 2016 Page 99 of 540 pages Syria by the Syrian government and Syrian opposition of chemical attacks. The Syrian government, via their state news agency, accused "terrorists" of firing a rocket containing chemical weapons in the Khan al-Assal area of Aleppo province, killing 16 people. While Russia expressed support for the Syrian government's claim, photographs of the victims indicated no signs of exposure to chemical weapons. The Syrian opposition soon issued its own accusation, saying that the Syrian government of carrying out the attack, and saying that 19 people had suffocated to death.

In late March 2013, the Arab League called on the Syrian opposition coalition to represent Syria in the bloc (Syria's membership had been suspended in late 2011 due to the brutal crackdown by the Assad regime on anti-government protesters). The Syrian opposition responded to the invitation by the Arab League by taking the Syrian seat irrespective of ongoing disarray in political ranks. To that latter end, the plan to solidify political power around the Syrian opposition was plagued by obstacles when the new leader of the Syrian National Coalition resigned from that role. Moaz al- Khatib expressed frustration over his calls to the international community for help in ending Syria's civil war, but only days later, there were suggestions that Khatib might rescind his resignation. As well, leading figures from the opposition wing were urging the opposition coalition to widen its popular appeal by including more women, minorities (such as Alawites), and not concentrate solely on support from persons in exile.

It should be noted that the opposition ranks in Syria were not unified and were being regarded quite differently from various segments of the international community. Syrian rebels aligned with the Jihadist al-Nusra Front were gaining strength in the southern part of Syria. There were suggestions that they were being bolstered by foreign Islamist fighters from Iraq and intended to advance a major push into Damascus. They were already making progress in the northern part of the country, thanks to assistance from Saudi Arabia and Qatar via Turkey. But the secular cadre of Syrian rebels, known as the Free Syrian Army was also making its own gains, thanks to assistance from Western countries via Syria's southern neighbor, Jordan. The existence of two rebel or opposition entities with different ideological agendas -- one Islamist in nature and the other democratic and secular in orientation -- promised a collision course of sorts in Syria in the post- Assad future.

Complicating matters was the declaration on April 10, 2013 from the leadership of the al-Nusra Front that the Jihadist opposition militia was officially aligned with the terror enclave, al Qaida. Abu Mohammed al-Jawlani, the leader of al-Nusra, said that his group pledged allegiance to the

Syria Review 2016 Page 100 of 540 pages Syria leader of al-Qaida, Ayman al-Zawahiri. The development would likely augment the United States' designation of al-Nusra as a terror organization, as well as bolstering the Obama administration's reluctance to enter the conflict in Syria. For some time, despite calls from hardline factions in the United States that the global power become more involved in helping the rebels in Syria to topple the Assad regime, the Obama administration has taken a more circumscribed role. Indeed, the Obama administration has long argued that elements of the Syrian opposition -- such as al-Nusra Front -- are Jihadist terrorists. Perhaps with an eye on ridding itself from this negative image, al- Nusra's leader, Jawlani, said that his group would not deter from its path of "good behavior," indicating a desire to win favor of other rebel factions as well as Syrian populace at large. That effort was not gaining extensive traction as a spokesperson for the Free Syrian Army, Louay Meqdad, said in an interview with Agence France Presse: "We don't support the ideology of al- Nusra." The Syrian National Coalition also entered the equation and said the alliance between al- Nusra and al-Qaida was worrisome.

That being said, United States Secretary of State John Kerry announced that his country would be doubling its aid to the Syria's rebels -- but not of the lethal military equipment variety. While Secretary of State Kerry noted that the scene in Syria was "horrific," it was apparent that the United States was not about to change its tentative stance a regards the Syrian rebels. Clearly, the United States remained concerned that weapons could fall into the hands of al-Qaida allied Islamic extremists. Indeed, as discussed just above, the Jihadist rebel enclave, known as the al-Nusra Front, officially aligned itself with the terror enclave, al Qaida. In terms of sheer effectiveness, the al-Nusra Front was gaining strength in the southern part of Syria. But that strength was believed to have been augmented by foreign Jihadist fighters from other countries. Given the complexity of the geopolitical landscape, there was little suggestion that the United States would be interested in moving in the direction of military support for the Syrian opposition.

Syria two years after the start of the conflict --

Meanwhile, more than two years after the start of the opposition uprising in Syria against the Assad regime, violence has continued to plague Syria. It should be noted that the British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said that March 2013 was the bloodiest month for violence in Syria with as many as 6,000 people dying over the 31-day period; most of the victims were civilians. Indeed, the spring of 2013 has been marked by mortar fire, car bombings, and other attacks rocking Damascus and resulting in further deaths and injuries to the already disturbing casualty toll.

The founder of the Syrian rebel army suffered serious injury when his leg was blown off by a car bomb. Colonel Riad al-Asaad lost his leg in what appeared to be an apparent assassination attempt but was expected to survive the attack. Around the same period in the last week of March 2013, rumors were surfacing that Assad had been injured -- or even dead -- as a result of an assassination attempt by a bodyguards; however, that rumor was quickly dispelled by various sources who said that the Syrian leader was alive and well and would soon give a national address.

Syria Review 2016 Page 101 of 540 pages Syria

On April 8, 2013, a car bomb in Damascus left at least 15 people dead and scores more wounded. The explosion, which appeared to have been caused by a suicide attack, occurred in a busy part of the Syrian capital, close to Syria's central bank, the bustling financial district, and a number of mosques and schools.

By mid-April 2013, the violence was ongoing. Air strikes by government forces in the north eastern part of the country targeted rebel-held areas in Hasaka province around the Kurdish village of Haddad, leaving around 20 people dead including women and children. A separate air strike by government on the town of Saraqeb in the north western province of Idlib left another 20 people dead. In Aleppo, a car bombing injured three journalists working for Syrian state media.

On April 15, 2013 Syrian government troops saw military success as they breached a rebel blockade in Idlib province. The strategic development meant that government troops -- for some time trapped at two military bases near Maarat al-Nauman -- could now potentially recapture the main road into Aleppo. The situation was poised to be a test for the rebels who would have to push back the government troops in order to avoid reverse this strategic loss. But if the government troops prevailed, the fight for Aleppo could turn to their favor very quickly.

On April 21, 2013, following five days of fierce fighting, Syrian government troops stormed and took control of the town of Jdiadet al-Fadl located close to Damascus. Opposition activists said that at least 80 people were killed, including women and children, in the offensive operation by the Syrian military. The British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) released videotaped footage of the violence and claimed that some of the victims had been summarily executed. The state news agency of Syria, SANA, seemed to confirm the situation, by noting that the military had "inflicted heavy losses upon terrorists" in Jdiadet al-Fadl.

On April 29, 2013, the inner cadre of the Assad regime was struck by violence when a car bomb exploded in the capital of Damascus. Syrian state television said that Prime Minister Wael al- Halqi's convoy was targeted in the attack. Although Prime Minister Wael al-Halqi survived the attack, several other people including one bodyguard to the prime minister, died in the blast. This was another strike on the inner circle of President Bashar al-Assad. In late 2012, a suicide bombing hit the Ministry of the Interior, severely injuring the interior minister at the time. In this case in April 2013, Halqi was clearly the target; Halqi has served as the head of government since 2012 when the previous prime minister, Riad Hijab, defected to Jordan. Suspicion rested on the aforementioned Islamist extremist al-Nusra Front as the likely culprits in these attacks, as they have been willing to use terrorism and assassination in their efforts against the Assad regime. The use of such tactics b opposition elements no doubt strengthened the Assad regime's claim that the opposition was infiltrated by terrorists.

Note that as of May 2, 2013, pro-Assad government forces were said to be carrying out offensive operations in key areas including the coastal village of Baida, where at least 70 people, including

Syria Review 2016 Page 102 of 540 pages Syria women and children, were killed according to human rights advocacy groups in Syria. As well, pro-Assad forces continued to fight to hold the capital of Damascus, while launching an attack on the flashpoint city of Homs in the center of the country, which has been regarded as the "birthplace" of the insurgency. Indeed, the spring of 2013 has been marked by significant gains for the pro-Assad government forces in Syria in an apparent concentrated effort against the rebel movement.

On May 3, 2013, around 80 people were killed in Baniyas as a result of clashes between Syrian forces and what Syrian media called "terrorist groups." With the brutal violence plaguing Baniyas, residents were said to be fleeing the area and moving southward towards the city of Tartus, only to be blocked by the pro-government militias.

Has Syria crossed the so-called "red line" by using chemical weapons?

Complicating matters further have been emerging claims about the use of chemical weapons in the conflict in Syria. In the month of March 2013, there were competing claims by the Syrian government and Syrian opposition of chemical attacks. The Syrian government, via its state news agency, accused "terrorists" of firing a rocket containing chemical weapons in the Khan al-Assal area of Aleppo province, killing 16 people. While Russia expressed support for the Syrian government's claim, photographs of the victims indicated no sign of exposure to chemical weapons. The Syrian opposition soon issued its own accusation, charging that the Syrian government had carried out the attack, and that 19 people had suffocated to death.

Both the Assad regime and opposition leaders demanded investigations into their claims while United States officials expressed skepticism. Still, both the United States and the United Nations warned that if, indeed, chemical weapons had been used -- under any circumstances -- consequences would be in the offing. Speaking from Israel where he was on an official state visit, United States President Barack Obama said, "We have been clear that the use of chemical weapons against the Syrian people would be a serious and tragic mistake." President Obama has steadfastly said that the use of chemical weapons in the Syrian conflict would constitute a "red line" defining his country's actions -- and possible intervention. Without such grounds, President Obama has demonstrated a reluctance to become embroiled in the Syrian crisis, despite a growing chorus from neoconservatives in the United States for that country to be more actively involved. But a month later in April 2013, President Obama found himself somewhat boxed in by his "red line" condition.

On April 25, 2013, the Obama administration acknowledged that United States intelligence conclude "with varying degrees of confidence" that Syria may have used chemical weapons against the opposition. The Obama administration explained that the intelligence indicated that the nerve agent, sarin, had been deployed on a "small scale," while also noting that such intelligence did not constitute indisputable proof. This acknowledgment emerged first via correspondence from the

Syria Review 2016 Page 103 of 540 pages Syria

White House to United States members of Congress, and included the following assessment: "Our intelligence community does assess, with varying degrees of confidence, that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons on a small scale in Syria, specifically, the chemical agent sarin." Of particular concern was the use of the phrase "varying degrees of confidence" in this assessment, which has often been deployed to suggest inherent variance in opinion within the intelligence community.

Accordingly, the correspondence made it clear that the Obama administration remained reluctant to take action based on limited intelligence and without the comfort of certitude, as illustrated by the following qualifier: "Given the stakes involved, and what we have learned from our own recent experiences, intelligence assessments alone are not sufficient -- only credible and corroborated facts that provide us with some degree of certainty will guide our decision-making." It was apparent that President Obama was not willing to go down the same road as his predecessor, George W. Bush, in using selected intelligence to make hasty decisions about military engagement. Clearly, President Obama was aware that the legacy of the Iraq war still fresh in the national memory.

Speaking from the United Arab Emirates, United States Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel reiterated the Obama administration's stance that there would be no rush to either judgment or to military action, as he said: "Suspicions are one thing. Evidence is another." Still, the Obama administration was not backing down from its stated "red line." Defense Secretary Hagel asserted that the use of sarin "violates every convention of warfare."

It should be noted that the findings from United States intelligence (regardless of the "varying degrees of confidence") were corroborated by the United Kingdom, whose Foreign Office said that various sources provided "limited but persuasive information" of the use of sarin. In fact, there were suggestions that British experts procured samples from Syria that were tested by the United Kingdom's Defense Science and Technology Laboratory and found to show affirmative evidence of sarin. But more conclusive reports could come from the United Nations, which said that it intended to examine soil samples in Syria to determine whether chemical weapons have been used against rebel fighters.

Meanwhile, in the United States, neoconservative members of Congress were not in the mood to wait for testing to be done by the international body, and demanded action immediately. Republican Senator McCain -- the defeated 2008 presidential rival of President Obama -- said in interviews with the media, "It's pretty obvious that red line has been crossed." Accordingly, McCain supported the idea of arming the Syrian opposition. But the Obama White House has long eschewed such a move, noting that the Syrian opposition was not unified, and had been infiltrated by Islamist Jihadists. The Obama administration, thus, was not interested in putting weapons into the hands of extremists. That position was bolstered when the Jihadist rebel entity, known as the al-Nusra Front, officially aligned itself with the terror enclave, al Qaida.

The whole question of whether tha Assad regime used chemical weapons or not was thrown into

Syria Review 2016 Page 104 of 540 pages Syria confusion on May 5, 2013, when, according to a report by Reuters News, United Nations human rights investigators were reported to have accumulated testimony indicating that rebel forces -- and not the Assad regime -- may have used the nerve agent sarin.

Carla Del Ponte, a member of the United Nations independent commission of inquiry on Syria, noted there was no conclusive evidence available yet suggesting that government forces used chemical weapons. Del Ponte did not foreclose the possibility that government forces may have used chemical weapons, but was addressing findings suggesting that the rebels used the sarin nerve agent. She explained: "Our investigators have been in neighboring countries interviewing victims, doctors and field hospitals and, according to their report of last week which I have seen, there are strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof of the use of sarin gas, from the way the victims were treated. This was use on the part of the opposition, the rebels, not by the government authorities."

Such a finding would no doubt place any potential plans of action into disarray. It should noted, however, that in a report by BBC News, officials of the United States government indicated no information supporting the notion of Syrian rebels using Sarin. In a separate interview with Reuters, a United States official was quoted as saying, "Our understanding has been that the armed opposition does not have such weapons and so we'll have to re-check our facts. But our initial take on that was that they do not have such things in their arsenal." As well, it was apparent that the United Nations was seeking to downplay Del Ponte's comments. Specifically, the United Nations Commission of Inquiry on Syria emphasized that there were no "conclusive findings" on the matter. Further, the head of the Commission of Inquiry, Sergio Pinheiro, issued a statement that was intended "to clarify that it has not reached conclusive findings as to the use of chemical weapons in Syria by any parties to the conflict... As a result, the commission is not in a position to further comment on the allegations at this time." An official report would be submitted to the Human Rights Council on June 3, 2013.

Israel carries out strikes into Syrian territory to stop transfer of weapons to Hezbollah

On May 3, 2013, Israel carried out an initial air strike into Syrian territory. While Israel was highly reticent about providing any confirmation of its activities, various reports indicated that the first air strike was intended to stop the transfer of missiles from Syria to the militant Islamic group, Lebanon-based Hezbollah, which has posed a clear and aggressive threat to Israel's national security. Indeed, the Assad regime in Syria along with Lebanon-based Hezbollah have long been allied with Iran, which has repeatedly voiced the desire for the destruction of the Jewish state of Israel.

Two days later on May 5, 2013, it was reported that Israeli warplanes struck a military research facility in Syria. There were some suggestions in the media that the second strike was aimed at neutralizing or destroying a delivery system for chemical weapons. However, as reported by Reuters News, an Israeli official speaking on the condition of anonymity made it clear that these air

Syria Review 2016 Page 105 of 540 pages Syria strikes by Israel on Syrian targets were for the singular purpose of stopping the transfer of weapons from Syria to Hezbollah in Lebanon. The official was cited in Reuters as saying: "There was an air strike. The target was not a chemical weapons facility. It was missiles intended for Hezbollah." A separate report by the New York Times appeared to corroborate this view, as anonymous United States officials were reported to have said that the weapons targeted included advanced Fateh 110 surface-to-surface missiles from Iran, which were located in a warehouse at the Damascus International Airport.

The Netanyahu government in Israel has made it clear that it would use force, if necessary, to prevent weapons from reaching Hezbollah that could be used against Israel. Indeed, months earlier in January 2013, Israel reportedly bombed a convoy in Syria, with an eye on preventing the delivery of weapons to Hezbollah.

At the international level, the Arab League condemned the Israeli air raids, while United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon expressed his worry over the situation and urged "maximum calm and restraint." Still, NBC reporter, Richard Engel, said via Twitter that irrespective of official disapproval over Israel's actions, there were many activists privately applauding the moves.

For his part, United States President Barack Obama offered little in the way of an admonishment to Israel, saying instead that Israel had the right to protect itself. In an interview with the Spanish- speaking network, Telemundo, he said: "What I have said in the past and I continue to believe is that the Israelis justifiably have to guard against the transfer of advanced weaponry to terrorist organizations like Hezbollah. We coordinate closely with the Israelis recognizing they are very close to Syria, they are very close to Lebanon."

To that end -- Israel acting to protect itself from potential threats posed by enemies in the region -- it should be noted that it was unlikely that Syria actually entered Syrian air space when it carried out its strikes. All expectations were that the Israel used "stand off" bombs to hit Syria from a distance.

Not surprisingly, Syria was not at all sanguine in its response to Israeli air strikes. At first Syria did not even acknowledge that any of its interests had been bombed at all. But late in the day on May 5, 2013, Syria promised that retaliation was in order. As reported by CNN News, the strike by Israel was being treated by Syria as "an act of war." To that end, Syrian Deputy Foreign Minister Faisal Miqdad described the Israeli air strikes as a "declaration of war" and warned of retaliation. At the same time, Syrian Information Minister Omran Zoabi declared: "Syria is a country that does not accept insults and it doesn't accept humiliation." He further added that the strikes left "a wide door for all possible options."

Is Syria becoming a proxy conflict between Shi'a Iran and Sunni Arab countries?

In mid-May 2013, the conflict in Syria was continuing with attention focused on the fight for the

Syria Review 2016 Page 106 of 540 pages Syria rebel stronghold of Qusair close to the border with Lebanon. Pro-government forces were carrying out a massive assault on Qusair using air strikes and tanks on the ground to subdue the rebels and consolidate control over Damascus by securing pathways between the capital and other strategic centers, such as Qusair, which was a rebel supply route from Lebanon to the anti-Assad stronghold of Homs.

It should be noted that this particular battle in Qusair involved Hezbollah militants who were fighting to bolster the control of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and repel the anti-Assad rebels. United States Secretary of State John Kerry was warning that the involvement of thousands of Hezbollah fighters in the Syrian conflict was exacerbating the level of violence in that country.

The pro-Assad forces were seeing some success against the rebels in Qusair but that advance was not without costs. As many as 100 people died in Qusair on May 19, 2013, alone, including 30 Hezbollah fighters, 20 Syrian troops, and several members of pro-Assad militias. Rebel fighters also made up a good portion of the dead in the battle that day for Qusair and, at the end of the day, appeared to have managed to hold pro-government forces off. It was unknown if the rebels would be able to maintain that stance for the long haul, with some rebel activists warning that the fall of Qusair could augur negatively for the conflict since it was an important logistical hub and supply route for arms being moved into Syria. As well, the potential recapture of Qusair from the hands of the rebels into the pro-Assad fold would augur negatively for the rebel stronghold of Homs due to its links with Damascus and the Mediterranean coast.

As May 2013 entered its final week, the battle for Qusair intensified with reports that the city was under heavy bombardment from ground-to-ground missiles, artillery and rocket fire, as well as air strikes. Not surprisingly, the death toll was increasing as a result; Hezbollah fighters were among the dead, along with other pro-Assad forces, and of course, rebels and residents in Qusair.

As May 2013 ended and June 2013 began, the situation in Qusair was dire with the Red Cross expressing concern over the situation there, particularly in regards to the status of thousands of civilians trapped in the city as the battle between rebels and pro-government forces (including Hezbollah) raged on. Concerns were so heightened for the welfare of the civilian population that the office of United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon demanded that residents be allowed to flee the city.

Earlier on May 25, 2013, the active involvement of Hezbollah in the Syrian conflict was foregrounded when Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of militant Shi'a Islamic entity, vowed that Hezbollah would prevail in the effort to bolster Assad. In a televised address, Nasrallah said, "This battle is ours... and I promise you victory." Nasrallah suggested that Hezbollah's fight in Syria was a personal one of sorts for Shi'a militants. He cast the Syrian rebel movement as being allies of the United States and Israel, and further said that if Sunni Islamists were able to take control of Syria, they would pose a threat to Lebanon.

Syria Review 2016 Page 107 of 540 pages Syria

It should be noted that Lebanon-based Hezbollah has long been backed by Shi'a Iran and allied with Assad in Lebanon. The increasingly active involvement of Hezbollah in the Syrian conflict thus raised questions about whether or not Syria was becoming a proxy conflict of geopolitical control in the Middle East between Shi'a Iran and Arab states such as Saudi Arabia. Indeed, Sunni Arab nation states in the Middle East have increasingly turned against the Assad regime in Syria, either tacitly or directly assisting the rebels in the aim of toppling the Bashar Assad from power. But several members of the international community were taking stances with regards to the war in Syria. Russia made clear that it would be assisting the Assad regime by providing missiles, while the European Union was clearing the way for member states to more actively support the moderate rebel factions with arms.

At the start of June 2013, the conflict spilled over into Lebanon as Syrian rebels and Hezbollah fighters were embroiled in an exchange fire close to the the town of Baalbek on Lebanese soil. As many as 15 people were believed to have died at Baalbek, according to Reuters News on June 2, 2013. Syrian rebels have made clear that they would retaliate against Hezbollah for intervening into the Syrian conflict and have already fired rockets into Lebanese territory. The outbreak of actual clashes in Lebanon would suggest a disturbing trend towards the widening of the war.

But as of June 5, 2013, it was reported that combined Syrian government troops, Hezbollah brigades, and Iranian Revolutionary Guards controlled most of Qusair. The development signaled serious momentum for the Assad regime in its fight against the rebels. Making it clear that control over the strategic town was a victory for the Assad regime and marked a turning point in the civil war, Brigadier General Yahya Suleiman was broadcast on television saying, "He who controls Qusair controls the center of the country and he who controls the center of the country controls the whole of Syria."

According to the Syrian Network for Human Rights, more than 1,000 injured civilians remained trapped in Qusair, and Hezbollah fighters refused to allow Red Crescent humanitarian workers into the city to help the wounded. As such, the United Nations has expressed concern over the growing humanitarian crisis in Qusair. Meanwhile, the rebel movement was being described as demoralized with some anti-government activists claiming that no rebel reinforcements arrived to support the fighters in Qusair.

Only a day later on June 6, 2013, the Syrian army was able to take control of the United Nations- monitored crossing at the Golan Heights, which had fallen to rebel forces in recent times. The location of the Golan Heights at the ceasefire line with Israel raised fears about further spillover violence. Already, the involvement of Hezbollah fighters augured the possibility of increased cross- border violence into Lebanon.

Fighting was ongoing elsewhere in Syria and threatened to spread to Lebanon as the militant al-

Syria Review 2016 Page 108 of 540 pages Syria

Nusra Front promised to retaliate against Hezbollah "where they live" in an apparent reference to Lebanon. militiamen. In the southern port city of Sidon, anti-Hezbollah Sunni militant clerics were launching boisterous protests and making it clear that the Shi'a extremist enclave was now to be regarded as an enemy. As well, the northern city of Tripoli was the site of fierce battles between anti-Assad Sunni militants and pro-Assad Alawites.

On June 10, 2013, two suicide bombers carried out near-simultaneous attacks in the Syrian capital of Damascus, killing 14 people and injuring at least 30 others. The attacks occurred in a commercial district at Marjeh Square. By mid-June 2013, with Qusair now in government control, attention was focused on the northern city of Aleppo where pro-Assad forces were preparing to carry out an assault. Then, on June 17, 2013, there were reports of an explosion in the Mezzeh suburb of Damascus. State television reported that the explosion was caused by an attempted attack on the Mezzeh military airport. Several soldiers were said to have died or been hurt in the blast at the strategic installation, which plays a key role in the distribution of military supplies.

In an effort to consolidate their Qusair victory, pro-Assad forces were launching an assault on villages in Homs province in the third week of June 2013. The government forced were expected to soon turn their attention towards the city of Homs and the towns of Rastan and Talbiseh, located along the main highway that links the southern Syrian-Jordanian border zone, through Damascus, to the north in Aleppo. As well, pro-Assad forces were augmenting their militarized cordon around Aleppo, with an eye on a future decisive victory there. Control over Aleppo, which has been in rebel hands for more than a year, controls supply routes from Lebanon. It also separates Damascus from Assad's Alawite base in the central part of the country. As such, Aleppo has been regarded as the main prize in the civil war in Syria.

By June 26, 2013, pro-Assad forces had retaken control of the town on Tel Kalakh on the Lebanese border. The recapture of Tel Kalakh, coming after the fall of Qusair, constituted another victory for the Assad regime. As with Qusair, Tel Kalakh has been used by rebels as a transit point for weapons into Syria, and was thus a strategic loss for the opposition camp.

Chemical weapons issue resurfaces

In a separate development, the issue of chemical weapons was resurfacing. In the first week of June 2013, various Western governments were reporting that tests confirmed the use of the nerve agent, sarin, during the Syrian war.

Earlier, in the month of March 2013, there were competing claims by the Syrian government and Syrian opposition of chemical attacks. The Syrian government, via its state news agency, accused "terrorists" of firing a rocket containing chemical weapons in the Khan al-Assal area of Aleppo province, killing 16 people. While Russia expressed support for the Syrian government's claim, photographs of the victims indicated no sign of exposure to chemical weapons. The Syrian

Syria Review 2016 Page 109 of 540 pages Syria opposition soon issued its own accusation, charging that the Syrian government had carried out the attack, and that 19 people had suffocated to death.

A month later in April 2013, President Obama found himself somewhat boxed in by his "red line" condition when his administration acknowledged that United States intelligence concluded "with varying degrees of confidence" that Syria may have used chemical weapons against the opposition. The Obama administration explained that the intelligence indicated that the nerve agent, sarin, had been deployed on a "small scale," while also noting that such intelligence did not constitute indisputable proof.

The whole question of whether the Assad regime used chemical weapons or not was thrown into confusion on May 5, 2013, when, according to a report by Reuters News, United Nations human rights investigators were reported to have accumulated testimony indicating that rebel forces -- and not the Assad regime -- may have used the nerve agent sarin. Such a finding would no doubt place any potential plans of action into disarray. It should noted, however, that in a report by BBC News, officials of the United States government indicated no information supporting the notion of Syrian rebels using sarin.

Now, in June 2013, the British Foreign Office was saying that tests had shown that sarin was used during the civil war, while the French Foreign Ministry was attributing the use of sarin to the Assad regime. The French foreign ministry said in a statement, "These tests show the presence of sarin in various samples in our possession. France is certain that sarin gas was used several times in Syria in limited areas." French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius further said in an interview with France 2 television that there was "no doubt" the nerve agent was used by the Assad regime. The French government has warned that the ever-increasing corpus of proof on the use of chemical weapons in Syria "obliges the international community to act." That being said, However, President Francois Hollande cautioned the form of such action, saying, "We can only act within the framework of international law."

By June 13, 2013, the White House in the United States was officially stating that pro-Assad

Syria Review 2016 Page 110 of 540 pages Syria forces in Syria had used chemical weapons "on a small scale" against the rebels. Ben Rhodes, a deputy national security adviser to President Barack Obama, said the United States possessed no "reliable" evidence the opposition had used chemical weapons. As stated by Rhodes, "Our intelligence community now has a high confidence assessment that chemical weapons have been used on a small scale by the Assad regime in Syria. The president has said that the use of chemical weapons would change his calculus, and it has." This admission appeared to be a precursor to increased United States involvement in the Syrian civil war, given the following statement by Rhodes: "The president has been clear that the use of chemical weapons -- or the transfer of chemical weapons to terrorist groups -- is a red line for the U.S." While Rhodes declined to specify the nature of the United States further action as regards Syria, he indicated that there might be aid for specific rebel entities -- the Supreme Military Council (SMC), led by General Salim Idris, and the Syrian Opposition Council -- rather than the Islamist a-Nusra movement.

Meanwhile, Senators John McCain and Lindsay Graham, who have vociferously supported the United States' arming the rebels, issued a joint statement supporting the White House's latest moves but urging not only that the United States provide "lethal assistance, especially ammunition and heavy weapons, to opposition forces in Syria" but also the use of "stand-off weapons such as cruise missiles."

The actual aid being dispatched to Syria was not of that variety and limited to military equipment and light weaponry, such as automatic weapons, mortars, and rocket-propelled grenades. Some rebel factions argued that small arms were unlikely to substantially help their cause, and that without surface-to-air missiles, they would never be able to defeat the Assad forces, which had the advantage of air superiority.

Given the weapons scenario noted above, and in response to recent gains by the Assad regime, Arab and Western indicated a willingness to increase their aid to Syria. In particular, Saudi Arabia was reported to be increasing its assistance to Syrian rebels, including the provision of anti-aircraft missiles among other weapons. As well, Qatar was also becoming a major player in the Syrian crisis, by supplying arms to the rebels.

Further Developments

As June 2013 entered its final week, the military commander of the Free Syrian Army, Salim Idriss, said in an interview with al-Arabiya that rebel forces had new weapons capable of "changing the course of the battle on the ground."

In a separate development, United States Defense Secretary Check Hagel said that his country did intend to honor a request by Jordan to keep F-16 fighters and Patriot missiles in that country. As well, 300 United States Marines were deployed to Jordan to provide military assistance. These aircrafts and missiles were not to be directed to Syria but, rather, to be used by Jordan to defend

Syria Review 2016 Page 111 of 540 pages Syria itself. Of course, there was no guarantee to suggest that Jordan would not become embroiled in the Syrian war. For its part, Russia responded by bristling to that news and warning that the use of F-16 fighters and Patriot missiles in Syria would be illegal under international law.

Meanwhile, Jordanian King Abdullah warned that without an end to the violence, the crisis in Syria could spread across the region. In an interview with the Asharq al-Awsat newspaper, he said: "It has become clear to all that the Syrian crisis may extend from being a civil war to a regional and sectarian conflict...the extent of which is unknown." Accordingly, he urged serious engagement from Arab quarters and global powers, saying: "It is time for a more serious Arab and international coordination to stop the deterioration of the Syrian crisis. The situation cannot wait any longer."

On June 16, 2013, Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi announced that his country was breaking all diplomatic ties with Syria and urged Hezbollah to exit Syria. Morsi also called for the establishment of a "no-fly" zone in parts of Syria -- a development unlikely to be realized due to the financial costs and the lack of international consensus on the Syrian civil war. Nevertheless, Morsi's statement made it clear that the dividing lines in Syria were hardening. Countries like Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey were taking an anti-Assad stance, while the likes of Iran and Lebanon-based Hezbollah were supporting the Assad regime. While such dividing lines indicated a sectarian element between Sunnis and Shi'ites respectively, the proxy war was expanding in nature what with Russia standing with Assad, and the West against the embattled Syrian leader.

In the offing were peace talks set to take place in the Swiss city of Geneva later in June 2013, which were brokered by Russia and the United States. It was to be seen if such negotiations could yield productive results. To date, multilateral efforts at ending the bloodshed and violence in Syria have ended in failure; the decision by the main rebel organization in exile -- the Syrian National Coalition -- to boycott the peace talks would not help the peace effort. As well, the Assad regime's victory in Qusair would likely boost Bashar al-Assad's determination to stay in power.

As June 2013 entered its final week, the peace talks (originally expected to take place in mid-2013) were delayed because of differences over the fate of Assad. Russian President Vladimir Putin said he would boycott the conference if the peace proposal continued to hold to a plan for Assad to resign as president. Other aspects of the plan included provisions that might allow Assad regime members to carry on in a new transitional government, as well as the expulsion of extremist entities linked to terrorism, such as al-Qaida, the al-Nusra Jihadist rebel entity and Lebanon-based Hezbollah fighters operating in Syria on behalf of Assad.

In the last week of July 2013, the Syrian civil war was raging with no sign of an end. A car bomb on the edge of the Syrian capital of Damascus left at least 10 people dead and more than 60 others injured. The bomb struck the al-Siyouf Square in Jaramanah -- a religiously mixed area composed not only of Muslims but also Druze and Christians. Jaramanah was known to be

Syria Review 2016 Page 112 of 540 pages Syria inhabited by both supporters of President Bashr al-Assad and his opponents although it was under military control. The attack was blamed on an al Qaida-linked group that was joined the rebel cause against the Assad regime.

On July 28, 2013, it was reported that government pro-Assad forces had taken control over most of the Khalidiya neighborhood in the central city of Homs, which has largely been regarded as a flashpoint in the Syrian civil war. As one of the few remaining districts in Homs under rebel control, regaining control over Khalidiya marked a major success for the Assad regime in Syria. Days later, Homs remained in the spotlight as rebels retaliated with a rocket strike on a weapons depot in the very city. As many as 40 people apparently died as a result of the blast.

At the start of August 2103, momentum was clearing with the pro-government forces as President Bashar al-Assad said he was "sure of victory" over the rebels. Speaking on the anniversary of Syria's Army Foundation Day, he said, "If we in Syria were not sure of victory, we would not have had the will to persevere in the face of more than two years of aggression." With a nod to his military forces the Syrian leader added, "I have great faith in you and confidence in your ability to fulfil the national mission that has been assigned to you." He added, "You have shown rare courage in the battle against terrorism and you have impressed the whole world with your resistance... in one of the most brutal and ferocious wars of modern history."

Death toll in Syrian civil war reaches 100,000 according to UN Secretary General

In mid-2013, the 15-member United Nations body conveyed its anxieties about the rising death toll in Syria -- now estimated to be approaching 100,000 since the start of the conflict in 2011 -- as well as the increasing number of internally displaced persons -- now estimated to be as many as four million, with two million fleeing to neighboring countries. Lebanon, especially, was bearing the brunt of the exodus of from Syria, as refugees sought to escape the crossfire of bloodshed and violence. To this end, the United Nations Security Council noted in its statement: "The Security Council underlines the need for assistance on an unprecedented scale, both to meet the needs of the refugees and of host communities, and to assist the Lebanese authorities who face extraordinary financial and structural challenges as a result of the refugee influx."

For his part, Lebanon's ambassador to the United Nations, Nawaf Salam, addressed the matter of Syrian refugees in his country saying, "Lebanon will not close its borders. Lebanon will not turn back any refugees. Lebanon will continue to provide assistance to all Syrian refugees. But let's be clear, Lebanon cannot cope with the burden of the refugee crisis. Lebanon needs international support."

United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon confirmed the disturbing news that the death toll in the Syrian civil war had reached the keystone mark of 100,000. This number was higher than the 93,000 deaths estimated only a month earlier in June 2013. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon

Syria Review 2016 Page 113 of 540 pages Syria mentioned the 100,000 death toll figure during an address at the headquarters for the United Nations in New York while flanked by United States Secretary of State John Kerry. For his part, Secretary of State Kerry noted there was an urgent need to find a political solution to end the bloody and violent Syrian civil war. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon called for reinvigorated efforts to convene a peace summit that was intended to be held in mid-2013 but was delayed due to differences between Russia and the West over the fate of President Assad.

Hezbollah-related violence in Lebanon raises questions about spillover violence from Syria

In mid-August 2013, Lebanon was struck by Hezbollah-related violence. An explosion in a southern suburb of Beirut killed about two dozen people and injured 200 others. The blast also exacted massive damage to buildings and vehicles in the vicinity. A week later as August 2013 was coming to a close, the northern city of Tripoli was the venue of further attacks. The bloodshed was being attributed to Hezbollah's ongoing involvement in the civil war in Syria, which has exacerbated sectarian tensions between Shi'ites (such as pro-Assad Hezbollah) and Sunni Muslims (of the type that form the base of the Syrian rebel opposition). Indeed, that connection was made clear when a Syrian rebel group took responsibility for a bombing in Beirut a month earlier (discussed below) and threatened to continue its assault against Hezbollah.

Going back to July 9, 2013, a car bomb exploded in the Lebanese capital city of Beirut, resulting in injuries to scores of people. The bombing occurred in the Beir el-Abed area of Beirut, which was known to be a stronghold of the Shi'a Islamic extremist militant entity, Hezbollah. Although there was no claim of responsibility for the attack, Hezbollah's role in the Syrian civil war next door raised questions about spillover violence into Lebanon from Syria. To be clear, Lebanon- based Hezbollah has increasingly taken a high-profile role on the side of the Assad regime as it has fought a relentless battle to hold onto power in Syria against a rebel movement supported by other Arab countries and the West. For their part, rebels have railed against Hezbollah for siding with the Assad regime and involving itself in the Syrian conflict. They have accordingly threatened to target Hezbollah in Lebanon for its intervention into the Syrian civil war.

It was not known if this bombing was the work of Syrian rebels in retaliation for Hezbollah's activity in Syria. That being said, by mid-July 2013, the United Nations Security Council was demanding that Lebanon-based Hezbollah end its involvement in the conflict in neighboring Syria. A statement from the United Nations Security Council read as follows: "The Security Council calls upon all Lebanese parties to recommit to Lebanon's policy of disassociation, to stand united behind President Michel Suleiman in this regard and to step back from any involvement in the Syrian crisis."

Syria Review 2016 Page 114 of 540 pages Syria retaliation for the militant Shi'a Islamic entity's involvement in the Syrian civil war, all suspicion rested on the rebels for this attack. It was vividly clear that the Syrian civil war, and specifically, Hezbollah's involvement in that conflict, was having an effect on the other side of the border in Lebanon.

Spillover violence from Syria reached new heights on July 17, 2013, when a well-known commentator on Syrian state television was assassinated in the southern Lebanese town of Sarafand. Mohammad Darra Jamo worked for the Syrian state media, but also appeared frequently on other Arab networks; he was known to be a strong supporter of Syrian President Bashar al- Assad. According to reports, gunmen were hiding in Darra Jamo's house prior to the attack; the gunmen opened fire and killed him. The Syrian state news agency, SANA, said that an "armed terrorist group" carried out the attack while Lebanese security officials said the assassination was carried out by supporters of the Syrian rebel movement.

In mid-August 2013, Lebanon was struck by further Hezbollah-related violence. An explosion in a southern suburb of Beirut left about two dozen people dead, up to 200 others wounded, and exacted massive damage to buildings and vehicles in the vicinity. The high number of injuries was due to the fact that the explosion -- caused by a car bomb -- occurred in a densely populated part of Beirut. Of course, the area was also a stronghold of Hezbollah. Accordingly, the violence was being attributed to Hezbollah's ongoing involvement in the civil war in Syria, which has exacerbated sectarian tensions between Shi'ites (such as pro-Assad Hezbollah) and Sunni Muslims (of the type that form the base of the Syrian rebel opposition). That claim gained traction when a Syrian rebel group took responsibility for a bombing in Beirut a month earlier (discussed above). In a video posting, the Battalions of Ayesha indicated their involvement in the Beirut bombing in July 2013 and promised to continue to target Hezbollah strongholds, which it described as "colonies of Iran."

Politicians from Hezbollah's government wing characterized the car bombing as a "terrorist attack," but they were seemingly cognizant of the deleterious consequences of the militant wing's activities in Syria as they also urged their supporters to exercise "restraint." But Hezbollah's militant wing was in no mood for the rhetoric of restraint. A day after the bombing, Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah referred to the Sunni Muslim militants from Syria behind the attack promising to personally fight in Syria against them. Speaking on his own television channel, Nasrallah said, "I will go myself to Syria if it is necessary in the battle against the takfiris (Sunni radicals)." He also indicated that Hezbollah had no intention of retreating from its effort to support the Assad regime in Syria. Dispelling the notion that spill-over violence would make Hezbollah rethink its activities, Nasrallah declared that his movement would re-intensify its involvement in Syria by doubling its forces fighting in that country.

Meanwhile, no conflict involving Lebanon-based Hezbollah could occur without some reference to Israel. Some politicians in Lebanon were casting blame on Israel for the mid-August 2013 attack in

Syria Review 2016 Page 115 of 540 pages Syria

Beirut. At a joint news conference with United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, Israeli President Shimon Peres dismissed that notion with a succinct declaration as follows: "Why should they look to Israel? They have a Hezbollah that collects bombs, that goes and kills people in Syria without the permission of the Lebanese government."

Violence continued to punctuate the Lebanese political landscape a week later. On Aug. 23, 2013, the northern Lebanese city of Tripoli was rocked by explosions, which left more than 40 people dead and another 400 injured. The blast occurred at the al-Taqwa mosque during Friday prayers; a second explosion ensued minutes later at the al-Salam mosque. Noteworthy was the fact that the well-known Sunni cleric opposed to Shi'a Hezbollah, Sheikh Salem Rafii, was in attendance at the al-Taqwa mosque; the general consensus was that he was the target of the attack although he escaped unharmed. The city of Tripoli has long been a flashpoint of sorts, representing the sectarian division between the majorty Sunni population of the city which also contains a small Alawite community aligned with the Assad regime in neighboring Syria.

Report of chemical weapons usage resurfaces and exacerbates Syrian crisis --

On Aug. 21, 2013, Syrian opposition activists and rebels said that chemical weapons had killed hundreds of people on the outskirts of Damascus. They said that government forces launched a major bombardment on rebel forces in the area of Ghouta using rockets with toxic agents. The Syrian government dismissed the accusations as "illogical and fabricated." The Syrian military further said that rebel forces were suffering major defeat and were using claims of chemical attacks to draw attention away from the fact that they were losing the war.

The claims and counter-claims set up rival theories that could not be verified simply by looking at the videotaped footage of victims that immediately surfaced online. Stated differently, while the international media was able to obtain visual evidence of victims who had died, that footage could not prove whether they died as a result of conventional military bombardment or due to exposure to toxic substances. However, there was an increasing chorus of disturbing assertions by medical staff that the victims, particularly children, appeared to have suffered suffocation and blurred vision. As well, further videotaped footage was starting to surface about the purported attacks, this time showing victims enduring convulsions or distinctly encountering breathing problems. In an interview with BBC News, Professor Alexander Kekule of the Institute for Medical Microbiology at Halle University in Germany, admitted that the videotaped images of the victims certainly suggested they had been subject to a chemical agent of some kind. However, he made a point of noting that none of the victims showed signs that they had been exposed to chemicals such as sarin or organophosphorous nerve agents.

The international community seemed initially wary to accept the claims of chemical attacks, perhaps with the memory of the inconclusive chemical weapons claims so fresh in their minds from earlier in the year (2013). Only recently, United Nations investigators traveled to Syria to

Syria Review 2016 Page 116 of 540 pages Syria look into those earlier claims. In August 2013, the United Nations convened an emergency meeting to discuss the newest chemical attack claims and its immediate response was to seek clarification on the situation in Syria. As noted by Maria Cristina Perceval, Argentina's United Nations Ambassador, "There is a strong concern among council members about the allegations and a general sense that there must be clarity on what happened and the situation must be followed closely."

That being said, individual countries -- such as France and the United Kingdom-- were going further and demanding that United Nations inspectors who were already investigating the earlier allegations of chemical attacks in Syria now look into these fresh claims. The United States echoed their call via White House spokesperson Josh Earnest, who said: "The United States is deeply concerned by reports that hundreds of Syrian civilians have been killed in an attack by Syrian government forces, including by the use of chemical weapons, near Damascus earlier today. We are formally requesting that the United Nations urgently investigate this new allegation. The United Nations investigative team, which is currently in Syria, is prepared to do so, and that is consistent with its purpose and mandate." Both the European Union and the Arab League entered the fray, adding their own voices to the call for United Nations inspectors to go look into the matter.

Perhaps not surprisingly, Russia had a different view and noted that the timing of the fresh claims of chemical attacks came just as United Nations inspectors were in Syria to investigate the chemical claims from earlier in 2013 The Russian foreign ministry said, "This makes us think that we are once again dealing with a premeditated provocation." Indeed, there was a legitimate question as to why the Syrian government would choose to use chemical weapons at a time when United Nations inspectors were "in country" and especially given United States President Barack Obama's 2012 famous statement that his country would not be involving itself in the Syrian crisis unless the Assad regime used chemical weapons -- essentially crossing a vital "red line" -- that could augur international military action.

There was incremental movement in that direction on Aug. 22, 2013, when the United Kingdom, France, and Turkey all demanded that the international community take a strong stand against the Syrian regime, if the chemical weapons attack was verified. France went further with French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius saying that if the claims of a chemical attack proved to be true, a "reaction of force" would result. The United Kingdom issued a similar threat via the British Foreign Office, noting, "We believe a political solution is the best way to end the bloodshed" but also warning that the government of Prime Minister David Cameron "has said many times we cannot rule out any option that might save innocent lives in Syria." Meanwhile, Turkey goaded the United Nations about its symbolic "foot dragging" as Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu declared: "All red lines have been crossed but still the United Nations Security Council has not even been able to take a decision."

Syria Review 2016 Page 117 of 540 pages Syria

On Aug. 23, 2013, United States President Barack Obama offered comments on the alleged use of chemical weapons in Syria saying that the claims constituted a "big event, of grave concern." In an interview with CNN, President Obama noted that the conflict in Syria would have a bearing on United States national interests "both in terms of us making sure that weapons of mass destruction are not proliferating, as well as needing to protect our allies, our bases in the region." Nevertheless, the United States leader struck a cautious note, reminding journalists that his country was still in the process of seeking confirmation on the matter of chemical weapons usage; however, he asserted that if the allegations proved to be true, the crisis would "require America's attention." Left unsaid was the nature of that attention. For his part, President Obama urged prudent action, tacitly reminding people of the consequences of the reckless military intervention of his predecessor, George W. Bush, into Iraq. The United States president said: "Sometimes what we've seen is that folks will call for immediate action, jumping into stuff, that does not turn out well, gets us mired in very difficult situations, can result in us being drawn into very expensive, difficult, costly interventions that actually breed more resentment in the region."

Around this time, Russia maintained its belief that the use of chemical agents might be a provocation by the opposition. Still, Russia was now urging Syria to cooperate with an "objective investigation" by United Nations chemical weapons experts. United Kingdom Foreign Secretary William Hague indirectly addressed this suggestion that the use of chemical agents was a provocation by rebel forces saying, "I know that some people in the world would like to say this is some kind of conspiracy brought about by the opposition in Syria. I think the chances of that are vanishingly small and so we do believe that this is a chemical attack by the Assad regime on a large scale."

United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon demanded an immediate investigation to clear up the matter. He said: "I can think of no good reason why any party -- either government or opposition forces -- would decline this opportunity to get to the truth of the matter." Ban also emphasized the fact that any use of chemical weapons -- by any actor or party -- would be a violation of international law, which would inevitably result in "serious consequences for the perpetrator."

Key Developments:

On Aug. 24, 2013, the international medical assistance organization, Medecins Sans Frontieres, or MSF, ("Doctors Without Borders" in English), confirmed that it had treated as many as 3,600 patients with "neurotoxic symptoms," and noted that 355 of those patients had died. This news from MSF augmented the claim that the use of chemical agents were used in Syria in the final week of August 2013 although the international medical assistance organization was careful to note that it could not "scientifically confirm" the use of chemical weapons. MSF Director of Operations Bart Janssens said: "MSF can neither scientifically confirm the cause of these symptoms nor establish who is responsible for the attack. However, the reported symptoms of the

Syria Review 2016 Page 118 of 540 pages Syria patients, in addition to the epidemiological pattern of the events, characterized by the massive influx of patients in a short period of time, the origin of the patients, and the contamination of medical and first aid workers, strongly indicate mass exposure to a neurotoxic agent." He continued, "This would constitute a violation of international humanitarian law, which absolutely prohibits the use of chemical and biological weapons."

On Aug. 25, 2013, the Assad regime again dismissed charges that it had used chemical toxins or poisons on Syrian citizens but did agree to allow United Nations inspectors to travel to suspected sites of chemical attacks to investigate the prevailing accusations. The United Nations said that Syria had agreed to allow investigators to operate in an environment of safety, even promising a ceasefire during inspections. However, as the convoy of vehicles carrying chemical weapons inspectors was driving to the Damascus suburb to carry out the investigation on Aug. 26, 2013, they were fired upon by snipers. The first vehicle in the convoy was repeatedly hit by gunfire, forcing it to discontinue its path. The other vehicles in the convoy, however, were able to get to the suspected sites and collect samples from victims, despite coming under gunfire. The United Nations released a statement describing what happened and condemning the attack on its convoy as follows: "The first vehicle of the Chemical Weapons Investigation Team was deliberately shot at multiple times by unidentified snipers in the buffer zone area. It has to be stressed again that all sides need to extend their cooperation so that the team can safely carry out their important work."

Should the United Nations' investigation end with evidence of the use of chemical agents, toxins, or poisons, the general consensus was that such confirmation would bolster the case for an international intervention into Syria. There were few hopes that veto-wielding Russia and China would sanction the use of force in Syria at the United Nations Security Council. However, there was a pertinent precedent for international action on the basis of humanitarian reasons. Specifically, the NATO campaign against Serbia to protect the people of Kosovo was undertaken without a United Nations Security Council Resolution and against the wishes of Russia -- an ally of Serbia. It was, thus, possible that Western powers could again go the NATO route -- this time in Syria.

A meeting of leaders from the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and other NATO allies was in the offing to discuss possible options. United States Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel appeared to be reflecting the Obama administration's cautious stance regarding action in Syria when he said: "The United States is looking at all options regarding the situation in Syria. We're working with our allies and the international community. We are analyzing the intelligence. And we will get the facts. And if there is any action taken, it will be in concert with the international community and within the framework of legal justification."

Of course, the official report on the suspected chemical weapons usage in Syria by the United Nations was expected to take weeks to prepare. As such, the United States was indicating that there was a "clear" and "compelling" case to be made of those charges against the Assad regime in

Syria Review 2016 Page 119 of 540 pages Syria

Syria. On Aug. 30, 2013, United States Secretary of State John Kerry released an unclassified intelligence report on the matter. Secretary of State Kerry said: “Read for yourselves the evidence from thousands of sources. This is the indiscriminate, inconceivable horror of chemical weapons. This is what Assad did to his own people.” The United States' top diplomat also delivered the shocking claim that more than 1,400 people were killed in the chemical attack -- at least 400 of whom were children.

France was also giving weight to the United States' claims regarding a massive chemical attack in Syria, with French Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault releasing a report in parliament. That report went so far as to note that while the Syrian army had already -- and repeatedly -- used chemical weapons against the Syrian people, on Aug. 21, 2013, it launched an attack using "massive use of chemical agents." The French report further alleged that the chemical attack at that time "could not have been ordered and carried out by anyone but the Syrian government." The French report additionally noted that Syria's arsenal of chemical weapons was "massive and diverse" and included both the nerve agent, sarin, and the toxic known agent, VX.

France was, therefore, maintaining its stance that there should be an international response to Syria's use of chemical weapons. On the issue of France's role in that response, Prime Minister Ayrault said, "France is determined to penalize the use of chemical weapons by Assad's regime and to dissuade with a forceful and firm response." He also indicated that France was working with international partners to build a coalition that would carry out a possible course of action against Syria. The French government was being very emphatic about the obligation of world powers to respond to the use of chemical weapons in defiance of international conventions. As stated by French President Francois Hollande on Sept. 3, 2013: "When a chemical massacre takes place, when the world is informed of it, when the evidence is delivered, when the guilty parties are known, then there must be an answer." The French leader urged other European countries to show unity on the issue.

The claims about Syria's use of chemical weapons by the United States and France were augmented by the statement of NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen, who declared that he was personally convinced that a chemical attack had, indeed, taken place, and that the Assad regime was responsible for that attack. That being said, there was no suggestion that NATO would be involved in any intervention into the Syrian crisis in the manner in which the regional security bloc was engaged in Libya.

On Sept. 4, 2013, United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said that any intervention into the Syrian crisis should have the blessing of the United Nations, and urged the Security Council to take action. He also declared, "This is a larger issue than the conflict in Syria. This is about our collective responsibility to humankind." Left unsaid by Secretary General Ban was the fact that veto-wielding Russia and China were not eager to accommodate a resolution that would authorize such intervention.

Syria Review 2016 Page 120 of 540 pages Syria

United States weighs its options:

Meanwhile, even as the evidence was increasing to support the claim of a chemical weapons attack in Syria, the political will to build an international coalition to act against Syria was eroding. At issue was a parliamentary vote in the United Kingdom's House of Commons urging an international response to the Syria chemical weapons crisis. The vote came amidst British Prime Minister David Cameron's vociferous condemnation of Syria's apparent use of chemical weapons, and his suggestion that the United Kingdom would join the United States and France in delivering some kind of punitive action against Syria. But when the parliamentary vote went down to defeat in the House on Commons on Aug. 29, 2013, it was apparent that the United Kingdom would not be a player in any kind of military intervention.

Irrespective of the political developments across the Atlantic, in the United States, President Barack Obama on Aug. 30, 2013, made clear that he was still considering the full range of options in response to Syria's use of chemical weapons against its own citizens. Referring to the aforementioned report on the suspected chemical weapons usage in Syria released by Secretary of State Kerry, President Obama said, "As you've seen, today we've released our unclassified assessment detailing with high confidence that the Syrian regime carried out a chemical weapons attack that killed well over 1,000 people, including hundreds of children. This follows the horrific images that shocked us all."

With an eye on showing why the use of chemical weapons required a response, President Obama said, "This kind of attack is a challenge to the world. We cannot accept a world where women and children and innocent civilians are gassed on a terrible scale." He continued, "So, I have said before, and I meant what I said that, the world has an obligation to make sure that we maintain the norm against the use of chemical weapons." In this way, the United States president was making clear that the international community had an obligation to respond to Syria's use of chemical weapons -- an act that was undertaken in defiance of international law and in contravention to international norms.

President Obama indicated that several options were under review, as he noted, "Now, I have not made a final decision about various actions that might be taken to help enforce that norm. But as I've already said, I have had my military and our team look at a wide range of options." That being said, President Obama noted that a long-term campaign involving a ground force in Syria (reminiscent of Iraq) were not among those possibilities. He expressly said, "We're not considering any open-ended commitment. We're not considering any boots on the ground approach. What we will do is consider options that meet the narrow concern around chemical weapons." Evidently, although President Obama believed there was a moral obligation to act against Syria for its use of chemical weapons, he was not eager to see the United States mired in another war in the world's most volatile region. Stated differently, it was through the prism of the Iraq debacle that the United

Syria Review 2016 Page 121 of 540 pages Syria

States leader was viewing his options for dealing with Syria.

Given the fears of the United States becoming bogged down in another Iraq-like quagmire, Secretary of State John Kerry aimed to articulate the objectives of the United States in any potential military action in Syria. During a senate committee hearing ahead of a congressional authorization vote on Sept. 3, 2013, Secretary of State Kerry said: "The goal of United States policy is not stalemate. The goal of United States policy is a negotiated settlement that results in the departure of Assad and the free voice of the Syrian people for their future."

It should be noted that military analysts were criticizing the utility of surgical strikes, and they were particularly critical of this course of action being discussed in the media. They noted that telegraphing the possibility of impending strikes on chemical weapons targets would undoubtedly result in a less than surgical outcome. Instead, Syrian authorities would have to time to move these supplies and even take advantage of using human shields to protect their chemical weapons cache. In fact, at the start of September 2013, the Associated Press reported that the Assad regime was actively going about the process of concealing weapons, as it moved rocket launchers, artillery, and other heavy weapons into residential neighborhoods. As well, the Syrian authorities transferred army troops from bases into civilian areas. The opposition movement told the Associated Press that members of the Republican Guards of the Syrian military was taking control over the private homes of civilians, arguing that "Syria was at war." The decision by President Obama to seek congressional authorization before moving forward with any military action would provide the Assad regime in Syria with even more time to cover their tracks in anticipation of strikes.

There was also rising opposition among the ranks of experts to the idea of even being peripherally involved in the Syrian conflict, with some factions fearful that it would only lead to anti-American sentiment globally, and others warning that it could spark a wider regional conflict.

At the same time, the United States public -- already war weary after the long wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and mistrustful of the judgment of political leaders on the issue of war due to specter of Iraq -- were skeptical about the call for a new chapter of military engagement in the Middle East.

At the political level, those reluctant to enter into the Syrian crisis -- even in a limited manner -- have argued that President Obama was trapped by his own "red line" reference. For his part, President Obama has steadfastly said that the use of chemical weapons in the Syrian conflict would constitute a "red line" defining his country's actions -- and possible intervention. Without such grounds, President Obama has demonstrated a reluctance to become embroiled in the Syrian crisis, despite a growing chorus from neoconservatives in the United States for that country to be more actively involved. Now, with evidence of the use of chemical weapons by Syria, some voices were claiming that the United States leader was being driven to act in order to preserve his credibility.

Syria Review 2016 Page 122 of 540 pages Syria

But on Sept. 4, 2013, President Obama rejected the suggestion that he was being forced to use military force against Syria in order to hold consistent with his so-called "red line" statement. Speaking from Sweden en route to the G20 summit in Russia, President Obama said, “I didn’t set a red line. The world set a red line... The world set a red line when governments representing 98 percent of the world’s population said the use of chemical weapons are abhorrent and passed a treaty forbidding their use even when countries are engaged in war.” He continued, “My credibility’s not on the line. The international community’s credibility is on the line, and America and Congress’ credibility is on the line." The United States leader also pushed back the notion that the world should hand-wring over the crisis in Syria without responding in a serious manner. He said, “I do have to ask people, well, if, in fact, you’re outraged by the slaughter of innocent people, what are you doing about it? The moral thing to do is not to stand by and do nothing.”

Given these myriad dynamics, it was probably not surprising that President Obama decided to seek congressional authorization for what would undoubtedly be a controversial strike against Syria.

In his effort to win congressional authorization for any form of military action against Syria, President Obama would be helped by the fact that he had the support of leading members of Congress from both parties. His former rival for the presidency -- Republican Senator John McCain -- was expressing backing the notion of military action against Syria. Indeed, McCain was advocating for even stronger action than targeted strike. Other leading Republicans -- House Speaker John Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor -- also signaled support for congressional authorization. On the other side of the aisle, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi -- not normally eager to see the United States engaged militarily -- was also indicating cautious support for a limited and targeted course of action against Syria. In this way, despite the ongoing stalemate between Republicans and Democrats in the United States Congress over most domestic issues, there seemed to be a more effective spirit of bipartisanship emerging when it came to the Syrian crisis.

Reflecting that bipartisan spirit, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Sept. 4, 2013, approved an authorization of force against the Syrian regime. At the time, a full vote in the United States Senate was expected to take place in the second week of September 2013. It should be noted that while the president was seeking congressional authorization, he also reserved the right to act without it. To this end, President Obama said: “As commander in chief, I always preserve the right and the responsibility to act on behalf of America’s national security. I do not believe that I was required to take this to Congress."

Syria's stance:

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has repeatedly denied that his forces launched any chemical attacks. The Syrian leader has warned of a wider Middle Eastern war if foreign countries decide to move forward with military action against Syria. That wider war could occur if Assad decided to react to a yet-to-occur military strike by international powers on Syria. Some of the possibilities

Syria Review 2016 Page 123 of 540 pages Syria available to Assad would include retaliatory attacks on pro-Western allies of the United States, such as Israel, Jordan, and Turkey. But the reality was that Syria's military already had its hands full fighting the civil war at home. Moreover, Syria likely could not risk sparking the ire of Israel, with its own well-armed military, or Jordan, which hosts United States fighter jets, missiles and troops, or Turkey -- a NATO member state. Indeed, an attack on any NATO country, such as Turkey, would prompt a response from the entire security alliance.

Status update:

On Sept. 8, 2013, the European Union called for no action to go forward with regard to Syria until the findings on the chemical agents were made available by the United Nations investigative team. As well, plans for a full vote in the United States Congress authorizing use of force against the Syria regime were cancelled.

At issue was an unexpected diplomatic breakthrough that emerged when United States Secretary of State John Kerry uttered a (seemingly) off-hand remark during a news conference in London on Sept. 9, 2013 with British Foreign Secretary William Hague. Secretary of State Kerry said that President Assad could prevent a military strike on Syria if he handed over "every single bit" of his chemical weapons to the international community. At the time, Secretary of State Kerry said that he did not expect Assad to respond to this call; but, in fact, the remark appeared to have sparked fresh possibilities for a diplomatic solution with Russia championing the idea of subjecting Syria's chemical weapons stockpile to international auditors, and then placing them under the aegis of international jurisdiction. Syria -- Russia's client state in the Middle East -- was almost immediately scrambling to say that it would be willing to move in this direction. That stance by Syria functioned also as an admission by the Syrian regime that it was, in fact, in possession of chemical weapons. Until that moment, the Assad regime would not even acknowledge that reality.

On Sept. 10, 2013, Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem offered a public admission of the Assad regime's chemical weapons stockpile when he said: "We are ready to inform about the location of chemical weapons, halt the production of chemical weapons, and show these objects to representatives of Russia, other states and the United Nations." He continued, "Our adherence to the Russian initiative has a goal of halting the possession of all chemical weapons."

On the night of Sept. 10, 2013, United States President Obama delivered a national address on the Syrian issue. Originally, the speech had been regarded as an opportunity for the president to build congressional support -- then, at anemic levels -- for authorizing strikes against Syria, and assuring a war-weary and skeptical nation that such action was necessary. Now, however, the speech had a two-fold purpose -- to bolster that aforementioned case against Syria, but also to address the emerging diplomatic channel.

As regards the former objective, President Obama presented a succinct case for acting against

Syria Review 2016 Page 124 of 540 pages Syria

Syria. President Obama emphasized his conviction that the Assad regime was responsible for the chemical toxins attack that ensued around Ghouta on Aug. 21, 2013, characterizing the scene of death as "sickening," reminding the global community that such an attack was a violation of international law, and warning Americans that it posed a threat to United States national security.

But the president also opened the door to a negotiated settlement on the issue of Syria's chemical weapons arsenal and usage. He said that the Russian plan to report Syria's chemical weapons arsenal and place them under the aegis of international jurisdiction constituted "encouraging signs" and announced that he would pursue a "diplomatic path." The president said that his top diplomat, Secretary of State Kerry, would travel to Geneva in Switzerland to meet his Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, with an eye on pursuing a negotiated settlement on the issue of dealing with Syria's chemical weapons.

President Obama offered cautious support for this path forward, saying, "It's too early to tell whether [the plan] would succeed, and any agreement must verify that the Assad regime keeps its commitments. But this initiative has the potential to remove the threat of chemical weapons without the use of force, particularly because Russia is one of Assad's strongest allies." President Obama defended his decision to consider military strikes against Syria, arguing that the current diplomatic opening was only possible as a result of the credible threat of military force by the United States. Accordingly, the United States leader made it clear that his country's armed forces would maintain their posture, saying: "Meanwhile, I've ordered our military to maintain their current posture, to keep the pressure on Assad and to be in a position to respond if diplomacy fails."

While United States pundits parried opinions over the effectiveness and utility of President Obama's speech, a poll from CNN showed that while a majority of Americans remained skeptical about involving the country in the Syrian crisis, an overwhelming majority expressed support for President Obama's approach to Syria. In precise terms, there was a split decision on whether or not the president's case for strikes with 47 percent of Americans saying the president had done so and had 50 percent saying that he had not. However, 61 percent of Americans said they favored President Obama's "wait for diplomacy and hold steady with the threat of action" approach, as set forth in his national address.

On Sept. 11, 2013, Russia officially handed over its plan for placing Syria's stockpile under international control to the United States. Discussion over its contents was expected to take place in Geneva, Switzerland, between United States Secretary of State Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov. Those negotiations would be of a bilateral nature. The Obama administration announced that in addition to Secretary of State Kerry's meeting with Foreign Minister Lavrov, the United States' top diplomat would also meet with the United Nations-Arab League special envoy on Syria, Lakhdar Brahimi.

Syria Review 2016 Page 125 of 540 pages Syria

On that very day, difficult discussions also commenced in the United Nations Security Council -- with particular emphasis among the permanent veto-wielding members, United States, United Kingdom, France, Russia, and China -- over the proposition and the associated United Nations resolution.

The diplomatic path was not without serious obstacles. Russia was demanding that the United States withdraw its threat of force, while France -- the United States' ally on the issue of action against Syria -- was crafting a United Nations Security Council resolution that would include a provision for precisely such action, should Syria fail to comply with the dictates of the plan. At issue was France's inclusion of a Chapter VII provision (of the United Nations charter), which would effectively authorize the use of force if Syria failed to adhere to its stated obligations. For its part, Russia advocated for a non-binding declaration supporting its initiative.

At stake in that initiative was a demand for Syria to provide a full audit of its chemical weapons -- including varieties of toxins and storage locations -- within 15 days, as well as procedures facilitating the transfer of control over those chemical substances, and ultimately, their destruction. Of course, the issue of destruction itself presented a disagreement between Russia and Syria with the latter not keen on that aspect of the plan. Still, with the client state of Syria reliant on Russia to save the regime from United States strikes, it was likely that the arsenal of chemical toxins would ultimately be set for elimination.

Complicating the diplomatic path was an opinion editorial piece penned by Russian President Vladimir Putin, which was published by the New York Times. At the more conventional level, the piece included a fulsome plea for diplomacy by Putin as follows: "The potential strike by the United States against Syria, despite strong opposition from many countries and major political and religious leaders, including the pope, will result in more innocent victims and escalation, potentially spreading the conflict far beyond Syria's borders."

Putin also urged international action via global instruments of jurisprudence, noting that any actions should go through the United Nations Security Council, which stood as "one of the few ways to keep international relations from sliding into chaos." Putin also offered the reasonable argument that the United Nations could go down the road of obsolescence as its precursor, the League of Nations, if "influential countries bypass the United Nations and take military action without Security Council authorization." Left unstated by the Russian leader, however, was the fact that his country's penchant for United Nations authorization for the use of force was not at play during the Soviet Union's invasion of Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Afghanistan, or even its limited engagement in the Georgian territory of South Ossetia most recently.

The most incendiary element in Putin's editorial was perhaps his chastisement of President Obama's declaration on United States' exceptionalism. Putin argued against that claim, stating: "And I would rather disagree with a case he made on American exceptionalism, stating that the

Syria Review 2016 Page 126 of 540 pages Syria

United States’ policy is What makes America different...it’s what makes us exceptional. It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation." This statement was a stunning example of irony coming from a world leader who declared to his fellow Russians in February 2013: "We are a victorious people! It is in our genes, in our genetic code!"

The Obama administration responded to this provocative opinion piece by Putin a day later on Sept. 12, 2013 with White House Press Secretary Jay Carney saying, "It's worth also pointing out there’s a great irony in the placement of an op-ed like this, because it reflects the truly exceptional tradition of this country of freedom of expression." Carney then went on to note that freedom of expression and free speech were "on the decrease in Russia." Carney also used the occasion to place the burden of the success of a diplomatic path on Russia, noting that the Russian president had placed his "prestige and credibility on the line" in offering a proposal to Syria to turn over its chemical weapons.

The Putin versus Obama contretemps aside, the diplomatic channels remained open. On Sept. 12, 2013, the United Nations announced that it had received documents from Syria, effectively acceding to the Chemical Weapons Convention, which prohibits the production and use of chemical weapons. Syrian Ambassador to the United Nations, Bashar Ja'afar, said, "Legally speaking Syria has become, starting today, a full member of the (chemical weapons) convention."

The move was the first significant indication that Syria was attempting to meet the demands of the international community. Syrian President Assad said in an interview with Russian media that now that those documents had been dispatched, the chemical weapons audit data would be submitted within 30 days of signing the Chemical Weapons Convention. But Assad appeared to be reticent about relinquishing his control over the situation, arguing that Syria's assent to the Russian plan was "not unilateral" and that his country would only accept it "if America stops military threats and if other countries supplying the rebels with chemical weapons also abide by the agreement." United States Secretary of State Kerry quickly disposed of the notion that Assad was calling the shots, warning the Syrian leader that "this is not a game." Kerry also indicated that he viewed Assad's promise to submit chemical weapons data with suspicion. Kerry instead asserted the following in regard to Syria's chemical weapons audit: “It has to be real. It has to be comprehensive. It has to be verifiable. It has to be credible. It has to be timely and implemented in a timely fashion. And finally there ought to be consequences if it doesn't take place.”

On Sept. 13, 2013, a preview of the highly anticipated United Nations' report on Syria's suspected use of chemical weapons emerged in the public purview. The chief chemical weapons inspector, Ake Sellstrom, acknowledged that the report was complete but that its release would be decided by the secretary general of the United Nations. The United Nations report was not expected to expressly assign blame for the use of chemical weapons in Syria, although according to sources, it would augment existing findings about the horror that unfolded in Ghouta, and its scientific

Syria Review 2016 Page 127 of 540 pages Syria evidence based on blood, urine, and soil samples would provide compelling suggestions as to the party responsible for the chemical weapons attack.

United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon indicated the findings from the United Nations inspectors would "overwhelmingly" confirm that chemical weapons were used in Syria. Speaking from the United Nations Women's International Forum, the head of the United Nations did not elaborate on which entity -- the Syrian regime or the Syrian rebels -- were responsible for the use of chemical weapons in that country; however, Ban was heard saying that Syrian President Assad was guilty of "crimes against humanity." Ban also said, "Therefore, I'm sure that there will be surely the process of accountability when everything is over."

Meanwhile, negotiations were ongoing in Geneva (Switzerland) between the top diplomats from the United States and Russia respectively -- Secretary of State Kerry and Foreign Minister Lavrov -- with leaks indicating that the two men enjoyed good rapport. The negotiations were being characterized as "constructive" and went late into the wee hours of Sept. 14, 2013, suggesting that climate was ripe with the possibility of forging a deal.

Chemical Weapons Deal

On Sept. 14, 2013, United States Secretary of State Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov announced that a breakthrough agreement had been reached as regards the Syrian chemical weapons controversy, and that diplomacy had won the day. At issue was the threat of force from the United States given the fact that Syria had crossed the so-called "red line" be using chemical weapons. Speaking at a joint news conference with his Russian counterpart, Foreign Minister Lavrov, Secretary of State John Kerry said of the concord: “If fully implemented, this framework can provide greater protection and security to the world.”

The agreement , titled “Framework for Elimination of Syrian Chemical Weapons,” calls for a full accounting of its chemical weapons stockpile within one week, the destruction of all production equipment by November 2013, and the elimination or transfer of the arsenal of chemical weapons by the middle of 2014. Achieving the objectives of the agreement promised to be difficult. A one week deadline for a full audit of Syria's chemical weapons arsenal was strenuously aggressive. As well, the destruction of production equipment and chemical toxins by 2014 was considered unprecedented since previous processes of this nature have typically taken several years to complete. Moreover, there would be complicated questions yet to address, such as how to ensure the safety of international inspectors in Syria.

It should also be noted that agreement on a United Nations Security Council resolution mandating Syrian disarmament on chemical weapons still promised to be potentially fractious. Russia was reluctant to the notion of adding a Chapter VII provision (authorizing the use of force if Syria reneged on its obligations) to the resolution, although Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov intimated

Syria Review 2016 Page 128 of 540 pages Syria that the provision could be added in the future in a worse case scenario. As such, the United States was not expected to press for that particular inclusion at this time.

The diplomatic breakthrough and the agreement itself were thus being lauded by all veto-wielding members of the United Nations Security Council (the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Russia, and China), as well as the broader United Nations and NATO. But with the same lack of diplomatic restraint shown by Russian President Putin in his opinion editorial in the New York Times, Syria's Assad regime hailed the breakthrough agreement as a "victory" for that country. Syrian Reconciliation Minister Ali Haidar declared in an interview with Russian media, "It's a victory for Syria achieved thanks to our Russian friends."

United States Secretary of State Kerry quelled Assad regime's bravado warning on Sept. 15, 2013, that the United States retained its right to carry out punitive strikes against Syria if that country did not meet its publicly stated international obligations. Secretary of State Kerry said, "If diplomacy has any chance to work, it must be coupled with a credible military threat." "We cannot have hollow words in the conduct of international affairs," Kerry added.

Already, President Obama in the United States had reminded the Syrian regime that while the agreement was "an important step" in the right direction, his country reserved the right to act against Syria for failing to meet its obligations. The United States leader said, "If diplomacy fails, the United States remains prepared to act." Indeed, the United States Pentagon noted that the United States military remained in a posture poised for military strikes against Syria.

Within the rebel ranks, the agreement was being regarded with scorn and bitterness. Indeed, the military leader of the anti-Assad Free Syrian Army, General Salim Idriss, dismissed the deal as irrelevant, saying, “All of this initiative does not interest us. Russia is a partner with the regime in killing the Syrian people.” Idriss also cast the deal as a Russian plan intended to gift the Assad regime with more time, and as such, he vowed to keep up the fight.

It should be noted that even as the world was focused on the diplomatic track in the second week of September 2013, fighting between the Syrian military and rebels continued. The main battleground was the Christian town of Maaloula, where al-Nusra fighters linked with al-Qaida were putting up a tough fight.

United Nations chemical inspectors confirm sarin attack; implicate Assad regime --

By the third week of September 2013, the United Nations released its report in which it confirmed that chemical weapons were used in Syria. The report by scientific experts stated that the banned chemical nerve agent, sarin, was dispersed using rockets into the Damascus suburb of Ghouta. The United Nations inspectors said that they had been able to procure significant evidence upon which to base their conclusions. That conclusion, in the words of the inspectors, was as follows: “The

Syria Review 2016 Page 129 of 540 pages Syria environmental, chemical and medical samples we have collected provide clear and convincing evidence that surface-to-surface rockets containing the nerve agent sarin.”

The report stopped short of assigning blame for the use of sarin, however the forensic details of the weapons appeared to implicate the Syrian government in the chemical weapons attack. Specifically, the report detailed the size and shape of the munitions, and the precise direction from which the munitions had been fired. These elements foreclosed the possibility that rebel forces were responsible for the chemical weapons attack, as alleged by the Assad regime, and as suggested by President Putin of Russia.

Indeed, the inspectors were able to carry out standard ordinance identification and crater analysis to conclude that two types of rockets had been used. Meanwhile, using angular measurements from the points where rockets had struck to their points of origin, the inspectors were able to note that the point of origin was a Syrian military complex. The identification of the rockets, along with size and sophistication of the launchers, and finally the angular plot analysis, together bolstered the unofficial assessment that the Syrian government and not the insurgents were responsible for the chemical attack on Ghouta.

The details of the report also suggested that the attack was more lethal than previously thought. First, based on the remnants of a warhead recovered by inspectors, it was clear that its capacity of sarin was quite large at around 56 liters. Second, the low temperature at the time of the attack meant that the sarin would prevail on the ground levels, even penetrating the lower levels of buildings where, according to the report, "many people were seeking shelter.”

After a briefing of the United Nations Security Council, which included a presentation of the report's findings by Dr. Ake Sellstrom -- a leading chemical weapons experts -- United Nations Secretary Ban Ki-Moon offered the following assessment: “The report makes for chilling reading. The findings are beyond doubt and beyond the pale. This is a war crime.” Secretary General Ban also stayed away from assigning blame to any particular party; however, he said that he hoped the seriousness of the situation would spur a new diplomatic solution to the Syrian crisis.

Such a hope was unlikely to be realized. Already Russia was downplaying the report as unconvincing. Russia’s ambassador to the United Nations, Vitaly Churkin, suggested that there remained several unanswered questions and said, “We need not jump to any conclusions.” Russia later went further and claimed the United Nations finding were "one sided." Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said, "We are disappointed, to put it mildly, about the approach taken by the U.N. secretariat and the U.N. inspectors, who prepared the report selectively and incompletely." He continued, "Without receiving a full picture of what is happening here, it is impossible to call the nature of the conclusions reached by the U.N. experts ... anything but politicized, preconceived and one-sided."

Syria Review 2016 Page 130 of 540 pages Syria

French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius responded to Russia's critique of the United Nations inspectors' report saying, "We are surprised by Russia's attitude because they are calling into question not the report, but the objectivity of the inspectors... I don't think anybody can call into question inspectors that have been appointed by the U.N."

The United Kingdom ambassador to the United Nations, Mark Lyall Grant, noted that the evidence pointed to a sophisticated chemical attack at the hands of the Assad regime. He said, “This was no cottage-industry use of chemical weapons." Pointing to the variety of munitions and the trajectories that had been plotted, Grant stated: “In our view, that there is no remaining doubt that it was the regime that used chemical weapons.” United States ambassador to the United Nations, Samantha Power, acknowledged that in the aftermath of Iraq, there was justifiable skepticism. But referring to the scientific evidence presented the aforementioned expert, Sellstrom, she said that it was important to focus on the facts. Powers said, “We understand some countries did not accept on faith that the samples of blood and hair that the United States received from people affected by the Aug. 21 attack contained sarin. But now Dr. Sellstrom’s samples show the same thing. And it’s very important to note that the regime possesses sarin, and we have no evidence that the opposition posses sarin.”

The United Nations itself entered the fray to defend the work of its chemical weapons experts who endured being shot at in Syria, in order to procure copious amounts of samples, and then carry out extensive analysis in record time. United Nations spokesperson, Martin Nesirky, declared: "The findings in that report are indisputable. They speak for themselves and this was a thoroughly objective report on that specific incident." Nesirky also emphasized the fact that there was an assiduously cross-checked chain of custody of all the environmental and biomedical samples used in the chemical weapons inquest.

It should be noted that an analysis of the United Nations' chemical inspectors' report by the Arms Control Association made clear that the findings were fair, factual, and convincing. The Arms Control Association drew attention to the annexes of the United Nations' chemical inspectors' report, stating, “The additional details and the perceived objectivity of the inspectors buttress the assignment of blame to Bashar al-Assad’s Syrian government.” As well, it should be noted that a separate investigation of the use of chemical weapons in Syria was carried out by Human Rights Watch, which also concluded that the Assad regime -- and not the rebels -- were behind the sarin attack. Indeed, Human Rights Watch concluded that sarin-filled shells had been fired from a military base in Syria supervised by Maher Assad -- the brother of the Syrian president.

United Nations Security Council Resolution on Syria

In the aftermath of the release of the report by the United Nations, the United States reminded Syria -- and indeed, the world -- that it remained under threat of punitive action for its use of chemical weapons, and was now subject to the provisions of the Russian-American compromise

Syria Review 2016 Page 131 of 540 pages Syria discussed above. To that end, Secretary of State John Kerry emphasized that his country would not tolerate any delays in the process of auditing and destroying Syria’s chemical weapons. Secretary of States Kerry said, “If Assad fails in time to abide by the terms of this framework, make no mistake, we are all agreed -- and that includes Russia -- that there will be consequences.” To that end, efforts were underway to move forward with a Security Council resolution against Syria. United Kingdom Ambassador Grant warned that the Security Council resolution against Syria was intended to compel Syria to abide by its promise to abandon its chemical weapons program.

It should be noted that in an address to the United Nations General Assembly on Sept. 24, 2013, United States President Barack Obama called for a robust United Nations Security Council resolution on Syria's chemical weapons. President Obama said that a strong resolution was needed "to verify that the regime is keeping its commitments" to remove or destroy its chemical weapons arsenal.

As September 2013 came to a close, the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council -- the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Russia, and China -- agreed to a resolution that would compel Syria to relinquish its chemical weapons.

Included in the draft were two key elements -- (1) a demand that Syria relinquish is stockpile of chemical weapons, and (2) a demand that Syria facilitate unfettered access to chemical weapons experts. Presumably to ensure the concurrence of Russia and China, the document did not contain automatic penalties if Syrian failed to comply with the dictates of the chemical weapons deal and the associated resolution. Instead, if Syria fails to comply the United Nations Security Council would reconvene to consider punitive action against that country.

Via Twitter, the United States ambassador to the United Nations said: "The draft UNSCR establishes that Syria's use of CW is threat to international peace & security & creates a new norm against the use of CW."

Wasting little time, the full 15-member United Nations Security Council put the draft to a vote where it won unanimous support for the binding resolution. Following the successful vote in New York, United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon characterized the outcome as "historic," and declared: "Tonight the international community has delivered." Secretary Ban also called on the Syrian government to implement the resolution "faithfully and without delay."

United States Secretary of State John Kerry hailed the adoption of the United Nations Security Council resolution on Syria, saying that the United Nations had illustrated the fact that "diplomacy can be so powerful that it can peacefully defuse the worst weapons of war." Meanwhile, at home in the United States, the Obama administration was making it clear that despite its critics on the left and right, it had in fact compelled Syria to disarm via effective diplomacy backed by a credible

Syria Review 2016 Page 132 of 540 pages Syria threat of force.

Latest Developments:

In the last week of September 2013, Syria had dispatched its chemical weapons audit to the United Nations. As well, fighting was reported in the central province of Hama where several people -- soldiers and rebels -- had been killed. On Sept. 24, 2013, a large explosion was reported in the Syrian capital of Damascus. It was apparent that regardless of the diplomatic track, the war in Syria was ongoing. That war contained its own complications with Islamist ranks of the opposition issuing a declaration on Sept. 25, 2013, that it rejected the authority of the main opposition alliance, the National Coalition, and instead called for an opposition bloc that was united under an "Islamic framework." Signatories to this pro-Islamist declaration were extremist and radical entities such as the Free Syrian Army and the al-Qaida allied, al-Nusra Front.

The move would undoubtedly influence the West's decisions in regards to engagement in Syria. In many senses, the declaration strengthened the claims of the Assad regime and of Russia that the rebels were infiltrated by extremist Islamist terrorists. As such, it was highly likely that the United States would confine its Syrian efforts to the chemical weapons issue.

As regards the chemical weapons issue, progress was being made towards the dismantling of Syria's chemical weapons arsenal in the first week of October 2013. A team of international weapons inspectors from the United Nations and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons were in Syria and carrying out the initial work of securing the sites where the inspections teams were to operate. Martin Nesirky, a spokesperson for United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, said that the first phase in the dismantling process -- disabling of Syria's chemical weapons production facilities -- was expected to commence "soon."

By mid-October 2013, United Nations-backed weapons inspectors released further news regarding that dismantling process. Inspectors with the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) confirmed that its inspections team was able to investigate 11 chemical weapons sites that were made known by the Syrian government in the aforementioned audit. The OPCW also said that critical equipment at six chemicals weapons sites had been destroyed.

The OPCW further expressed confidence that it would be able to meet the deadlines for the destruction of the chemical stockpiles. Of course, the reality was that some of the work to be undertaken by the inspectors was expected to take place close to war zones, thus presenting a serious logistical challenge. The fact that there was a mortar attack close to the hotel where the inspectors were residing in Damascus, and the detonation of several improvised explosive devices (IEDs) in cars nearby, were serious matters of concern for the inspectors.

Nevertheless, by Oct. 30, 2013, the OPCW announced that Syria met a key deadline to complete

Syria Review 2016 Page 133 of 540 pages Syria the destruction of chemical weapons production and mixing/filling equipment. A statement by the OPCW read as follows: "The joint mission is now satisfied that it has verified -- and seen destroyed -- all of Syria's declared critical production and mixing-filling equipment. Given the progress made in the Joint OPCW-U.N. Mission in meeting the requirements of the first phase of activities, no further inspection activities are currently planned."

The next major deadline facing Syria was set for Nov. 15, 2013, when the OPCW executive council would have to approve a detailed proposal by Syria to eliminate its chemical weapons stockpile. On that date, the chemical arms watchdog group affirmatively responded to the Syrian proposal and adopted the plan to destroy Syria's stockpile by mid-2014.

The plan hit a snag when the country of Albania, which recently destroyed its own chemicals arsenal, rejected a request to host the destruction of the Syrian chemical weapons stockpile. While the actual venue for that activity remained unresolved, the OPCW executive council nevertheless moved forward by approving the Syrian plan. The OPCW stipulated that the "most critical" chemicals would have to be removed by the end of 2013, but the full destruction of Syria's chemical weapons stockpile would have to be moved outside Syria and destroyed by a mid- 2014 deadline. As noted in the following statement: "Syrian chemical weapons will be transported for destruction outside its territory to ensure their destruction in the safest and soonest manner, and no later than June 30th 2014."

Note that as the first week of December 2013 came to a close, the OPCW said that all of the unfilled or "Category 3" munitions declared by Syrian have been destroyed.

Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) wins Nobel Peace Prize

In peripherally related news, the very institution carrying out this vital chemical weapons prohibition work in Syria received one of the world's most prestigious distinctions. The Norwegian Nobel Committee awarded the 2013 Peace Prize to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). Weapons inspectors from the OPCW have endured the threat of injury and even death, working in chaotic war zone conditions, to fulfill its duties to remove the threat of further chemical weapons use in Syria. The civil war in Syria, including the use of chemical weapons, and the vital role being played by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), were clear driving factors behind the Nobel Committee's 2013 choice for the renowned peace prize.

War or Peace?

Meanwhile, the civil war in Syria raged on. On Oct. 18, 2013, Syrian government forces carried out air strikes on the eastern city of Deir al-Zor following violent and bloody clashes that left scores of people dead on both sides of the conflict. The al-Qaida linked opposition force, al-Nusra Front,

Syria Review 2016 Page 134 of 540 pages Syria was said to be heavily engaged in these clashes. The battle was also marked by the death of one of President Bashar al-Assad's top military intelligence officers. General Jama'a Jama'a was actually shot to death by snipers during a battle with rebels. His death was cause for celebration among the rebels and opposition, while presenting a notable blow to the Assad regime.

In the Tel Arn village, close to Safira, a dozen Kurds were killed as a result of bombardment by pro-Assad forces around the same period. As well, a truck bomb at a security checkpoint in Hama left at least 30 people dead. That attack was blamed on the opposition al-Nusra Front, which is allied with the terror enclave, al-Qaida.

News involving al-Nusra emerged on Oct. 25, 2013, with an unconfirmed report about the death of Abu Mohammad al-Golani -- the head of the al-Qaida aligned entity. Should this news prove to be true, it would be a blow to some rebel factions seeking the overthrow of the Assad regime. On the other hand, it might strengthen the hand of other (less militant) rebel groups operating in Syria and might help bind the rebel ranks -- often fractured -- more closely together.

A car bomb on Oct. 25, 2013, in the village of Wadi Barada outside of Damascus left 40 people dead and dozens more wounded. Fighting continued in the Christian town of Sadad where Islamic extremist militants had seized a security checkpoint. Also in the last week of October 2013, pro- Assad forces saw success as they successfully captured the town of Hatitat al-Turkomen' control over this town would help facilitate access to a key highway that linking Damascus with the international airport.

The landscape in Syria deteriorated further on Oct. 30, 2013, as reports emerged about a possible strike by Israel on Syrian missile sites -- in one case close to the port city of Latakia and in another case in Damascus. The strikes seemingly targeted Russian-made surface to air highly mobile missile systems, which were believed to be intended for delivery to Hezbollah in Lebanon. If true, the strikes were less oriented towards changing the dynamics of the ongoing civil war in Syria, and more about Israel's own national security interests, which are threatened by Lebanon-based Hezbollah. That being said, the strikes would invariably complicate the already-volatile scene in Syria.

On Nov. 14, 2013, bombs and mortar fire killed three people close to the historic part of the Syrian capital of Damascus. Fighting was reported to be ongoing in Qara, close to the border with Lebanon, and thus driving people across the border as they attempted to flee the cross-fire of violence. Fighting was also reported to be taking place in Aleppo. There, rebel ranks suffered a significant loss when a prominent Syrian rebel commander -- Abdelqader Saleh of the Islamist al- Tawhid Brigades -- died following an air raid on the city.

A day earlier on Nov. 17, 2013, a massive bomb exploded in a government building in Damascus. The blast left more than 30 people dead and the structure decimated. The Syrian Observatory

Syria Review 2016 Page 135 of 540 pages Syria for Human Rights said that four generals were among the dead. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights also noted that the bomb exploded at a time when only the night staff was in the building; had the bombing occurred an hour before, the building would have been filled with personnel and the death toll would likely have been much higher. There were unofficial reports that the explosives had been planted in the basement. This information, if verified, would suggest that the rebels were able to successfully get past security.

Meanwhile, hopes for a negotiated settlement to the end of the Syrian civil war were dealt a blow when on Oct. 25, 2013, the Supreme Military Council -- an umbrella organization for several rebel brigades including the Free Syrian Army -- warned that it would not be participating in negotiations with the Syrian government.

Nevertheless, there remained cautious hopes that peace talks set to take place in Geneva, Switzerland in November 2013 might yield some results, given the success in finding an international solution to the chemical weapons issue (as discussed above). However, the reality was that finding basic common ground remained a profound challenge.

Several opposition entities have railed at the notion of Assad remaining in power. For example, George Sabra, the head of the Syrian National Council which sits within the Syrian opposition coalition, emphasized the need for Assad to resign as part of whatever resolution emerged from the talks in Switzerland. In an interview with A-Arabiya News, he said, "We want an announcement in advance that Bashar al-Assad and his ruling clique ... form no part of the political life in Syria in the transitional stage and in future." At the same time, Assad in October 2013 remarked that he saw "no reason" why he should not stand for the next presidential election. Cleary, a transition plan -- and indeed, Syria without him at the helm -- was not on the mind of President Assad.

As November 2013 commenced, hopes for peace were dashed when no consensus could be reached on who would be attending the negotiations. Of particular significance was the lack of clarity on the role of the Western-backed opposition coalition during these talks. The Syrian National Coalition argued that it should be the unitary entity representing the opposition in Geneva; however Russia called for several opposition delegations to be present.

Another bone of contention was the call for a transitional government which would not include either President Assad or his close associates. In fact, the Syrian National Coalition refused to participate in the talks unless there was a clear timetable for President Bashar Assad to leave power. This demand was met with outrage from Russia, and clearly, given President Assad's aforementioned belief that he would be contesting the country's next presidential election, he was not likely to assent to the notion of a transitional order that did not include him. It should be noted that the Syrian National Coalition was also demanding the release of detainees, and that relief agencies be guaranteed access to war zones.

Syria Review 2016 Page 136 of 540 pages Syria

In these ways, the main stumbling blocks remained unresolved: The Syrian opposition was divided and the Syrian government was refusing to discuss a transition of power. A third complication was the disagreement between the United States and Russia on whether Iran should be present for the peace talks. Clearly, the issue of an "exit strategy" for Assad promised to be well beyond a "sticking point," and more akin to the insurmountable wall between war and peace in Syria.

Not surprisingly, in November 2013, the United Nations-Arab League envoy on Syria, Lakhdar Brahimi, acknowledged that it was unlikely that the peace conference in Geneva would go forward anytime soon, although he hoped for a meeting before the year came to a close.

To that end, the new date being floated for a peace summit was Jan. 22, 2014, in Geneva. A spokesperson for United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said the goal of the summit was to create a transitional government. Syria's opposition coalition had earlier said that it would attend the peace conference; however, militant elements were highly resistant to the notion of engagement. There were also serious challenges to the process of building a negotiating team. Moreover, it remained unclear if the rebels' precondition that President Assad leave office remained on the table. Also unclear was the role -- if any -- of Iran at the peace summit. Despite progress on the Iranian nuclear issue and Iran's role as a regional player, the United States and Saudi Arabia remained opposed to the notion of official Iranian involvement at the negotiating table.

Hopes that this impending peace summit in Geneva would yield positive results were dashed when the rebels' Free Syrian Army (FSA) announced that its representatives would not be in attendance at the summit set to take place in January 2014. Instead, the FSA commander, General Salim Idriss, declared that his fighters would continue to battle until they drove the Assad regime from power. Meanwhile, the Syrian government of President Bashar al-Assad said it would attend the summit but it drew the line at negotiating with "terrorists." The Assad regime has also been vocal about its stance that there was no reason for Bashar al-Assad to step down from power. Clearly, that stance was at odds with the objectives of the opposition.

November 2013 highlighted the geopolitical implications of Syrian Conflict in the form of a bombing at Iranian embassy in Beirut. On Nov. 19, 2013, a double suicide bombing outside the Iranian embassy in the Lebanese capital of Beirut left more than 20 people dead and more than 140 others injured. The first bombing was carried out by a suicide attacker on a motorcycle, while the second was executed by a suicide bomber in a a four-wheel drive vehicle. Among the dead was the Iranian cultural attache, Sheikh Ibrahim Ansari, who had just assumed his diplomatic post a month prior.

Because Iran has been a well-known supporter of the Lebanese Shi'a Islamic extremist group, Hezbollah, which deployed fighters to Syria to help the government of Bashar al-Assad hang onto

Syria Review 2016 Page 137 of 540 pages Syria power against rebel forces, there were suggestions that this attack was a manifestation of spillover violence from the Syrian civil war.

Certainly, the violence and bloodshed augured negatively for Lebanon as it pushed the country further into a state of turmoil. Noteworthy was the fact that it was the first since Lebanon's 1975- 90 Civil War that an embassy had been targeted. Moreover, the brazen act of violence illustrated the ease with which Lebanon was being pulled into Syria's destructive orbit.

There was also a sectarian element to the attack as the Sunni Jihadist group, Abdullah Azzam Brigades, claimed responsibility for the violence at the Iranian embassy in Beirut. Via the Twitter account of the group's religious guide, Sheikh Sirajeddine Zuraiqat, Abdullah Azzam Brigades issued its formal claim of responsibility, declaring: "The Abdullah Azzam brigades - the Hussein bin Ali cells - may they please God - are behind the attack on the Iranian embassy in Beirut." The group, which is linked with the notorious terror enclave, al-Qaida, also said that the bombings were a "double martyrdom operation carried out by two heroes from the heroic Sunnis of Lebanon." The group threatened more attacks in Lebanon until Iran withdrew its forces from Syria, bolstering the view that a sectarian conflict that transcended borders was emerging in the Middle East.

At the start of December 2013, the sense of pessimism surrounding the Syrian conflict was accentuated when French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said he had limited expectations that the planned peace talks over the Syrian conflict would yield positive results. On the agenda in Geneva would e a plan to ensure the delivery of humanitarian aid, end the fighting and outline a political transition for Syria. Foreign Minister Fabius said his country was looking towards the summit with "a great deal of doubt."

At the World Policy Conference business meeting in Monaco, Fabius said, "My fellow European ministers and I are working on the success of [Geneva II], but we can have a great deal of doubt on that. If sadly it isn't successful, that would mean this martyred country will continue to suffer as will its neighbors." Of President Assad's reluctance to relinquish power, Fabius noted that while the Syrian leader possessed "a lot of faults, he is not an idiot" and that France "can't see why he would hand over all his powers." He was realistic about the capacity of the fragmented opposition -- made up of elements supported by the West, such as the Free Syrian Army and the Syrian National Coalition, as well as extremist Jihadist Islamist elements opposed by the West, such as al- Nusra Front -- saying "As for the opposition that we support, it is in great difficulty."

But there were even complications in the support of the more desirable elements of the opposition when in early December 2013 the West said it was suspending all non-lethal support for the rebels due to concerns that it was inappropriately landing in the possession of the Islamist extremists.

By mid-December 2013, the opposition ranks became even more complicated when a fresh

Syria Review 2016 Page 138 of 540 pages Syria coalition of Syrian rebel groups declared themselves to be the Syrian Rebels Front and said they were fighting on two fronts -- against the regime of President Bashar Assad and against the Islamist extremist Jihadists aligned with al-Qaida. The newly-declared entity seemed to include elements of previously known rebel groups, such as the Free Syrian Army. In its statement, the Syrian Rebels Front said that its objective was "to overthrow the al-Assad regime and protect the people and the country."

The war in Syria raged on with pro-Assad jets dropping explosives-laden barrels on rebel- controlled areas of the northern city of Aleppo in mid-December 2013. More than 20 people were reported to have died as a result, including approximately 14 children.

Since mid-December 2013 through the end of the year, Syrian jets under the country of President Bashar al-Assad reportedly dropped barrels packed with explosives on the northern province of Aleppo. Over the course of that two-week period, more than 500 people -- including women and children -- were believed to have been killed as a result of that barrel bombing campaign. For the Assad regime, control over Aleppo -- a flashpoint city in the conflict between pro-Assad forces and anti-Assad rebels -- has been a major concern. The Assad regime has viewed jurisdiction over Aleppo as a priority in its mission to win the civil war raging in Syria since 2011. To that end, it was clearly prepared to use draconian methods -- albeit of the conventional rather than the chemical weapons variety -- in that fight.

Developments in 2014

On Jan. 8, 2014, the United Kingdom advanced a United Nations Security Council statement condemning the Syrian government's use of air strikes against civilians in the city of Aleppo, and particularly, the use of barrel bombs and Scud missiles. Russia assumed its usual role of protecting the Assad regime from international sanctions at the hands of the United Nations Security Council and blocked the condemnation by bringing forth amendments that removed reference to the events in Aleppo. That move essentially defanged the statement, forcing the United Kingdom to withdraw its support of the drat document and effectively blocking the statement.

The elimination of Syria's chemical weapons stockpile continued to dominate the landscape in December 2013 and into the start of 2014. A plan was afoot for Norwegian and Danish ships to transport the chemical arms from the Syrian port of Latakia to Italy. From that point, the arms would be moved to a United States navy ship and sailed into international waters where for destruction in a titanium tank.

The United Nations warned that Syria was likely to miss its year-end deadline for moving its most deadly chemical weapons from the country due to logistical and security challenges. A statement from the United Nations and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) read as follows: "At this stage transportation of some of the most critical chemical material before

Syria Review 2016 Page 139 of 540 pages Syria

Dec. 31 is unlikely." That Dec. 31, 2013, deadline was not met; however, at the start of 2014, the first shipment of chemical weapons departed Syria on a Danish ship bound for Italy, where (as noted above) it was to be transferred to a United States navy ship.

Now anxieties were concentrated on the looming mid-2014 deadline when Syria was supposed to have disposed of its chemical weapons arsenal and equipment, there remained questions emerging about whether all objectives could be met by that date. The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), which was charged with directing the destruction of Syria's stockpile of chemical weapons, warned that the process of moving and destroying the toxic chemical was a slow one, and it was being negatively affected by security concerns. Still, Ahmet Uzumcu of the OPCW expressed confidence that the chemical arms would be ultimately eliminated by the mid- 2014 deadline, regardless of the security challenged. There were also questions as to if Syria could do so in accordance with the United States-Russia plan aimed at averting military action. Accordingly, the OPCW demanded that Syria "intensify its efforts" to assist them in achieving the stated goals.

At the start of 2014, Germany had decided to join the international efforts to destroy Syria's stockpile of chemical weapons. The Germany government said that waste from destroyed weapons would be burned at a government facility in Muenster in accordance with environmental regulations. German Foreign Minister Frank Walter Steinmeier said his country, while being reluctant to embroil itself in the Syrian conflict, could not shirk its responsibility to global security. He said, "The destruction of Syria's chemical weapons could be the first, decisive step towards defusing the Syria conflict..... It is the duty of the international community to ensure their final disposal." It should be noted that the United Kingdom had already assented to assisting in the elimination of toxic chemical weapons waste.

Meanwhile, all eyes were on a forthcoming peace summit set to take place in Geneva, Switzerland. In the third week of January 2014, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad made clear that he had no intention of stepping down from power -- a key demand from the opposition but an issue that was not even on the table for discussion at the peace talks. According to Interfax News, Assad stated, "If we wanted to surrender we would have surrendered from the start." Of course, it should be noted that two Syrian news outlets suggested that this quote was inaccurate as Assad did not give an interview to the Russian Interfax news agency.

Around the same period, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon invited Iran to attend the Syrian peace talks in Switzerland. This news was not warmly received by the Syrian opposition, given Iran's allegiance to Syrian President Assad. In fact, the opposition, led by the Syrian National Coalition, made it clear that it would withdraw from the peace talks unless the invitation to Iran was retracted. The Syrian opposition pointed to Iran's role in bankrolling Hezbollah and contributing to the ongoing morass of the Syrian civil war, noting that they were not prepared to attend the peace talks if Iran was a participant in Geneva. As stated by Syrian National Coalition

Syria Review 2016 Page 140 of 540 pages Syria spokesperson, Louay Safi, in an interview with CNN, "This is a deal breaker for the National Coalition. If they insist to bring Iran, we will have to go back to the drawing board again. We don't want to negotiate with Iran. We want to negotiate with the regime. Before we go [to the conference], Iran has to say they will pull out all the fighters [inside Syria] allied with it." Accordingly, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon had the embarrassing task of rescinding the invitation to Iran.

But even with Iran out of the equation and the Syrian opposition returning to the negotiating table, the Geneva talks were seeing limited success. Instead the so-called pace summit was a gathering marked by acrimony and harsh rhetoric.

Of note were the fractious exchanges between the Syrian government and the Syrian National Coalition. The head of the Syrian National Coalition, Ahmad Jarba demanded Syrian President Assad's resignation and his trial "alongside all the criminals of his regime." He showed a photograph depicting the alleged torture and execution of opposition detainees in Syria, saying, "For the Syrians, time is now blood." On the other side of the equation, Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem referred to the Syrian opposition as "traitors."

Also of note was a contretemps between United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and Syrian Foreign Minister Muallem over the length of his speech. Muallem reacted to Ban's attempts to attend to the time limit as follows: "You live in New York. I live in Syria. I have the right to give the Syrian version here. After three years of suffering, this is my right."

The Syrian foreign minister also took issue with United States Secretary of State John Kerry's discussions of Syria without President Assad. At issue was Kerry's declaration that the Syrian government was the only entity not embracing the Geneva communique aimed at setting out a future path for Syria, without Assad at the helm. Kerry said, "Every delegation, with one exception, embraced the Geneva communique. No-one has done more to make Syria a magnet for terrorists than Bashar al-Assad. You cannot save Syria with Bashar al-Assad in power." In response, the Syrian foreign minister, Muallem, vituperatively declared that only Syrians could decide President Assad's fate. He said: "No one in the world has the right to confer or withdraw the legitimacy of a president, a constitution or a law, except for the Syrians themselves."

Meanwhile, Syria's ambassador to the United Nations, Bashar Jaafari, cast many of the commentaries at the summit as "provocative and repetitive statements based on hatred towards the Syrian government."

Still, the United Nations mediator for the Syrian crisis, Lakhdar Brahimi, made clear that all parties would continue to participate at the peace summit in Geneva. At an interview with international media, Brahimi said, "Both parties are going to be here tomorrow. They will be meeting. Then we will decide the following meeting on Sunday. Nobody will be leaving on Saturday and nobody will

Syria Review 2016 Page 141 of 540 pages Syria be leaving on Sunday." Brahimi continued by noting that the two sides (of the Syrian conflict) "understand what is at stake." He said, "Their country is in very, very bad shape. The situation in Syria is bad and getting worse. I think the people who are there representing the opposition and the government understand that as I do or better. It is their country after all." He continued, "The huge ambition of this process is to save Syria."

In the last days of the month (January 2014), the peace talks in Geneva were at a stalemate over the matter of a political transition for Syria. As expected, the main sticking point was the future role for President Assad. Also at issue was the matter of humanitarian aid, which should have been the least controversial topic of discussion but which was nonetheless a source of contention. United Nations envoy, Brahimi, was attempting to bridge the chasm via indirect negotiations; however, the peace talks in Geneva ultimately ended without success and with no major breakthroughs at hand. The only agreement reached involved a temporary three-day ceasefire in the beleaguered city of Homs to allow civilians to evacuate the city and to facilitate the delivery of relief supplies.

In February 2014, the war in Syria raged on with government forces dropping barrel bombs on the northern city of Aleppo; as many as 90 people had died as a result, according to activists on the ground. United States Secretary of State John Kerry issued a harsh condemnation of this use of barrel bombs by the Syrian regime. The Syrian government dismissed Kerry's reaction, insisting they were not targeting civilians but rather defending the country against "terrorists." Throughout, the Assad regime has referred to the Syrian rebel movement as "terrorists."

Meanwhile, accusations were rising that Syria was delaying the destruction of its chemical weapons stockpile. Syria denied this claim by the international community, characterizing it as "absolutely unjustified." But of concern for the United States has been the fact that only four percent of Syria's chemical stockpile had actually left the country. Syrian Deputy Foreign Minister Faisal al- Mekdad said in an interview with BBC News that Syria was "doing its best" to comply with the provisions of the chemical weapons deal and explaining that the ongoing war was causing complications. He said, "We shipped two shipments to the Syrian coast. The second shipment was intercepted by fire from terrorist groups." He continued, "This is a serious business. Syria is in war, and the Americans and others have to take this into consideration." In the latter part of February 2014, Syria was not meeting its obligations to destroy its chemical weapons arsenal, in accordance with the timetable set forth in the United States-Russia agreement.

These developments placed the vaunted Russia-United States compromise agreement on Syria at risk, potentially opening up the door once again for some sort of military action. However, the Obama White House was making it clear that it remained reticent about direct engagement in the Syrian civil war. White House spokesperson Jay Carney said: "We have to examine what the alternatives some might be proposing are, and whether they're in our national security interests, and whether a desire to do something about it could lead us, the United States, to take action that

Syria Review 2016 Page 142 of 540 pages Syria can produce the kind of unintended consequences we've seen in the past." Carney's statement suggested that President Barack Obama had little interest in involving the United States in another war in the Middle East.

A second round of peace talks in Geneva in February 2014 saw no better results than the previous talks a month earlier, which ended without any significant progress on the matter of ending the bloodshed in the Syrian civil war.

As well, Russia and the West could find no consensus on a draft of a United Nations resolution on aid access in Syria. Russia accused the West and certain Arab countries of viewing the Syrian crisis from a biased lens and said that the draft proposal (prepared jointly by a select group of European and Arab countries) was filled with "one sided accusations aimed at the [Assad] regime." But using Assad's own lexicon of referring to all rebels as "terrorists," Russia also introduced to the United Nations Security Council its own resolution on humanitarian aid access in Syria that also contained references to the fight against "terrorism" in Syria. That reference point raised the ire of many anti-Assad contingents who have said that the Syrian regime deploys the word terrorism broadly against any and all opposition entities. The lack of agreement from Russia and the West on the matter of simply crafting a document aimed at advancing humanitarian aid suggested that a resolution to the Syrian crisis remained elusive.

That being said, as February 2014 entered its final week, the Unitd Nations Security Council finally found concurrence and were able to forge a resolution on access to humanitarian aid in Syria. Russia and China, which had both previously vetoed resolutions on Syria, voted in favor of this document. Russia withdrew its objections once references to sanctions against Syria were removed from the draft document. The resolution demanded that both the Syrian government and opposition allow humanitarian aid convoys to function unimpeded in Syria as they attempted to help civilians in need. The document stopped short of threatening sanctions although it warned of "further steps" in the two sides failed to comply with the resolution. United Nations Secretary- General Ban Ki-moon said in an address to the General Assembly that the United Nations would do everything possble to implement the Security Council resolution.

Meanwhile the civil war in Syria continued on in the last week of February 2014 with several people dying as a result of a car bomb near a field hospital in northern Syria -- an area close to the border with Turkey. The field hospital in the rebel-controlled town of Atmeh was home to a camp for refugees from the civil war. Also in the same period, in fighting between radical militant factions on Syrian terrain reached new heights when a senior rebel leader with ties to al-Qaida was killed in a suicide attack in the Syrian city of Aleppo. It was believed that the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, known as ISIS, may have been behind that killing due to its ongoing power struggle with rival factions in the Syrian civil war.

At the start of March 2014, Amnesty International was warning that starvation of civilians was

Syria Review 2016 Page 143 of 540 pages Syria being used as a weapon of war in Syria. Amnesty International pointed to the deaths of about 130 people in the Yarmouk camp in Damascus as an illustration of this tactic. The human rights agency noted that thousands of people were trapped there facing a "catastrophic humanitarian crisis," often being forced to risk death by sniper fire in their desperate search for food, and with the vast many of the persons there suffering from malnutrition as a result of the failure to find food.

The start of March 2014 also saw Syria gain the dubious distinction of replacing Afghanistan as the source of the world's largest refugee population. As stated by Antonio Guterres, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in a speech before the United Nations General Assembly: "Five years ago Syria was the world's second-largest refugee hosting country. Syrians are now about to replace Afghans as the present biggest refugee population worldwide." He continued, "It breaks my heart to see this nation that for decades welcomed refugees from other countries, ripped apart and forced into exile itself."

Meanwhile, the deputy United Nations aid head, Kyung-Wha Kang, said that as many as 4.3 million children in Syria were affected by the war, and another 1.2 million were refugees. She explained the particular toll the war had taken on children, saying, "Children have been killed, arrested, abducted, tortured, mutilated, sexually abused, and recruited by armed groups. They have been used as human shields. They are malnourished. Syria is in danger of losing a generation of children."

Also at the start of March 2014, United Nations human rights investigators noted that all warring sides in the Syrian civil war were resorting to shelling and siege with deleterious effects for the civilian population. Paulo Pinheiro, the head of the United Nations commission of inquiry, said, "One of most stark trends we have documented is the use of siege warfare, the denial of humanitarian aid, food and basic necessities such as medical care and clean water have forced people to choose between surrender and starvation." The report by the commission concluded that war crimes had been committed on both sides, including torture, massacres, rapes and recruitment of child soldiers. The United Nations commission of inquiry also exercised no restraint in its excoriation of world powers at the United Nations Security Council, which it said was responsible for allowing war crimes to continue to take place in Syria. Pinheiro, the head of the commission, said, "The Security Council bears responsibility for not addressing accountability and allowing the warring parties to violate these rules with total impunity."

In mid-March 2014, it was clear that the Assad regime in Syria was winning the civil war as government forces recaptured the remaining rebel-held town on the border with Lebanon. The recapture of Yabroud by joint Syrian military and Hezbollah forces made it clear that an effort to oust rebel fighters from the Qalamoun mountains near the Lebanese border, which had been ongoing for several months, was seeing success. Already government forced had taken control over other rebel strongholds such as Qara, Deir Attiya, and Nabak, located to the northeast of

Syria Review 2016 Page 144 of 540 pages Syria

Yabroud.

Tensions between Turkey and Syria emerged in March 2014 when Turkey downed a Syria aircraft, which (according to Turkey) had violated its air space. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan announced the incident and warned that Syria' violation of Turkish sovereignty called for a heavy response. The prime minister declared: "A Syrian plane violated our airspace. Our F-16s took off and hit this plane. Why? because if you violate my airspace, our slap after this will be hard." For its part, Syria reacted with outrage, disputing Turkey's version of the events, and insisting instead that the jet was flying over Syrian territory when it was downed. Syria further accused Turkey of "blatant aggression." It should be noted that the fighter pilot appeared to have survived the incident, with some reports suggesting the pilot was able to eject safely from the aircraft. In many senses, Turkey was becoming a key inflection point in the ongoing Syrian crisis.

Meanwhile, spill-over violence from the Syrian civil war was also affecting Lebanon. Notably, a suicide car bombing in late March 2014 at an army checkpoint in Lebanon close to the border with Syria left three soldiers dead and another four wounded. The attack took place in the town of Arsal, which was home to a complex population base including thousands of Syrian refugees and Syrian (Sunni) rebels. The attack in Arsal was thus linked with the civil war rocking Syria. Indeed, it likely constituted another episode of cross-over violence.

Tensions were already at an elevated level following the capture of the strategic Syrian border town of Yabroud by the Syrian army earlier in the month. Then as March 2014 was coming to a close, the Syrian army were making more gains as they captured the Syrian border towns of Flita and Ras Maara. Collectively, these victories for the Assad regime in Syria likely created consternation among Sunni antagonists across the border in Lebanon where many Sunni residents were more sympathetic to the Syrian rebels than the Alawite Assad regime. Now, the attack in Arsal -- for which the Sunni extremist group Ahrar al-Sunna claimed responsibility -- suggested these tensions were escalating, and that Sunni militants were becoming increasingly active not only in Syria but also in Lebanon.

The timing of the Arsal attack was key, coming as it did on the heels of a blustery speech by Hezbollah leader, Hassan Nasrallah, in which he declared that he was protecting Lebanon by fighting Sunni militants in Syria. Of course, around the same time, the Lebanese army raided the house of a Sunni bomb maker in Arsal and killed him. Together, the two incidences were illustrative of the competing loyalties and ethno-sectarian hostilities at play in Lebanon. Collectively, the violence in Lebanon highlighted the increased Sunni-Shi'a tensions plaguing the entire region of the Middle East, with particular attention to Syria, which was in the throes of its ongoing civil war, and with spill-over violence in neighboring countries like Lebanon.

As March 2014 came to a close, two Spanish journalists were released after six months in captivity in Syria. Javier Espinosa, a correspondent for El Mundo, and Ricardo Garcia Vilanova, a freelance

Syria Review 2016 Page 145 of 540 pages Syria photographer, were abducted close to the border with Turkey by Islamist extremist militants from the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS) -- an al-Qaida linked entity -- in September 2013. Four members of the Free Syrian Army who were protecting them were also captured along with the two Spanish journalists, but were released separately. While the cases of Espinosa and Vilanova ended happily, the story was not so happy for several other foreign journalists in Syria believed to have been kidnapped or murdered by Islamists fighters in Syria. As many as 17 other foreign journalists and more than 20 local Syrian reporters were abducted by militant Islamic rebels, while another 40 Syrian journalists were being held by the Syrian government. Indeed, according to Reporters Without Borders, has cast Syria as the most dangerous country for journalists.

In the first part of April 2014, Assad forces had captured the rebel-held Syrian border town of Rankous, essentially ensuring they had wrested back control over the area used as a rebel supply line from neighboring Lebanon. The capture of Rankous was the latest victory for joint Syrian and Hezbollah fighters in their operation to hold sway over the border region with Lebanon and, in particular, the main thoroughfare from Damascus to central Syria, Homs, and north to the Mediterranean coast. Despite a series of military defeats, joint rebel and foreign Jihadist forces were yet holding onto their strongholds in eastern and northern Syria. They were also embroiled in fierce fighting with pro-Assad forces in the area of Latakia.

Syria's compliance with a deal aimed at addressing its use of chemical weapons (and thus avoiding military threats from the United States), was at issue in the spring of 2014. One concern was Syria's inaccurate or unclear audit of its chemical weapons arsenal to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). As such, Syria submitted a new audit of its stockpile, replacing ranges of quantities with specific amounts. Another issue was the fact that a June 2014 deadline was looming by which time Syria was supposed to have eliminated all of the chemicals in its possession. However, Syria was significantly off-schedule in its commitments to load its arsenal of toxic chemical weapons, including mustard gas and sarin, on Scandinavian ships at the port city of Latakia, where they would be taken out to sea to be disposed of at a specially-equipped United States vessel, or to commercial waste facilities in Europe. Given the fact that it had missed several key deadlines in this regard, Syria submitted a new timeline to the OPCW.

At the political level, President Assad was signaling his confidence that he had the advantage over the rebels and was in no mood to relinquish control when it was announced that the next presidential election would go forward on June 3, 2014.

At the close of April 2014, the war in Syria was raging on with a devastating car bomb in the city of Homs that left 100 people dead. Women and children were among the victims. By the start of May 2014, there were plans afoot for rebels to be allowed to retreat from government-controlled areas to rebel-held areas of that besieged city. Also in Homs, scores of people did in car bombings.

A separate attack was carried out using mortar shells and hit the Badr al-Din al-Hussein technical

Syria Review 2016 Page 146 of 540 pages Syria institute, located in the Damascus suburb of Shaghour. More than a dozen children died and scores more were injured as a result. Another mortar attack on the outskirts of Damascus in Adra killed three children seeking shelter at a facility for internally displaced families. Meanwhile, in Hama, suicide bombings killed around 20 people, about a dozen of whom were children. While there was no claim of responsibility for those attacks, car and suicide bombings have become regular fare for the Islamist extremists al-Nusra Front, which is aligned with the terror base, al-Qaida.

As well, Syrian government forces carrying out air strikes in Aleppo that left approximately 20 people dead, most of whom were children at a school in the Ansari district, according to activists on the ground. Human rights railed against the Syrian regime's indiscriminate attacks in populated areas, thus exacting a significant civilian death toll. As noted by the regional director of the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) struck a similar chord as she said, "Every day, across Syria, children who are simply trying to go about their everyday lives are being killed and maimed by indiscriminate attacks on populated areas." She continued, "These attacks appear to be escalating, in complete disregard of all the calls that have been made to stop this insane cycle of violence, and to avoid similar breaches of international law."

In the first week of May 2014, rebels struck back at pro-Assad forces in Aleppo. They carried out a bombing on the city's tunnels, ultimately destroying the 150-old Carton Citadel Hotel and several other buildings around the city's medieval citadel, all of which are part of a UNESCO World Heritage Site. The attack targeted pro-Assad forces and appeared to have ended in the killing of dozens of government troops. It was clear that the rebels were not prepared to easily relinquish control over Aleppo even as the Assad regime was intent on regaining jurisdiction over that city. Indeed pro-government forces have been carrying out a vicious aerial bombardment of rebel-held Aleppo since late 2013.

At the close of May 2014, government fighter jets carried out an aerial bombardment of rebel-held areas while rebels used mortars and car bombs to carry out its attacks. But rebels were also using an emerging tactic of digging tunnels into the capital, which remained in pro-Assad hands. The rebels would presumably use the tunnels to move fighters and weapons into the center of Assad's stronghold. More frightening to the residents of Damascus was the possibility that the rebels might use tunnel bombs to attack the capital, much in the same way as they have done in other parts of the country.

Meanwhile, in mid-May 2014, the futility of the peace effort in Syria was brought into sharp relief when the United Nations-Arab League envoy to Syria, Lakhdar Brahimi, announced that he would resign at the end of the month. Brahimi's resignation was attributed to the lack of progress in finding a peaceful resolution to end the civil war in Syria. As stated by Brahimi himself in a meeting with the United Nations Security Council, "I go with a heavy heart because so little was achieved."

Syria Review 2016 Page 147 of 540 pages Syria

Election Farce

Despite the civil war rocking Syria since 2011, and irrespective of the fact that wide swaths of the Syrian population -- led by the rebel movement -- wanted to see President Bashar al-Assad gone from power, the incumbent president made it clear that he would be seeking re-election. To that end, a presidential election was scheduled to be held on June 3, 2014.

It should be noted that there are technically no "elections" to the presidency in Syria; the last referendum confirming the presidency was held on May 27, 2007. In that vote, President Bashar al-Assad was confirmed for a first seven-year term with 97.6 percent of the vote. President Assad was confident that in 2014, he would again be confirmed to the country's top post.

The reality was the Syria in 2014 was beset by a bloody and violent civil war, and with Syrian subject to some of the worst living conditions. Indeed, Syria had bypassed Afghanistan as the source of the world's largest refugee population, with more than two million people now being classified as such. Separate from the refugee population were the millions of Syrians who were classified as "internally displaced." It was difficult to comprehend how a legitimate election could take place under such conditions.

At the international level, governments in the West and in the Middle East pilloried the very notion of a Syrian presidential vote taking place during an active state of civil war, referring to it as a "parody of democracy." The European Union dispatched a statement asserting that a presidential vote "conducted in the midst of conflict, only in regime-controlled areas and with millions of Syrians displaced from their homes would be a parody of democracy, have no credibility whatsoever, and undermine efforts to reach a political solution."

At the start of May 2014, the Syrian Supreme Constitutional Court announced that it had validated the candidacies for three candidates for the presidency, including President Bashar al-Assad, Hassan Abdallah al-Nouri, and Maher Abdel-Hafiz Hajjar. Neither Hassan Abdallah al-Nouri nor Maher Abdel-Hafiz Hajjar was expected to pose a serious threat to Bashar al-Assad, making the election something of a farce in the eyes of observers. There was no doubt about Assad's re- election irrespective of the growing outrage over the government's new "reconstruction" tax. The new charge, which appeared on utilities bills, was intended to be used for the rebuilding of the infrastructure the Assad government was systematically destroying in the war. The irony was not lost on many soldiers who could not comprehend being ordered to bomb a building and then be

Syria Review 2016 Page 148 of 540 pages Syria charged for its reconstruction.

By the end of May 2014, the government was in election mode as it launched its "Together, We Rebuild" campaign, with posters depicting hands clasped together across the streets of Damascus. The visual imagery was at odds with the reality of a country in the throes of a bitter civil war with no resolution in sight and with an international community able to do little to stop the rampage of violence. Indeed, there remained little understanding of how logistically the election could go forward amidst a state of violent civil war.

The fairness of the election was also an issue with Syrians who took refuge from the civil war in Lebanon being told that they would lose their refugee status if they crossed the border back into Syria. With as many as a million Syrian refugees in Lebanon, the election in Syria would likely lack the participation of a key constituency with high stakes in the matter of who would rule Syria. In truth, however, the election was not a competitive contest and most of these refugees likely made the calculation that there was no good reason to risk losing their refugee status (1) to re-enter a war zone, and (2) to vote in an election where the outcome was pre-determined.

On June 3, 2014, after the election transpired in Syria, Bashar al-Assad was declared to be the landslide winner of the presidential election with 89 percent of the vote share. Assad's challengers, al-Nouri and Hajjar, received 4.3 percent and 3.2 percent of the vote respectively. The Syrian capital Damascus -- an Assad stronghold -- erupted into celebration after the results were announced.

The election was regarded with cynicism from other quarters. A coalition of Islamist rebel fighters described the voting process as "Elections of Blood" and condemned it as having no legitimacy. At the international level, the European Union issued a statement criticizing the election and noting that it could not be considered "a genuinely democratic vote." United States Secretary of State John Kerry issued a more scathing rebuke as he declared: "They [the Syrian presidential elections] are meaningless, and they are meaningless because you can’t have an election where millions of your people don’t even have the ability to vote, where they don’t have the ability to contest the election, and they have no choice."

Assad a global pariah --

Despite his landslide re-election victory at home in Syria, his standing on the global stage was not one of great popularity. Instead, Assad had the dubious distinction of being at the top of a a list of 20 war crimes indictments of government officials and rebels drafted by prosecution experts from the Syria Accountability Project. That list, along with accompanying documentary evidence numbering 1,400 pages in total, was handed on to the International Criminal Court (ICC) and included details for all the alleged war crimes violations. It should be noted that the list apparently did not only include members of Syria's military and political establishment but also included

Syria Review 2016 Page 149 of 540 pages Syria members of Sunni Islamist extremist groups functioning in Syria such al-Nusra Front.

Of course, given the stances of Russia and China on the United Nations Security Council, it was unlikely they would back moved to refer the Syrian case to the ICC for possible prosecution of war crimes and crimes against humanity. However, it was conceivable that a treaty could be forged that would facilitate the formation of a tribunal on Syria.

Chemicals weapons disposal progress

Another issue was the fact that a June 2014 deadline was looming by which time Syria was supposed to have eliminated all of the chemicals in its possession. However, Syria was significantly off schedule in its commitments to load its arsenal of toxic chemical weapons, including mustard gas and sarin, on Scandinavian ships at the port city of Latakia, where they would be taken out to sea to be disposed of at a specially-equipped United States vessel, or to commercial waste facilities in Europe. Given the fact that it had missed several key deadlines in this regard, Syria submitted a new timeline to the OPCW.

On June 23, 2014, Syria relinquished the last of its declared chemical toxins. The remaining 100 tons -- about eight percent of the total amount of chemical poisons reported to the OPCW -- was being stored at a facility the Assad regime said was in an unsafe area due to ongoing fighting. However, with the security landscape improving, the toxic chemicals were retrieved and dispatched to Latakia, to be disposed of as discussed above. OPCW chief Ahmet Uzumcu said, "A major landmark in this mission has been reached today. The last of the remaining chemicals identified for removal from Syria were loaded this afternoon aboard the Danish ship Ark Futura."

Despite the fact that Syria had achieved this milestone, the head of the OPCW said it was not yet prepared to declare Syria to be free of weapons of mass destruction. OPCW chief Ahmet Uzumcu said, "All declared chemical weapons have left Syria (but) clearly we cannot say as the secretariat of the OPCW that Syria doesn't possess any chemical weapons any more." Indeed, the West remained suspicious about Syria's access to materials used in chlorine gas attacks. In fact, the OPCW appeared to bolster the West's charges that chlorine gas related substances were not declared by Syria.

Also of note was the fact that it would take several months for the entire Syrian chemical weapons arsenal to be destroyed, with particular attention to highly toxic chemical agents such as sarin and

Syria Review 2016 Page 150 of 540 pages Syria mustard gas. To this end, OPCW chief Ahmet Uzumcu added, "While a major chapter in our endeavors closes today, OPCW's work in Syria will continue. We hope to conclude soon the clarification of certain aspects of the Syrian declaration and commence the destruction of certain structures that were used as chemical weapons production facilities."

"Islamic State" extremists make territorial gains and declare Caliphate

In the first week of July 2014, 30 Islamist extremists from the ascendant Jihadist entity "Islamic State" (previously known as Islamic State of Iraq and Syria or ISIS as well as Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant or ISIL) broke out of a jail in al-Hawaaj where they were being held by a rival militant faction. In this period, "Islamic State" fighters also seized control of the largest oil field in the eastern Deir al-Zor province, effectively ousting the Islamist al-Nusra Front (aligned with al- Qaida). Several villages in Deir al-Zor were additionally seized and now held by this faction of Islamic Jihadists. These actions suggested that "Islamic State" (formerly known as ISIS or ISIL) was gaining momentum not only next door in Iraq but also in Syria, and effectively consolidating its territorial gains across both countries, which it claims as part of its medieval-style Islamic Caliphate.

For some time, the United States and other countries of the West have been reluctant to enter the Syrian conflict, noting that they did not want to inadvertently help Islamist terrorists, such as al- Nusra Front. That stance was proving to be prescient in 2014 with "Islamic State" essentially presenting an even more dangerous challenge in the region than other extremist terrorist entities. Whereas the West and regional powers in the Middle East had earlier called for an end to the Assad regime, suddenly the geopolitical stakes were quite different as extremist terrorists from "Islamic State" were now posing the most dangerous threat to regional stability.

On the matter of those extremist terrorists, those previously known as ISIS or ISIL were making it clear that they were the new leaders of the region from Syria to Iraq, which they deemed to be a new medieval-style Islamic Caliphate. The extremists Sunni militants also declared that their new name was "Islamic State" -- a move that seemed to imbue these extremist terrorists with a broad Islamist and Jihadist mandate unlikely to be limited to their existing territory. Indeed, the leader of the so-called "Islamic State," Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, demanded that Muslims across the world take up arms and descend on his self-declared caliphate, while also promising to move onto to Baghdad in Iraq. While that country was "ground zero" of its Jihadist mission in mid-2014, Syria was also a central part of the equation with an ever-expanding zone of control that included wide swaths of Syrian and Iraqi territory.

In the second week of July 2014, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the head of "Islamic State," released a videotaped message in which he demanded obedience from Muslims. His message cast him as a reluctant leader, as he said, "I am your leader, though I am not the best of you, so if you see that I am right, support me, and if you see that I am wrong, advise me." It should be noted that many of

Syria Review 2016 Page 151 of 540 pages Syria the fighters aligned with Baghdadi and "Islamic State" were from other countries in the region. In many senses, Baghdadi was surpassing Osama Bin Laden's successor, Ayman al-Zawahri, as the new Sunni pan-Islamic and Jihadist leader on the world scene.

Assad inaugurated for another term following election farce

In mid-July 2014, President Assad was inaugurated into office for another term as Syria's president. This swearing in ceremony ensued in the aftermath of an election largely viewed as a farce.

Despite the civil war rocking Syria since 2011, and irrespective of the fact that wide swaths of the Syrian population -- led by the rebel movement -- wanted to see President Bashar al-Assad gone from power, the incumbent president sought re-election on June 3, 2014, against a handful of opponents -- none of whom were expected to pose any challenge.

The reality was the Syria in 2014 was beset by a bloody and violent civil war, and with Syrian subject to some of the worst living conditions. It was difficult to comprehend how a legitimate election could take place under such conditions. The fairness of the election was also an issue with Syrians who took refuge from the civil war in Lebanon were being told that they would lose their refugee status if they crossed the border back into Syria to vote. With as many as a million Syrian refugees in Lebanon, the election in Syria would likely lack the participation of a key constituency with high stakes in the matter of who would rule Syria. Critics at home and abroad thus pilloried the very notion of a Syrian presidential vote taking place during an active state of civil war, referring to it as a "parody of democracy."

Nevertheless, Assad was ultimately declared to be the landslide winner of the presidential election with 89 percent of the vote share and, as discussed here, he was inaugurated into office six weeks later in mid-July 2014. Assad seized the opportunity to declare victory over his political enemies at home, in the region, and internationally who advocated that he step down from office. Indeed, it was an indisputable fact that Assad remained securely at the helm of Syria three years after the start of the civil war. Aware that Islamic militants were now making gains in Syria and Iraq, Assad also had a defiant message for them as he promised to recover the territory lost in Syria and vowing to destroy those extremists. He also had a message for the governments of mostly of Sunni Arab countries in the region, saying they would "pay" for their decision to support and fund the extremist Islamists operating in Syria. On state television, Assad was seen declaring: "Soon we will see the Arab, regional and Western states that supported terrorism pay a high price."

Special Report: terror group Islamic State extends its rampage of horror from Syria to Iraq

Terror group Islamic State carries out rampage of horror from Syria to Iraq; United States

Syria Review 2016 Page 152 of 540 pages Syria

President Obama outlines strategy to to "degrade and ultimately destroy" the Jihadist terror group alternatively referred to as ISIL and ISIS --

Introduction

In mid-2011, the United Nations Security Council and the Arab League respectively issued condemnations of the violence in Syria. As well, the United Nations Human Rights Council called for an independent inquiry into the violent crackdown on dissent. Meanwhile, global leaders were calling for President Assad to step down from power, given the brutality of the Syrian regime's crackdown on protesters. In 2012, the bloody crackdown by the Assad regime on anti-government protesters was ongoing. In fact, the crackdown appeared to become more relentless in places such as Homs and Aleppo. Despite widespread condemnation from the West, a United Nations Security Resolution on the situation in Syria was subject to veto by Russia and China. A subsequent vote in the United Nations General Assembly overwhelmingly condemned Syria for its brutal crackdown. A prevailing truce, brokered by the joint United Nations/Arab League envoy, Kofi Annan, was established in the interests of preventing further bloodshed; however, it was revealed to be an exercise in theory rather than practice and eventually the United Nations monitoring mission ended in failure.

Syria Review 2016 Page 153 of 540 pages Syria line" had definitively been crossed, the international community remained reticent about becoming more involved in the Syrian crisis. Ultimately, an ensuing chemical weapons deal with Syria between the United States and Russia quieted the war drums. In the meantime, though, a highly anticipated peace summit in Geneva ended without yielding any productive results and the civil war in Syria raged on and on.

By mid-2014, while Syria had shown progress in its disposal of chemical toxins, in keeping with an international agreement intended to avoid intervention by the West, the country was dealing with an ascendant "Islamic State." Previously known as Islamic State of Iraq and Syria or ISIS as well as Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant or ISIL, this group self-declared a caliphate extending from Syria to Iraq. It was apparent that the power vacuum from the Syrian civil war provided a breeding ground for extremism that Islamic State could exploit and use to both challenge the Assad regime and function as a recruitment tool for Jihadists. Whereas the West and regional powers in the Middle East had earlier called for an end to the Assad regime, suddenly the geopolitical stakes were quite different as extremist terrorists were now posing the most dangerous threat to regional stability. The barbaric beheadings of two American journalists by Islamic State in their stronghold in Syria changed the calculus and the Obama administration in the United States -- initially reticent about re-engaging in the Middle East -- was now looking at a targeted anti-terrorism strategy in the Syrian-Iraqi landscape of Islamic State. As such, a Western coalition, led by the United States, was soon carrying out air strikes on Islamic State targets in Syria and Iraq. Of note was the fact that the United States-led coalition expanded to include Japan and Jordan when citizens of their countries that were being held by Islamic State were also brutally killed.

As of 2015, Syria was beset by two sets of intersecting challenges -- the ongoing civil war between the Assad regime and rebel forces on one end, and the horrific dangers posed by the notorious terror group, Islamic State, which had seized wide swaths of territory in Syria and left an appalling death toll. It was generally understood that the civil war conditions in Syria, to some extent, facilitated the emergence of Islamic State in that country. Syrian President Assad's priority to hold onto power, and thus the center of power in Damascus, had allowed a power chasm to flourish in other parts of the country, which Islamic State has been able to exploit. The result has been a mass exodus of Syrians fleeing the country and seeking refuge in Europe. The so-called migrant influx in Europe has raised questions as to how to legally and humanely deal with a burgeoning humanitarian refugee crisis.

At the political level, Russia signaled it would be entering the Syrian crisis militarily in September 2015 although it was unclear if Moscow's goal was to bolster and preserve Bashar al-Assad's hold on power, or, to go after Islamic State. The geopolitical landscape was complicated in October 2015 with the news that the United States would be deploying special operations teams to Syria. The scene in November 2015 was grave as Russia and France intensified their efforts to go after Islamic State targets in Syria following devastating terror attacks by the Islamist terror network that killed hundreds of Russian and French citizens. Russia, France, and the United States were now

Syria Review 2016 Page 154 of 540 pages Syria respectively changing their respective calculations, cognizant that the Islamist terror group was no longer simply seeking to build its Caliphate but, instead, transposing its goals to more of an Islamic Jihadist orientation. The result was a global security crisis.

In December 2015, in the aftermath of an appalling Islamic State-inspired massacre in California in the United States, President Barack Obama augmented special operations teams in the region with an eye on strategically targeting Islamic State. Also on the agenda in December 2015 and well into January 2016 was a renewed push for peace in Syria, with the goal being a stabilized country where terrorism would not be able to flourish with impunity.

In the first few months of 2016, all eyes were on the peace process for Syria, as well as a fragile cessation of hostilities aimed at facilitating a settlement. Meanwhile, Russia announced it would be withdrawing from Syria although it continued to carry out air strikes supportive to the Assad regime. For its part, pro-Assad forces were making gains against all groups opposed to Assad rule, including Islamic State. Of note was the recapture of the heritage city Palmyra; Also of note in this period was the United States' announcement that its effort against Islamic State was going well, as marked by the elimination of the terror group's second in command.

In the spring of 2016, the Syrian city of Aleppo was being struck by massive aerial bombardment with a devastating death toll on the city's population. It was to be seen how this development would affect the already-fragile peace process.

Overview of threat posed by Islamic State:

Sunni Islamic extremist militants, under the aegis of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant or ISIL (also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria or ISIS), have seized control over wide swaths of Iraqi and Syrian territory. In Iraq, ISIL held sway -- from Fallujah and Ramadi in Anbar province, to Mosul in Nineveh, as well as Tikrit -- the hometown of the ousted and late Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. Across the border in Syria, ISIL was proving to be the most successful anti- government force in that country. It was consolidating territory held either by the Assad regime or by rival rebel entities, even ousting other Islamist insurgent and terrorist groups in the process. These gains collectively constituted a spectacular victory for ISIL, which seeks to establish a Sunni Islamic Caliphate in territory that includes Iraq and Syria.

As Syria and Iraq respectively grappled with the tumultuous security landscapes within their borders, their political spheres were also mired by turmoil. In Iraq, Prime Minister Nouri al- Maliki's treatment of the Sunni minority, including his persecution of former Vice President Tariq al-Hashemi, a Sunni, and raids on anti-government protest camps, had alienated even the more moderate Sunni elements in that country. As a result, Salafist Sunni Jihadists from home and abroad were answering the call to fight on Iraqi soil. At the same time, the power vacuum from the Syrian civil war had provided fertile ground for ISIL to take root, not simply challenging the

Syria Review 2016 Page 155 of 540 pages Syria

Assad regime but also attracting Jihadists from across the world seeking a "cause" upon which to concentrate. ISIL's ascendancy, thus, mitigated Assad's control over wide swaths of Syrian territory while simultaneously delivering a remarkable blow across the border to the Iraqi leader at the time, Shi'a Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

The year 2014 saw Iraq rocked by the worst violence and bloodshed in recent years. The violence in Iraq was the result of the aforementioned ethno-sectarian dissonance between Sunni Muslims and Shi'a Muslims, and the dramatic and escalating political conflict between the Shi'a dominated government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and the increasingly alienated Sunni opposition. In the month of June 2014 alone, more than 2,000 people -- mostly civilians -- had been killed in the violence rocking Iraq, according to the United Nations. It was the bloodiest and most deadly month in Iraq since the peak of ethno-sectarian warfare in Iraq in 2007.

Given this restive and volatile landscape, the United Nations envoy to Iraq, Martin Kobler, warned that "systemic violence" was about to explode "at any moment" in that country. Kobler called on Iraq's political leaders to "engage immediately to pull the country out of this mayhem." As stated by Gyorgy Busztin, the United Nation's Iraq representative, "The impact of violence on civilians remains disturbingly high." He also called on Iraq's leadership to take steps to end the violence saying, "Iraq's political leaders must take immediate and decisive action to stop the senseless bloodshed."

The summer of 2014 was marked by devolving chaos in Iraq as ISIL expanded their control from Fallujah and Ramadi in Anbar province, to Mosul in Nineveh, as well as Tikrit -- the hometown of the ousted and late Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein, making significant territorial gains.

Across the border in Syria, the Assad regime had been grappling with an ongoing uprising that started in the Arab Spring of 2011. President Bashar al-Assad's brutal tactics aimed at quelling that uprising against various rebel factions served only to create an even more tumultuous landscape, and eventually set the path for a full-blown civil war. That civil war pitted the Assad forces, backed by Lebanon-based Hezbollah, against a disparate cabal of anti-government entities, ranging from the rebel Free Syrian Army to several Islamist terrorist enclaves. As noted above, the power vacuum from the Syrian civil war provided a breeding ground for extremism that ISIL could exploit and use to both challenge the Assad regime and function as a recruitment tool for Jihadists.

The result was a series of strategic victories across Syria and Iraq for ISIL. Then, at the start of July 2014, the security crisis in the region was at acute levels as ISIL had declared itself to be the sovereign power over a "caliphate" ranging from Syria to Iraq and renamed itself the "Islamic State."

Throughout, the United States-trained Iraqi forces proved themselves to be ineffectual in fighting ISIL. In fact, Iraqi troops abandoned their positions, thus allowing the terrorists to make off with

Syria Review 2016 Page 156 of 540 pages Syria heavy military equipment provided to the Iraqi military by the United States. Indeed, the only defense being provided against ISIL in Iraq were the Kurds who were now having to face ISIL terrorists armed with stolen American weaponry. While Kurdish peshmerga forces were far more engaged in the fight to save Kurdistan, they were nonetheless no match for ISIL, which now had in its possession United States-provided weapons that had been abandoned by Iraqi forces.

President Barack Obama of the United States was not eager to re-enter into a military engagement in Iraq, and as such, he advocated that leaders in Iraq work towards a political solution. That political solution remained elusive as Prime Minister Maliki refused to form an inclusive national unity government and as members of parliament failed to agree on a new government. Given the frustration over the failure of the Iraqi government in Baghdad to address the political and security crisis facing Iraq, the Kurdish president called for an independence referendum. The Kurds were also taking advantage of the power chasm by seizing control over the oil-rich city of Kirkuk.

But the scene in Iraq took an ominous turn in August 2014 as Islamic State was now pushing Kurdish peshmerga fighters into retreat. ISIL (or the so-called Islamic State) was exerting its self- declared power and authority as it carried out a rampage of barbaric violence, brutally targeting some of Iraq's historic minority communities. Certainly, Islamic State's persecution of Iraq's minority populations, particularly Christian and Yazidis, could be understood as nothing less than gross human rights abuses, even as it triggered a humanitarian crisis.

Initially, United States President Barack Obama dispatched military advisers to Iraq but ruled out renewed military engagement in that country; instead, as noted above, he called for a political solution. As the author of the withdrawal of United States troops from Iraq, President Obama was not keen to be drawn back into the Iraqi quagmire. But having recognized the dire landscape for religious and ethnic minorities in Iraq, on Aug. 7, 2014, the United States President Barack Obama ordered limited strikes in northern Iraq, released a supply of arms to Kurdish peshmerga fighters resisting Islamic State, and provided humanitarian relief supplies to civilians forced to flee their homes.

The presence of Maliki at the helm of Iraq had stood as another obstacle, as the United States was unwilling to be the unofficial military support of a Shi'a government known to have persecuted the Sunni minority population of Iraq. But the subsequent replacement of the Maliki government with a more inclusive Abadi government set the tone for an improved domestic scenario in Iraq, to the relief of the United States and the wider world. It also provided a more hospitable climate for increased United States' engagement in Iraq to fight ISIL.

That being said, the barbaric beheadings of two American journalists by ISIL fundamentally changed the calculus both for the war-weary American public as well as the American president. As a consequence, on Sept. 10, 2014, President Barack Obama outlined a counter-terrorism strategy to "degrade and ultimately destroy" ISIL -- not only in Iraq where the United States was

Syria Review 2016 Page 157 of 540 pages Syria already engaged in a limited manner, but also in Syria. To that end, the Obama administration was rallying a coalition of Western and Middle Eastern partners -- including Jordan -- to take on the threat posed to global security by ISIL.

In truth, the advance of ISIL in not only Iraq but also Syria had compounded the geopolitical crisis facing the Middle East. Suddenly, anti-Assad countries in the region were finding themselves in the uncomfortable position of sharing with Syria the goal of eliminating ISIL. For their part, Arab countries in the region were slow to respond to ISIL. Nevertheless, the Arab League was slowly coming to terms with the fact that it would have to have to engage in the regional security crisis and that its objectives would likely, at times, overlap with that of the Assad regime. Indeed, in September 2014, the Arab League endorsed the effort to confront Islamic States at a time when the United States was rallying allied countries to join the effort to repel and eradicate ISIL.

For his part, United States President Barack Obama made clear that his country was committed to eliminating the leadership of Islamic State (also known as ISIL or ISIS), while noting that a coalition of NATO allies and Middle Eastern partners was prepared to join the campaign against the brutality of these extremist Islamist Jihadists, and to take on the threat posed to global security by this dangerous terrorist group.

Accordingly, on Sept. 22, 2014, international coalition forces, led by the United States and including both European and Arab partner countries, commenced a campaign of air strikes against Islamist terror groups in Syria.

By October 2014, despite the active international air campaign over Iraq and Syria, ISIL continued to carry out its campaign of terror -- even extending the battlefield to Kurdish areas bordering Turkey. Irrespective of the fact that the town of Kobane (alternatively called Kobani and predominantly inhabited by Kurds) on the Turkish border was under siege, and regardless of legislation passed in Turkey's parliament authorizing action against ISIL, Turkey -- a NATO country -- showed little interest in joining the fight against ISIL, even with the protection of its own territory at stake.

Nevertheless, the United States-led global coalition was intensifying its strikes against ISIL targets; it was also air dropping weapons and military supplies to Kurdish forces.

The latter part of 2014 saw an intensification of the active air campaign over Iraq and Syria against ISIL by United States-led coalition forces. As well, United States President Obama called for more troops to be deployed to the region to assist with the training and advising of Iraqi forces.

At the start of 2015, Japan and Jordan were beset by tragedy when citizens of their countries that were being held by ISIL, were brutally killed. As has become a pattern, ISIL proudly released videotaped footage depicting their vicious acts of murder. In response, Japan promised to do its

Syria Review 2016 Page 158 of 540 pages Syria part in the international fight against ISIL while Jordanian King Abdullah warned of a "relentless war" on the Islamist terror group as it commenced a campaign of air strikes against ISIL targets in Syria.

In February 2015, the horrific killings of more than 20 Egyptian Christians working in Libya marked a new front in the war against Islamic State. Post-Arab Spring Libya was on the brink of political collapse with Islamist extremists taking advantage of the power void. The result was an emerging satellite Islamic State venue in Libya. However, Egypt -- like Jordan -- was prepared to respond to the threat posed by these Islamist Jihadists to its citizens and commenced its own air strike campaign against ISIL targets in Libya.

It was to be seen if the Jordanian and Egyptian responses would mark a turning point for the Arab and Islamic worlds, regarding the international effort to degrade and ultimately destroy the Islamist terror group, known in derogatory Arabic parlance as "Daesh."

Meanwhile, in February 2015, President Barack Obama of the United States called on the legislative branch of government in that country to advance new legislation authorizing military action against the terror group calling itself Islamic State. It was to be seen if partisan rivalries in the United States Congress would impede the process of passing a new authorization intended to carefully circumscribe the United States' military effort to degrade and destroy Islamic State.

Also at stake was a looming effort to retain control over the key Iraqi city of Mosul from Islamic State. To that end, United States military advisers were training joint Iraqi and Kurdish forces to achieve this end in what was expected to be a spring offensive operation. But before the Mosul offensive could move forward, the United States-led coalition continued to carry out air strikes in Iraq, supporting Kurdish fighters, with the goal being to drive Islamic State from the oil-rich city of Kirkuk.

It should be noted that in mid-April 2015, the United States Pentagon confirmed that Islamic State lost more than a quarter of the territory in Iraq it held prior to the air campaign that was launched in August 2014. With the intent to build on this success, Iraqi Prime Minister Abadi traveled to the United States to request more assistance in the air campaign against Islamic State. However, before the United States could even process this request, in mid-April 2015, on the heels of their victory in Tikrit, Islamic State was carrying out an advance on the city of Ramadi. It was apparent in the spring of 2015 that even if Islamic State was under pressure, it was still a functional and aggressive terrorist entity.

It should be noted that whereas progress had been made in Iraq, the prevailing dynamics remained in place in Syria where Islamic State continued to hold sway over large swaths of that country.

That being said, by mid-2015, with Islamic State posing a direct security threat to Turkey, the

Syria Review 2016 Page 159 of 540 pages Syria

Turkish government shifted its calculus regarding its engagement in the international fight against the terror group. Turkey had to this point refrained from involving itself in the global coalition against Islamic State, and instead focused its energies on seeing the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria come to an end. Now, the United States and Turkey was announcing a campaign of close cooperation in the effort against Islamic State. But the Turkish government raised eyebrows when it announced it would also go after strongholds of Kurdish extremists as part of its burgeoning campaign against terrorism -- a move sure to raise the ire of Syrian Kurdish fighters, the YPG, who were to be distinguished from the PKK and who had led the local charge against Islamic State.

Alert: Islamic State assassinates American journalist

In mid-August 2014, Islamic State was making further territorial gains including consolidated gains across the border in Syria.

Aug 19, 2014, was marked by the grim news that James Foley, an American journalist who had been seized in Syria, had been killed by Islamic State in retaliation for the United States' strikes in Iraq. It was, as such, the day in which Islamic State had effectively carried out its first terrorist attack against the United States.

Islamic State released a gruesome video recording, titled " A Message to America," in which the photojournalist, who was abducted in Syria in 2012, was shown reading out a prepared statement by his captors before being horrifically beheaded. The disturbing video recording included footage of United States President Barack Obama announcing that he had authorized strikes in Iraq. A subtitled message, conveniently translated into both Arabic and English, was shown on the screen, noting: "Obama authorizes military operations against the Islamic State effectively placing America upon a slippery slope towards a new war front against Muslims."

In the future record detailing those crimes against humanity would be the aforementioned beheading of American journalist, James Foley. But a second American journalist, Steven Sotloff, suffered the same kind of horrific fate in early September 2014, with Islamic State again releasing another gruesome and shocking videotape depicting his beheading.

Weeks earlier before these horrific and barbaric developments, United States intelligence officials warned that Islamic State was benefiting from its territorial gains in Syria and Iraq by attracting more Muslim extremists to its ranks. Once believed to be a movement totaling around 10,000 fighters, the militant Islamist Jihadist entity was now significantly larger in size. United States intelligence officials also warned that Islamist State was attempting to establish terror cells outside Iraq and Syria, with operatives believed to be in Western countries. Those external terrorism ambitions were causing grave anxieties for the countries of the West, including the United States, regarding existing or future plots to carry out terror attacks. At a time when the United States and

Syria Review 2016 Page 160 of 540 pages Syria the countries of the West were hoping to withdraw from "war footing" in countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan, the reality was that the Islamic Jihadist terror threat continued to present a global security crisis.

It should be noted that Navi Pillay, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, has condemned Islamic State, accusing its members of "appalling, widespread" crimes that could easily be classified as crimes against humanity Iraq. Among the list of abuses and human rights violations believed to have been carried out by Islamic State were targeted killings, kidnappings, trafficking, slavery, sexual abuse, forced conversions, destruction of cultural sites, and the persecution of entire communities. As noted by Pillay, "They are systematically targeting men, women and children based on their ethnic, religious or sectarian affiliation and are ruthlessly carrying out widespread ethnic and religious cleansing in the areas under their control."

The Syrian dimension in the Islamic State's rampage of terror:

On Aug. 24, 2014, following several days of fighting that left close to 500 people dead, terrorists from Islamic State stormed an air base in Tabqa in northeast Syria, taking control there at the expense of government forces. The victory at Tabqa was a significant one was it constituted the last stronghold for pro-government forces in that region of Syria. Two other Syrian military bases were taken in recent weeks in addition to the latest loss at Taqba, thus delivering a painful blow to President Bashar al-Assad's regime. In the nearby city of Raqqa, Islamic State militants celebrated their victory in their increasingly familiar and barbaric manner by displaying severed heads of Syrian soldiers in the city center while chanting "God is great." It was clear that whether Islamic State operated in Iraq or Syria, its tactics of bloodshed and brutality were being applied with enthusiastic conviction across its self-declared Caliphate.

Critics have suggested that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has avoided becoming overly- embroiled in a conflict with Islamic State, preferring to concentrate on his fight with other rebel groups opposed to him. They have intimated that Assad was counting on his neighbors in the Middle East, as well as the West more broadly, to come to terms with the brutality of Islamic State. Accordingly, they would be forced to confront the terror group, which was proving itself to be the most dangerous threat to global security in recent times.

That calculation was proving to hold some relevance in late August 2014. At issue were emerging reports that the United States was preparing its military options to deal with Islamic State -- not only in Iraq but also in Syria. While the United State authorities made clear that there was no immediate plan to extend the current engagement of limited air strikes in Iraq, they were not foreclosing other possibilities, especially since Islamic State had now brutally assassinated a United States national (as discussed above), also because the terror group was expressly conveying its threats against the United States. A spokesperson for General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said "With Central Command, (Dempsey) is preparing options to address

Syria Review 2016 Page 161 of 540 pages Syria

ISIS both in Iraq and Syria with a variety of military tools including air strikes."

It was to be determined whether or not United States President Obama would re-examine his policy regarding Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, given the advance of Islamic State into Syria. President Obama was on the record calling for Assad to step down from power given his hardline and often brutal fight against rebels in Syria. Suddenly, the United States, the West, and several countries of the Middle East who had staked out anti-Assad stances were finding themselves aligned with unlikely countries, such as Syria and Russia, in wanting to see an end to Islamic State's rampage of terror in the region.

Note that on Aug. 25, 2014, Syria's foreign minister, Walid Muallem, said that his country would welcome a joint effort with the United States to fight Islamic State. Muallem said Syria was "the center of the international coalition to fight Islamic State" and called on the United States to coordinate with Syria as to any possible air strikes on its terrain. Muallem. however, warned that "Anything outside this is considered aggression."

For its part, the Obama administration in the United States made clear that if it chose to move forward with any engagement in Syria aimed at quelling the threat posed by Islamic State, it would not clear its plans with the Assad regime in Syria.

On Aug. 26, 2014, it was announced that President Obama approved air surveillance of Islamic State in Syria. The general consensus was that while this initial effort was aimed as intelligence reconnaissance, it could easily set the table for an expansion of air strikes against Islamic State -- not only in Iraqi territory but also on Syrian terrain.

Note: At the start of September 2014, the human rights watchdog group, Human Rights Watch, alleged there was "credible evidence" that the terror group, Islamic State, had used ground-fired cluster munitions in northern Syria. As well, videotaped footage of the mass execution of Syrian soldiers at the hands Islamic State was released to the world.

Special note on human rights abuses and cultural destruction --

In mid-2014, the United Nations published a comprehensive review of conditions in Iraq in which it accused Islamic State (formerly known via the acronyms ISIS and ISIL) of massive human rights violations and gross abuses ranging from execution to rape and the forced conscription of child soldiers. The report read as follows: "ISIL and associated armed groups have also continued to perpetrate targeted assassinations of community, political, and religious leaders, government employees, education professionals, health workers." The United Nations also detailed other crimes, making note of "sexual assault, rape and other forms of sexual violence against women and girls, forced recruitment of children, kidnappings, executions, robberies." Thus, the United Nations issued the following succinct conclusion: "This may also amount to war crimes." The United

Syria Review 2016 Page 162 of 540 pages Syria

Nations, via this review, also had harsh words for the Iraqi government forces, which the United Nations said had done little to protect the civilian population.

The horrific security conditions in Iraq were described by Navi Pillay, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, in the following manner: "Every day we receive accounts of a terrible litany of human rights violations being committed in Iraq against ordinary Iraqi children, women and men, who have been deprived of their security, their livelihoods, their homes, education, healthcare and other basic services."

The bloodshed and death aside, there was also a humanitarian disaster in the making for those who managed to survive the wrath of Islamic State. In northern Iraq, as many as 200,000 people have been displaced in mid-2014 alone, according to the United Nations, as Islamic State has consolidated territory.

While Iraq's Shi'a population constituted the main target of Islamic State's wrath, Christian Iraqis were also on its target list. In fact, as of mid-July 2014, Christians -- typically Chaldeans and Assyrians -- were fleeing the culturally diverse city of Mosul in droves. Many were said to be taking refuge in the semi-autonomous region of Kurdistan.

This mass exodus followed an ultimatum by the Sunni Islamist terror group that Christians either convert to Islam and pay a "jizya" protection tax or be faced with death. The ultimatum by Islamic State was announced in mosques and read as follows: "We offer them three choices: Islam; the dhimma contract -- involving payment of jizya; if they refuse this they will have nothing but the sword." Soon, these three choices were reduced to two, with the payment of jizya removed and Christians being forced to either convert or be killed; in several instances in Syria, even Christians who converted to Islam at the command of Islamic State were subject to brutal extermination via beheadings.

In an interview with Agence France Presse, a senior Christian cleric, Patriarch Louis Sako, sadly noted, "For the first time in the history of Iraq, Mosul is now empty of Christians." Indeed, Iraq had been home to one of the world's most ancient Christian communities but since the United States-led invasion in 2003, the numbers have been on a downward spiral. The takeover of Mosul by Islamic State in 2014 was essentially ensuring that the ancient stamp of Christianity in Iraq was blotted out.

The blotting out of the ancient stamp of Christianity was also taking place in Qaraqosh -- known as Iraq's Christian center. The Christian population was forced to abandon that town. Joseph Thomas, the Chaldean archbishop of Kirkuk, described the scenario as such: "It's a catastrophe, a tragic situation: tens of thousands of terrified people are being displaced as we speak." Meanwhile, Islamic State militants set upon the task of destroying the churches, the religious artifacts within them, as well as the ancient religious manuscripts that stood as sacred testaments to Iraq's rich

Syria Review 2016 Page 163 of 540 pages Syria cultural history.

Also in the crosshairs of Islamic State's rampage of terror was the Kurdish Yazidi community, whom the brutal Sunni extremists have viewed as heretics and have thus repeatedly targeted for attack. As noted above, Islamic State had managed to wrest control over the town of Sinjar -- the ancestral home of the Yazidis -- driving them to desperately seek refuge in the mountains -- but also effectively trapping them there without food, water, or means of survival. For all intents and purposes, a de facto siege was underway with the Yazidis as the victims.

Because the Yazidis faced imminent death, there was an urgent call for international humanitarian intervention. As noted by Jabbar Yawar, the secretary-general of the Kurdistan Regional Government ministry: "Urgent international action is needed to save them. Many of them -- mainly the elderly, children and pregnant women -- have died." Indeed, the United Nations reported that as many as 40 Yazidi children had died "as a direct consequence of violence, displacement and dehydration" in the space of days.

There was a different kind of misery in the works for young female Yazidis who were kidnapped by Islamic State militants. These young women were forced into sexual slavery under the guise of "marriage" in the same manner as Boko Haram Islamic terrorists, who have abducted and oppressed young women in Nigeria.

Other victims of persecution at the hands of Islamic State included apostate Sunnis, Shi'ites, Shabaks, Kakai, Sabaeans, Christians, and ethnic Turkmen minorities from towns and villages in Nineveh.

Navi Pillay, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, has condemned Islamic State, accusing its members of "appalling, widespread" crimes that could easily be classified as crimes against humanity Iraq. Among the list of abuses and human rights violations believed to have been carried out by Islamic State were targeted killings, kidnappings, trafficking, slavery, sexual abuse, forced conversions, destruction of cultural sites, and the persecution of entire communities. As noted by Pillay, "They are systematically targeting men, women and children based on their ethnic, religious or sectarian affiliation and are ruthlessly carrying out widespread ethnic and religious cleansing in the areas under their control."

As the Sunni extremist terrorists from Islamic State were continuing their aggression across Iraq, they were directing their campaign of abuse not only at people but also at Iraq's cultural and historic heritage. At issue was the destruction of the tomb of Jonah -- burial site of the Prophet Jonah revered by Jews, Christians, and Muslims alike. Militants from Islamic State reportedly planted explosives around the mosque that houses Jonah's burial site and detonated them remotely. The tomb of Biblical Daniel was also reported to have been decimated. Several other heritage sites around Mosul, such as the centuries-old shrine to Seth -- believed to be the son of

Syria Review 2016 Page 164 of 540 pages Syria

Adam and Eve, the Prophet Jirjis Mosque, and the Awn al-Din Shrine, were also demolished. To the west of Mosul in the town of Tal Afar, several Shi'ite shrines and mosques were destroyed by Islamic State.

The actions were reminiscent of the Taliban in Afghanistan in the late 1990s and early 2000s, as well as al-Qaida-aligned Ansar Dine in Mali in 2012. Both extremist Islamist enclaves have been aligned with the terror enclave, al-Qaida, and were responsible for cultural and historic destruction in these two countries, for the purpose of obliterating any monuments they viewed as insufficiently Islamic. Often, such holy sites are declared by Islamist zealots to be places of "apostasy" instead of prayer, thus resulting in their destruction. Of note is the fact that global analysts view Islamic State as being even more extreme than al-Qaida, which was responsible for the 2001 terror attacks in the United States.

Damage to Iraq’s cultural and historic legacy was not a new phenomenon in a country beset by war for more than a decade. The United states-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 resulted in the looting of Baghdad’s National Museum and National Archives. But such incidences constituted the tragic consequences of warfare, and were to be distinguished from Islamic State's deliberate and nefarious campaign of cultural and historic destruction, which was intended to erase all cultural and archaeological remnants of Iraq's rich heritage -- precisely because they did not suit the extremist Salafist interpretations of Islam.

In addition to Islamists' campaign of human rights violations and cultural destruction was the emerging goal of eradicating Western-style education. In September 2014, the self-described Islamic State banned the study of Mathematics, Social Studies, and Civics (which includes learning about elections and democracy) in its self-declared caliphate. References towards science, such as evolution, were also to be removed completely, while laws of physics and chemistry were to be explained as "the result of Allah's rules and laws." Notions of ethnic and national identity were to be excised and replaced with "belonging to Islam" and the "denunciation of infidels." Sports were to be entirely prohibited. The anti-education edict ended with the following warning: "This is an obligatory announcement, and all violators will be punished." Reminiscent of the anti-education stance adopted by the Islamist terror group, Boko Haram, in Nigeria, it was apparent that such Islamist extremists were intent on purging their ranks of intellectualism and replacing it with ideological zealotry.

Western allies form coalition to fight Islamic State:

In the fight against Islamic State, there were emerging reports that air strikes on the northern city of Mosul in the first week of September 2014 killed Abu Alaa al-Iraqi, a senior Islamic State military commander from the city of Tal Afar.

The United States was also carrying out a series of air strikes using bomber and fighter aircraft

Syria Review 2016 Page 165 of 540 pages Syria against Islamic State targets in the area of the Haditha Dam in western Iraq. The aim of those strikes was to protect the strategic dam at Haditha, which has functioned as a key source of energy in Iraq. Meanwhile Iraqi troops were active east of Haditha as they sought to regain control over Barwana, while Kurdish forces worked to liberate the area of Mount Zarta. These actions showed some success for the effort against Islamic State terrorists.

That effort would be bolstered as the United States announced it was rallying allied countries to join the campaign to repel and destroy Islamic State. Speaking from a NATO summit in Wales in the first week of September 2014, United States President Barack Obama reiterated his country's commitment to eliminating the leadership of Islamic State, while noting that NATO allies were prepared to join the campaign against the brutality of Islamic State. To this end, President Obama formed what he termed "a core coalition" of allied Western countries to fight against the threat posed by Islamic State, albeit without the so-called "boots on the ground."

That coalition, according to United States Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, consisted of the following NATO allies: United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, and Turkey. The task of this bloc, according to United States Secretary of State John Kerry, would be as follows: "We need to attack them in ways that prevent them from taking over territory, to bolster the Iraqi security forces and others in the region who are prepared to take them on, without committing troops of our own."

President Obama received criticism from remarks he made about not having a strategy to deal with the threat posed by Islamic State. While his remarks were actually focused on the Syrian dimension of the equation, they nonetheless fueled condemnations from neoconservatives who believed that President Obama was not moving fast enough as regards a confrontation with Islamic State.

Speaking on the NBC television show, "Meet the Press," President Obama sought to address concerns that he was not acting with sufficient urgency against Islamic State as he said: "We are going to be able to not just blunt the momentum of ISIL. We are going to systematically degrade their capabilities. We're going to shrink the territory that they control. And ultimately we're going to defeat them."

The particulars of his strategy would be detailed in a speech to be delivered on Sept. 10, 2014. President Obama said that in that address, his intent would be to "prepare the country" for the impending fight against Islamic State or ISIL. As before, however, he emphasized that the United States would not be returning to the battlefield on the ground in Iraq.

President Obama explained, "This is not the equivalent of the Iraq war. What this is, is similar to the kinds of counter-terrorism campaigns that we've been engaging in consistently over the last five, six, seven years. I just want the American people to understand the nature of the threat and

Syria Review 2016 Page 166 of 540 pages Syria how we're going to deal with it and to have confidence that we'll be able to deal with it."

On Sept. 9, 2014, one day before the highly-anticipated address in which he would prepare the country for the effort against Islamic State or ISIL, President Obama met with congressional leaders to apprise them of his plans. President Obama indicated that he already had the authority expand ongoing action against Islamic terrorists in Iraq and Syria without Congressional approval; however, the president suggested that he would he welcomed action from Congress in support of plan aimed at reversing and repelling Islamic State, also known as ISIL and ISIS.

Attention was also focused on the regional Arab powers in the Middle East who would most likely be affected by the territorial gains of Islamic State, but who have hitherto been largely "missing in action." In the first week of September 2014, the Arab League was meeting in Egypt. From Cairo, the Arab League issued its own support for the fight against Islamist extremist groups in Iraq and Syria, while indirectly endorsing the United States' campaign of aerial bombardment against Islamic State.

The head of the Arab League, Nabil al-Arabi, also warned that the ascendancy of Islamic State posed a serious challenge to the authority of Iraq, threatening "its very existence and the existence of other states." Thus, he urged that a military, political, economic, and cultural plan be advanced to confront the dire threat of terrorism posed by Islamic State. It was to be seen how the Arab League concretely envisioned its military, political, economic, and cultural involvement in the fight against Islamic State.

United States President Barack Obama outlines strategy to "degrade and ultimately destroy" ISIL - -

On Sept. 10, 2014, President Barack Obama called on Americans to support a campaign to repel and eliminate the brutal and barbaric terrorist group that named itself Islamic State and declared a caliphate over broad swaths of Syrian and Iraqi terrain. President Obama said of his proposed campaign in Iraq and Syria: “Our objective is clear: We will degrade, and ultimately destroy, ISIL through a comprehensive and sustained counter-terrorism strategy."

The president offered a scathing excoriation of the terror group that he has consistently referred to by the acronym ISIL rather than by their preferred name, Islamic State. President Obama said, "Now let's make two things clear: ISIL is not 'Islamic.' No religion condones the killing of innocents, and the vast majority of ISIL's victims have been Muslim. And ISIL is certainly not a state. It was formerly al-Qaida's affiliate in Iraq, and has taken advantage of sectarian strife and Syria's civil war to gain territory on both sides of the Iraq-Syrian border. It is recognized by no government, nor the people it subjugates. ISIL is a terrorist organization, pure and simple. And it has no vision other than the slaughter of all who stand in its way."

Syria Review 2016 Page 167 of 540 pages Syria

President Obama made it clear that his proposal for a campaign to fight and defeat this terrorist organization (ISIL, also known as ISIS and Islamic State) was to be distinguished from the invasion and occupation of Iraq and the war in Afghanistan. He emphasized that the endeavor would not involve United States ground troops, declaring: "We will not get dragged into another ground war."

President Obama indicated that the military structure of the effort in Iraq and Syria would involve United States air strikes with regional forces providing the military forces on the ground. Stated differently, the United States would provide air power and air support to Kurdish and Iraqi forces on the ground in the fight against ISIL. To this end, he said, “This counter-terrorism campaign will be waged through a steady, relentless effort to take out ISIL wherever they exist using our air power and our support for partner forces on the ground.”

Nevertheless, President Obama announced that he would deploy 475 more United States troops to shore up allied forces, bringing the total American military personnel to just over 1,500. While their mission would be arm and train local forces to fight ISIL, and while these troops could not be properly be understood as "combat troops," President Obama acknowledged that these United States troops would nonetheless be at risk.

As indicated here, the counter-terrorism effort against ISIL would also include Syria. To be precise, the United States would extend assistance to select (read: "moderate") Syrian opposition forces. That assistance would include the training of Syrian anti-ISIL forces. It should be noted that Saudi Arabia confirmed that it would provide bases to train these "moderate" Syrian opposition fighters. Still, there would be no assistance for the Assad regime. As stated by the president, "In the fight against ISIL, we cannot rely on an Assad regime that terrorizes its people: a regime that will never regain the legitimacy it has lost."

Throughout, President Obama has been hesitant to enter into an engagement of any kind in Syria, largely due to the fact that it was difficult to distinguish between rebel forces. While the Obama administration has been willing to aid the Free Syrian Army and it has backed the official Syrian opposition in the civil war against the Assad regime in Syria, it has been careful about allowing weapons and aid to fall into the hands of anti-Assad terror groups, such as al-Nusra Front and even ISIL, which have increasingly held sway in Syria.

Now, however, with ISIL on an advance and posing a serious threat to global security interests, President Obama was prepared to strike them in Syria. To this end, he said, “That means I will not hesitate to take action against ISIL in Syria, as well as Iraq. This is a core principle of my presidency: If you threaten America, you will find no safe haven.”

Other elements of President Obama's counter-terrorism strategy would include intensified measured aimed at cutting off terrorist funding for ISIL, stemming the tide of Jihadist fighters into

Syria Review 2016 Page 168 of 540 pages Syria the region, increased intelligence operations, and increased humanitarian assistance to civilians affected by ISIL's rampage of terror. President Obama also announced that he would chair a meeting of the United Nations Security Council that would be intended "to further mobilize the international community" around the effort to degrade and destroy ISIL.

Critics of the president have complained that the campaign outlined by President Obama offered no definitive goal lines for victory. Instead, a long-term effort to strike at terrorist targets, potentially lasting several years, lay ahead. Indeed, President Obama was making no pretense of this reality. Instead, he clearly indicate that the fight against ISIL might be a long and difficult one as he said, “It will take time to eradicate a cancer like ISIL." To be sure, the mission of eliminating terrorist threats in any country or region in the world would inevitably be a long-term endeavor.

Other critics -- predominantly in Congress -- were affronted by the president's claim that he already had the executive authority to expand military operations in Syria and Iraq. At issue was the prevailing 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) that the Obama administration said provided the legal basis for extending anti-terrorist operations in Syria. Given the existence of that legislation, which was broadly used by the previous Bush administration to carry out its own activities, the Obama administration intimated that it would not need to secure further legislation authorizing military engagement. Of course, there was a certain irony regarding the fact that President Obama would be relying on the very same AUMF that he said should be "refined and ultimately repealed" a year earlier. To be sure, President Obama suggested that he would welcome congressional support -- possibly on votes regarding funding rather than another grand authorization. Of course, there was no guarantee that members of Congress would agree with this stance. It was to be seen if an executive versus legislative showdown loomed ahead.

It should be noted that President Obama drew on examples of limited counter-terrorism engagements in Yemen and Somalia using drone strikes and special operations to show that models of such counter-terrorism campaigns were already being utilized.

Some critics have balked at this reference by President Obama to the counter-terrorism strategies in Yemen and Somalia as templates for the proposed strategy in Iraq and Syria to deal with ISIL. Their argument, picked up and advanced by the media, has been that the situation in Iraq-Syria with ISIL was to be distinguished from al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula in Yemen and al-Shabab in Somalia. That distinction, in the view of these critics, was due to the fact that ISIL had control over actual territory. However, President Obama's examples of targeted counter-terrorism approaches in Yemen and Somalia may not be wildly off the mark.

Much like Iraq and Syria, Yemen has a fragile government at the helm of a fractured country confronting multiple threats to its national security -- from Islamist terrorists from al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, to a Shi'ite Zaidi rebellion in the north, and a secessionist movement in the

Syria Review 2016 Page 169 of 540 pages Syria south. The United States has concentrated its efforts via drone strikes on terrorist strongholds in Yemen, keeping in mind that al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula poses a threat to global security; the United States, however, plays no role in addressing the other domestic rebellions in Yemen. Likewise, President Obama has shown little interest in intervening significantly into the Syrian civil war; however, he was now willing to go down the select counter-terrorism path in Syria, in much the same as the United States has been involved in Yemen.

In Somalia, al-Shabab, much like ISIL, began with a domestic Islamist agenda and took hold in a failed state mired by fragile governance and a security crisis. Over the course of years, even after being driven from the capital of Mogadishu, al-Shabab was able to consolidate territory in the south of Somalia, and at time controlled as much as half the country. It also extended its domestic Islamist agenda to one with a more global Jihadist orientation, going after targets in Kenya. One could argue that al-Shabab has been, at least, a contender for bloodthirsty barbarism following its horrific attack on a Kenyan shopping mall in 2013. The United States has been carrying out a targeted counter-terrorism campaign in Somalia in recent years, going after the leadership successfully in 2013 and most recently in 2014. A similar strategy -- albeit one requiring years of targeted engagement -- could potentially yield results against ISIL in Syria and Iraq.

The determinations and evaluations of success will be decided by history; however, the fact of the matter was that there were at least some templates available for the United States to pursue a "no boots on the ground" campaign against terrorist threats in hot spots across the world, including in Iraq and Syria. That campaign in the Middle East would be coordinated by retired Marine Corps General John Allen, who would be named as the Special Presidential Envoy for the Global Coalition against ISIL.

It should be noted that on Sept. 11, 2014, following a series of meetings in the Middle East, United States Secretary of State John Kerry won the backing of several Arab countries for the campaign to degrade and destroy ISIL. According to Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, Brett McGurk, these countries included: Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, Egypt, Jordan, UAE, Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, Lebanon.

Although the non-Arab nation state, Turkey, attended the meetings hosted by Kerry, it was left out of the reports. At issue were sensitivities regarding 46 Turkish hostages held by Islamist terrorists. (Note that in the latter part of September 2014, the Turkish hostages were released; it was not known if this development would create the imprimatur for Turkey to do its part, as a NATO state, to support the efforts of other NATO countries in the global fight against terrorism.)

Secretary of State Kerry described the roles of the participating regional powers as follows: "Arab nations play a critical role in that coalition, the leading role really across all lines of effort: military support, humanitarian aid, our work to stop the flow of illegal funds." He continued, "The participating states agreed to do their share in the comprehensive fight against ISIL, including ... as

Syria Review 2016 Page 170 of 540 pages Syria appropriate, joining in the many aspects of a coordinated military campaign against ISIL." State Department personnel subsequently said that some Arab countries went so far as to offer to conduct air strikes against ISIL in Iraq and Syria. Secretary of State Kerry said that he was "extremely encouraged" by pledges of military assistance by the international community to fighting the dire threat posed by ISIL.

That dire threat was highlighted by another brutal assassination by Islamic militants on a Westerner; the third victim was a British aid worker, David Haines. It was apparent that ISIL was trying to intimidate the West into retreating from their (re-)engagement in Iraq and surrounding countries. Of course, these acts of barbarism were more likely to build public support in the United States and across the Atlantic in Europe for concerted effort to diminish and ultimately defeat these extremist Islamist terrorists.

On Sept. 16, 2014, during Congressional hearings in Washington D.C., Secretary of State Chuck Hagel said that the tactical approach against ISIL would involve striking the terror group's safe havens, essentially destroying its infrastructure and command capabilities. General Martin Dempsey noted that a "shock and awe" approach akin to the 2003 invasion of Iraq would not work against ISIL, given that terror group's particular organization. Instead, Dempsey promised a "persistent and sustainable campaign." According to Dempsey, that targeted approach would presumably take time but it would also be against more effective in the long term.

Indeed, in the middle of September 2014, the United States military was intensifying its air strikes on ISIL targets in Iraq, with targets being struck to the southwest of Baghdad. A statement from United States Central Command read as follows: "The air strike southwest of Baghdad was the first strike taken as part of our expanded efforts beyond protecting our own people and humanitarian missions to hit (Islamic State) targets as Iraqi forces go on offense."

Note that on Sept. 17, 2014, President Barack Obama's plan for confronting and defeating Islamist terrorists known as ISIL/ISIS gained congressional support with the House of Representatives approving a "stop gap" spending measure to train and arm moderate Syrian rebels. The measure was passed with bipartisan support -- 273-156 -- but also garnered bipartisan opposition. Despite the passage of the bill by a healthy margin, it was clear that re-engagement in the Middle East -- albeit in a limited capacity -- remained a controversial matter more than a decade after the 2003 invasion of Iraq led by the previous Bush administration. A more decisive vote was taken in the Senate a day later and saw strong bipartisan support with 78 Senators voting in favor of a measure to train and arm Syrian rebels in the fight against ISIL, and only 22 voting against the measure.

International coalition launches air strikes in Iraq and Syria aimed at ISIL/ISIS targets --

On Sept. 19, 2014, the global coalition to fight the brutal and homicidal entity known as ISIS or ISIL was in force with French jets hitting Islamic terrorist targets in Iraq. According to French

Syria Review 2016 Page 171 of 540 pages Syria

President Francois Hollande, his country's fighter jets struck "a logistics depot of the terrorists" near the city of Mosul, which was under ISIL control for several months. The active involvement by France was illustrative of the expanding global coalition, led by the United States, to "degrade and destroy" the Islamic terrorist movement, as promised by United States President Barack Obama.

Already, the United States was carrying out air strikes in northern Iraq and the area close to the capital of Baghdad. There, in the Iraqi capital, terrorist bombings were becoming regular fare; however, car bombings were taking place elsewhere in Iraq -- even in the Kurdish city of Kirkuk.

One of Iraq's major Shi'ite leaders appeared to sanction the international intervention, although warning against subservience to foreign entities. Via a spokesperson, Grand Ayatollah Ali al- Sistani issued the following statement: "Even if Iraq is in need of help from its brothers and friends in fighting black terrorism, maintaining the sovereignty and independence of its decisions is of the highest importance,"

Air strikes by foreign powers were having an effect, even as United States war hawks complained that a ground operation would be necessary to defeat ISIL/ISIS. In fact, air strikes provided Kurdish fighters with the support to regain control over portions of the northern province of Nineveh in Iraq. Still, control by the group that self-declared itself as Islamic State was being consolidated in the region, with the terrorists establishing a police force tasked with enforcing the dictates of the religious judiciary.

On the other side of the border in Syria, Islamic State terrorists targeted the residents of the town of Ayn al-Arab (known as Kobani in Kurdish), and the surrounding villages. Facing a likely massacre at the hands of brutal Islamist terrorists, tens of thousands of the mainly Kurdish population sought refuge in Turkey before the authorities in Ankara closed the border.

On the evening of Sept. 22, 2014, the international coalition to hit ISIL/ISIS commenced its operations in Syria. Led by the United States, a coalition of allies launched air strikes against the self-declared Islamic State terrorists in the Syrian city of Raqqa (a known Islamic State stronghold) and along the eastern border with Iraq.

Significantly, the coalition included several Arab countries including Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Bahrain, and Qatar. It was something of a coup for United States President Barack Obama and his top diplomat, Secretary of State John Kerry, that they had done what no American president in recent memory had managed to do with regard to global security threats emanating from the Middle East. They had forged a truly global coalition with Arab countries not only standing as major stakeholders, but also with these Arab partners actively engaged in the military operations. It should be noted that Israel was contributing its intelligence in the global fight against ISIL/ISIS.

Syria Review 2016 Page 172 of 540 pages Syria

Rear Admiral John Kirby, the Pentagon press secretary, issued an official confirmation of the operation via the following statement: “I can confirm that U.S. military and partner nation forces are undertaking military action against ISIL terrorists in Syria using a mix of fighter, bomber and Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles." He continued, “Given that these operations are ongoing, we are not in a position to provide additional details at this time." Kirby added, “The decision to conduct these strikes was made earlier today by the U.S. Central Command commander under authorization granted him by the commander in chief.”

Indeed, American warplanes, such as F-22 Raptors, B-1 Bombers, as well as armed Predator and Reaper drones, along with fighter jets from allied Arab countries, conducted a sustained campaign of aerial bombardment on the ISIL/ISIS infrastructure in the Syrian city of Raqqa. As well, Tomahawk cruise missiles unleashed a flurry of precision-guided bombs from United States navy vessels located in the area. The relentless strikes were collectively aimed at stationary targets, such as weapons depots, militants' barracks, and command and control buildings. Ultimately, the goal was to deprive ISIL/ISIS of its safe haven in Syria.

Rear Admiral Kirby made it clear that the air strikes on Sept. 22, 2014, were only the start of a long campaign against Islamic terrorists. He said, "I can tell you that last night's strikes were only the beginning."

The air strikes made clear that President Obama was making good on his promise to "degrade and ultimately destroy" the terror enclave known as ISIL/ISIS not only in Iraq but also Syria. This development was to be viewed amidst complaints from the right-wing neo-conservative flank of the political spectrum in the United States, which has argued that the Obama administration had "no strategy" for dealing with ISIL/ISIL in Syria.

For his part, United States President Barack Obama on Sept. 23, 2014 offered comment on the expanded military effort against ISIL/ISIS. During a televised broadcast, President Obama said that the wide global coalition, including several Arab nation states, showed the United States was not alone in its campaign against Islamist terrorists known as ISIL/ISIS. To this end, the United States leader said, "This is not America's fight alone." President Obama also lauded partner countries in the coalition, saying, that the United States was "proud to stand shoulder to shoulder with these nations."

Reports soon emerged that the United States had notified Syria of its impending campaign of aerial bombardment against Islamic State targets in Syrian territory. There was no condemnation from Syria, which was likely tacitly blessing the actions of the international community. In fact, state- controlled Syrian media confirmed that the air strikes were taking place; it also emphasized that the strikes were not being treated as an act of aggression since the Syrian government had notified in advance. A Syrian analyst, Ali al-Ahmad, noted that while Syria was not part of the alliance

Syria Review 2016 Page 173 of 540 pages Syria carrying out the air campaign against ISIL/ISIS, there was nonetheless a "common enemy." Meanwhile, the Syrian opposition was more forthright in its applause for international intervention into Syria, especially since Hadi al-Bahra, the president of the Syrian Opposition Coalition, had urged such action.

It should be noted that the day after strikes commenced in Syria, the United States announced that its efforts were not limited to ISIL/ISIS, but also to a hitherto unknown terror group, known as the Khorasan Group, which was planning an imminent threat against Western targets, including the United States homeland. The Khorasan Group was believed to be an offshoot of the notorious terror enclave, al-Qaida. The Khorasan Group was reportedly relying on innovative means to obfuscate explosive materials in their effort to carry out another 9/11-type attack. Of note was the possibility that bomb makers responsible for the so-called "underwear" and "printer cartridge" bombing plots were making further strides; indeed. There were suggestions that they were now innovating new means to hide explosives in toiletries that a passenger might carry onto a civilian aircraft.

President Obama addressed this ancillary operation against the Khorasan Group, saying, "Once again, it must be clear to anyone who would plot against America and do Americans harm that we will not tolerate safe havens for terrorists who threaten our people." On a related note, there were unconfirmed reports that the leader of the Khorosan Group, Mohsin al-Fadhli, was killed in the air strikes. Such a development would be considered a notable blow against the terror group. That being said, the threat posed by this terror group to the United States homeland remained in place. The Department of Homeland Security issued a national security bulletin warning law enforcement agencies to be on heightened alert for lone-wolf terror attacks.

Meanwhile, the full array of the results -- including human casualties -- from Day 1 of the air strikes on Syria was yet to be revealed. However, a third terrorist group in the Middle East was affected by the aerial bombardment campaign in Syria. On Sept. 23, 2014, there were unconfirmed reports that the air strikes the night before killed leader as Abu Yousef al-Turki, also known as "the Turk" -- the leader of the al-Nusra terror group that has long been engaged in the fight against the Assad regime in Syria.

On Sept. 24, 2014, United States President Barack Obama was scheduled to address the United Nations General Assembly in New York. There, he was scheduled to make his case to the world of the imperative to defeat brutal and barbaric Islamist militant groups that seek to terrorize the world. It should be noted that while United Nations Secretary-General Ban ki-Moon did not explicitly back the action against ISIL/ISIS, he nonetheless emphasized the fact that Islamic extremist groups in Syria "pose an immediate threat."

In his address to the United Nations General Assembly, President Obama issued a strenuous defense of his policy to "degrade and ultimately destroy" ISIL, noting that military engagement was

Syria Review 2016 Page 174 of 540 pages Syria the only rational option. He declared: “There can be no reasoning, no negotiation, with this brand of evil. The only language understood by killers like this is the language of force.”

It was the type of muscular foreign policy stance not often associated by the president who was elected to end the United States' lengthy wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. But as history has often taught, leaders are compelled by circumstance to respond to the realities on the domestic and international scene and not the agenda items envisioned in election campaigns years prior.

In this case, President Obama was responding to the grim reality that an Islamist terrorist group was destabilizing the Middle East while, also sparking an eruption of Islamic zealotry and global Jihadism across the world. In response to this dangerous development, the United States leader said, “We must take concrete steps to address the danger posed by religiously motivated fanatics...No God condones this terror. No grievance justifies these actions."

President Obama reminded his fellow Americans that the mission to rout ISIL would not involve United States ground forces, and did, in fact, involve a global coalition of partner countries from Europe and the Arab world. To this end, he said, “We do not act alone. Nor do we intend to send U.S. troops to occupy foreign lands. Instead, we will support Iraqis and Syrians fighting to reclaim their communities.” President Obama also had a stark warning for the Islamic terrorists as he said. “Those who have joined ISIL should leave the battlefield while they can.”

Later on the same day, President Obama chaired a meeting of the United Nations Security Council. As the leader of the United States, which held the rotating presidency of the 15-member Security Council at the time, President Obama was in the prime position to direct the agenda, which in this case was focused on the global terrorism and the associated flow of foreign fighters to conflict zones across the world. In that session, President Obama called for the adoption of a measure mandating that member states of the United States cooperate in efforts to address the threat posed by foreign terrorist fighters.

The resolution called on member states to “prevent and suppress the recruiting, organizing, transporting or equipping of individuals who travel to a State other than their State of residence or nationality for the purpose of the perpetration, planning or preparation of, or participation in, terrorist acts or the providing or receiving of terrorist training, and the financing of their travel and of their activities.” It also made specific mention of the Islamic terror groups functioning in the Middle East, such as ISIL, al-Nusra Front, and all groups associated with al-Qaida.

It should be noted that the United Nations Security Council is often a venue for controversial impasse when it comes to making major decisions. Veto-wielding permanent members invariably divide themselves into bifurcated blocs with the West on one side and the Russia-China duo on the other side. But in a rare moment of concurrence, the draft of this measure on the threat posed for the flow of foreign fighters gained unanimous support at the United Nations Security Council and

Syria Review 2016 Page 175 of 540 pages Syria was thus decisively adopted.

On the battlefield, the fight continued with the international coalition striking targets in Iraq and Syria. Among the targets of the air strikes on Sept. 25, 2014, were oil refineries controlled by ISIL in eastern Syria. Clearly, the objective in this case was tactical as the strikes would deprive the terror group of its crucial access to oil and, thus, its ability to operate over wide expanses of land.

As well, Kurdish forces were doing their part and had managed to push back ISIL forces advancing on the town of Kobani (mentioned above), where a mass exodus had taken place days earlier as the mainly Kurdish population fled in fear of being ISIL's latest victims.

Nevertheless, ISIL was seeing success of its own, as it managed to take over a military base in the western Anbar province of Iraq. It was also attracting more extremists to the fold, with an Algeria-based terror group being the latest example. But while ISIL was attracting like-minded militants, its actions were also reinforcing President Obama's call to action for the world to unite in fighting global Jihadists. One illustration of this phenomenon was the brutal decapitation of a French tourist in Algeria by the Islamic terror groups pledging allegiance to ISIL. That act of blood lust only served to strengthen France's resolve in the fight against this particularly barbaric brand of terrorism.

Note: The brutal beheadings by ISIL of a British tax driver, Alan Henning, and a British aid worker, David Haines, who were in the region to provide aid and assistance to civilians, likely had the same effect of bolstering the United Kingdom's stance against ISIL and other such inhumane Islamic terror groups.

Meanwhile, with the United Nations Security Council receiving an emphatic request from Iraq for foreign intervention in the fight against ISIL, other countries were joining the campaign. Belgium announced it would seek parliamentary consent to contribute fighter jets, while the Netherlands said it would not only carry out air strikes, but also train Iraqi and Kurdish forces. Prime Minister David Cameron announced he was recalling parliament and would seek legislative approval to actively enter the aerial bombardment campaign against ISIL. Australia had already issued its fulsome declaration to support the effort in the same manner.

An anti-terrorism message was also emanating from within the Islamic intelligentsia with more than 120 Islamic scholars across the world advancing an open letter condemning ISIL and using a barrage of sophisicated theological arguments to challenge the Islamist terror organization for its warped interpretation of their religion, which they described as "a great wrong and an offense to Islam, to Muslims and to the entire world." The open letter also included this excoriation of ISIL members: "You have misinterpreted Islam into a religion of harshness, brutality, torture and murder."

Syria Review 2016 Page 176 of 540 pages Syria

The Seige of Kobane and the Turkish Dimension:

By October 2014, despite the active international air campaign over Iraq and Syria, ISIL continued to carry out its campaign of terror, even extending the battlefield to Turkish Kurdish areas. Irrespective of the fact that the Syrian town of Kobane (alternatively called Kobani and predominantly inhabited by Kurds) on the border with Turkey was under siege, and regardless of legislation passed in Turkey's parliament authorizing action against ISIL, Turkey showed little interest in joining the fight against ISIL. Even with the protection of its own territory at stake, with access to its own sophisticated military might including signficant air power, and despite its standing as a NATO country, Turkey was positioned on the sidelines of the conflict with ISIL.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan acknowledged that Kobane was likely to fall to ISIL; however, he said his country would not involve itself in the conflict raging across Syria and Iraq against ISIL unless the United States did more to oust Syrian President Bashar al-Assad from power. Erdogan's calculation appeared to be predicated on the belief that ISIL would not dare to actually penetrate the Turkish border, and so he was attempting to draw the United States more actively into the effort in Syria to remove Assad from power. Given Turkey's explicit and long- standing support for Syrian rebels -- many of whom could not be classified as moderate by any stretch of the imagination -- it was evident that the NATO country was not against the notion of intervening into another country's affairs in the region. The obvious conclusion was that, in a stunning display of self-interest matched by recklessness, Turkish President Erdogan was willing to risk his country's security at the border, in order to wrest concessions from the United States, and thus further the goals of his pet project: regime change in Syria.

The geopolitical risks notwithstanding, there was also a domestic gamble President Erdogan was making with regard to the Kurdish people who do not necessarily and neatly fit within any existing territorial borders. The Turkish nation state has had a fractious relationship with the Kurds, and has branded the Turkish Workers Party, which aims to establish an autonomous Kurdish state, to be a terrorist entity. However, in recent years, some progress has been made between the two sides in the path towards rapprochement. Now, Kurdish fighters in the battle zone were calling for reinforcements in the face of certain death, and the Turkish government was making it abundantly clear that it would not willingly heed that call. The repercussions promised to be long-standing. The Kurds were unlikely to forget Erdogan's selective humanitarian stances. While the Turkish leader favored going to great lengths to help Syrian civilians aligned with anti-Assad factions, he was apparently willing to watch a Kurdish blood bath unfold on his own border.

With pressure mounting for Turkey to move more pro-actively against ISIL, President Erdogan suggested that further action could not be taken unless a no-fly zone over Syria was established. However, United States officials pointed out that with the heavy air strike activity ongoing in the region, a de facto no-fly zone was already in place. Other officials excoriated Turkey for failing to act like a NATO member state. They railed against Turkey for not taking a leadership position

Syria Review 2016 Page 177 of 540 pages Syria when turmoil was unfolding on its doorstep.

By the second week of October 2014, progress was made in securing assistance from Turkey -- at least in limited form. Turkey agreed to allow the United States use of its military bases in the campaign against ISIL. According to United States National Security Adviser Susan Rice, Turkey agreed to allow the United States to access Turkish bases and territory "to train moderate Syrian opposition forces" and "engage in activities inside of Iraq and Syria." Rice said of Turkey's accommodation in these regards, "That's the new commitment, and one that we very much welcome."

Meanwhile coalition air strikes were being carried out against ISIL positions in Kobane. It was to be determined if the intensified air campaign would be enough to assist Kurdish fighters who said they were running out of ammunition and exhausting their troop strength.

Status Update --

In the second week of October 2014, Iraqi troops abandoned their positions once again at military bases in that country. It was clear that even with aerial support from the international coalition, the Iraqi military was an ineffectual entity, very likely ill-equipped to actually defend the country (or what was left of it).

The continued poor performance of the Iraqi army was actually an argument in favor of President Barack Obama's original position to end the war in Iraq and withdraw United States troops from that country. Unless the United States was prepared to retain an endless military presence in Iraq, not only limited to training Iraqi troops -- a fruitless exercise that had already been attempted -- but rather functioning as Iraq's proxy army, it was difficult to argue that even a limited residual force would have much of a purpose.

If Iraq was to stand as a sovereign nation state, it could not indefinitely rely on international intervention to save it from nefarious forces that came into being partially because of the power vaccum created by the 2003 invasion of Iraq and the ousting of Saddam Hussein, and partially because of political mismagament under the Maliki government. Perhaps Vice President Joe Biden's plan to partition Iraq along Kurdish, Sunni, and Shi'ite lines might be the only viable solution to calm the ethno-sectarian strife and end a political climate clearly hospitable to the rise of Islamic militants, such as ISIL.

Meanwhile, bombings and other attacks continued to plague Iraq, as ISIL continued its campaign of terror. One attack in Iraq's Anbar province resulted in the death of the police chief when a bomb targeted his convoy close to the provincial capital of Ramadi. In response to the alarming level of violence and the advance of ISIL, neoconservatives in the United States intensified their argument in favor of ground forces in Iraq, even as the Obama administration insisted that the

Syria Review 2016 Page 178 of 540 pages Syria

United States would not re-engage in a ground campaign in that country.

President Obama's 2008 rival in the presidential campaign of that year, Senator John McCain, said in an interview with CNN that the administration's targeted air strike strategy against ISIL was failing. He said, “They’re winning and we’re not. Pinprick bombing is not working."

During a meeting of military commanders from the countries* that make up the anti-ISIL coalition, President Obama indirectly addressed such criticism, reminding people that a "long-term campaign" against ISIL was afoot in Syria and Iraq. He noted, "There are going to be periods of progress and setbacks." Underlining President Obama's point was the fact that a positive turning point was underway in Kobane.

Indeed, the United States-led global coalition had intensified its air strikes in the conflict zone, and particularly in Kobane. ISIL had the advantage there for several weeks, but with the expanded air strikes, suddenly the momentum shifted towards the Kurds and more success was being seen in holding off the onslaught from ISIL.

Asya Abdullah, the co-chairman of the Kurdish political party in Syria, conveyed thanks to the United States-led global coalition against ISIL, noting that the latest spate of air strikes had been "extremely helpful." He said, "They are hitting Islamic State targets hard and because of those strikes we were able to push back a little." However, he added , "They [ISIL militants] are still shelling the city center."

A similar report on Kobane also came from United States Central Command, which made the following assertion via a statement: "Combined with continued resistance to ISIL on the ground, indications are that these strikes have slowed ISIL advances into the city, killed hundreds of their fighters and destroyed or damaged scores of pieces of ISIL combat equipment and fighting positions." Central Command nevertheless noted that Kobane remained at risk of falling to the Islamist terror group, as it added the following warning: "However, the security situation in Kobani remains fragile as ISIL continues to threaten the city and Kurdish forces continue to resist."

For his part, President Obama emphasized the global dimension of the effort against ISIL, pointing to the number of countries* joining the fight against the barbaric terror group. Of significance was the fact that the aforementioned meeting of military commanders included representatives from the countries that make up the international anti-ISIL coalition. *That international coalition in October 2014 included: Australia, Bahrain, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Egypt, France, Germany, Iraq, Italy, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Spain, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

Meanwhile, crisis conditions were unfolding in Iraq's Anbar province -- an ISIL stronghold -- as the Islamic terrorist expanded their control over yet another town there. At issue was control over the

Syria Review 2016 Page 179 of 540 pages Syria road running through Anbar to Baghdad. ISIL militants wanted an open route from the Syrian border to Baghdad and consolidating control over Anbar was the way to accomplish that goal. The genesis of the ISIL crisis really began when they took over Ramadi and Fallujah in Anbar several months prior, and have systematically expanded their terrain in the area. With the Iraqi military continuing to be an ineffectual entity, remaining "hold out" parts of Anbar not already under ISIL control were being protected by tribal fighters. However those fighters were warning that they were outgunned and likely to be overrun by ISIL without weapons and external assistance.

President Obama has promised that the effort would continue both in Kobane on the Syrian- Turkish border and in Iraq's Anbar province as he said, "Coalition air strikes will continue in both of these areas." To that end, the United States-led coalition carried our air strikes in Iraq close to Fallujah.

Even as the fighting was afoot in hotspots in Syria and Iraq, the Iraqi capital city was not immune from violence. On Oct. 17, 2014, a series of car bombings and mortar strikes in Shi'ite sections of Baghdad and in the rural areas to the south of the capital left close to 50 people dead and about 125 others injured. Because the targets of attacks were Shi'ite areas, suspicion rested on Sunni militants, likely ISIL itself or Sunni allies of the terror group. On Oct. 22, 2014, a series of bombings across Baghdad left more than 20 people dead and scores more injured. The attacks targeted restaurants in various districts in the capital city.

Iraqi authorities viewed these attacks as malicious messages from ISIL, intended to remind Shi'a Iraqis that even with a global coalition offering air support to Iraqi forces, they were able to target Shi'ites across the country at will. It was to be seen if that message was received, or, if Iraqis would heed the words of Iraqi's new Prime Minister Abadi who said in a televised speech at a military compound, "Baghdad is safe and the vicious terrorists cannot and will not reach it. Our brave security forces have managed to secure Baghdad and its perimeter."

Another disturbing development was the news that Iraqi pilots who joined ISIL were training militants to fly the fighter jets that the terror group was able to capture. Reports suggested that the militants were undergoing training at the captured al-Jarrah military airport to the east of Aleppo in Syria. While the move indicated that ISIL was trying to move into the arena of air power, the fact of the matter was that three fighter jets were not likely to present that much of a threat to the far more sophisticated air forces of various countries now functioning as part of the anti-ISIL international coalition.

On Oct. 20, 2014, the United States military was air dropping weapons, ammunition, and medical supplies to Kurdish forces in the area of Kobane. According to announcements by United States Central Command, C-130 transport aircraft had made "multiple" drops of supplies. A statement from the United States Central Command explained that the air drop mission was "intended to enable continued resistance against ISIL's attempts to overtake Kobane." United States Central

Syria Review 2016 Page 180 of 540 pages Syria

Command noted that all aircraft used in the mission had returned safely.

Turkey expressed displeasure regarding the United States' role in air dropping supplies to Kurdish fighters, whom they associate with the outlawed Kurdish Workers Party. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan declared that he would not allow Kurdish fighters to receive any transfers of United States arms. However, it was clear that the air drop had gone forward anyway. An official from the Obama administration explained the decision to carry out the air drop mission in the face of Turkish objections, saying: "President Obama spoke to Erdogan yesterday and was able to notify him of our intent to do this and the importance that we put on it. We understand the longstanding Turkish concern with the range of groups, including Kurdish groups, that they have been engaged in conflict with. However, our very strong belief is that both the United States and Turkey face a common enemy in ISIL and that we need to act on an urgent basis."

That argument from the Obama administration -- that the United States and Turkey faced a common enemy in ISIL -- apparently gained traction. On Oct. 20, 2014, Turkey reversed its stance to some degree and said it would allow Kurdish peshmerga fighters from Iraq cross the Syrian border to fight ISIL terrorists in Kobane. The shift in policy would allow Iraqi Kurdish peshmerga fighters safe passage through Turkey into Kobane. Then, on Oct. 22, 2014, members of the Iraqi Kurdish parliament approved a proposal that would result in the deployment of their fighters to Kobane. Iraqi Kurdish peshmerga fighters would offer support to fellow Kurds who were trying to hold Kobane on the Syrian-Turkish border from falling to ISIL.

In the last week of October 2014 fierce fighting was ongoing in Kobane. ISIL fighters had the upper hand in Tal Shair, to the west of the town. Tal Shair had actually flipped between ISIL and Kurdish fighters, suggesting that conditions remained tense. Despite allied air support, Kobane and the surrounding area on the Syria-Turkish border certainly remained at risk of falling to ISIL.

In Iraq, joint Iraqi forces and Shi'ite militias saw a strategic victory, taking control over the strategic town of Jurf al-Sakhar near Baghdad. Since ISIL was housing weapons and supplies, and also moving fighters, though tunnels close to Jurf al-Sakhar, control over the town essentially meant a disruption of a key network for ISIL. It was a notable success for Iraqi forces, which have not shown themselves to be much of a match for ISIL. Although ISIL fighters and allied Sunni insurgents had retreated to nearby villages, they were continuing to fire on Iraq and Shi'ite rivals in the area. Nevertheless, Jurf al-Sakhar was also the site of despair in late October 2014 as a suicide bombing killed close to 30 Shi'ites and wounded 60 others.

Kurds in Iraq were also seeing success against ISIL, retaking control over Zumar in Nineveh and several villages in the area, thanks to allied international air support. Kurdish intelligence sources told international media that despite encountering strong ISIL resistance, Kurdish peshmerga forces were able to advance on Zumar from several directions ultimately overwhelming ISIL fighters there. Success in Zumar could position Kurdish peshmerga fighters to go after Sinjar -- a particular

Syria Review 2016 Page 181 of 540 pages Syria flashpoint since ISIL forces laid siege on the local Yazidis in the region.

But despite these strategic gains, the region remained mired by violence and strife. In late October, central Baghdad was struck with violence as a car bomb left 15 people dead in the Karrada district of the city center. ISIL militants also attacked the town of al-Mansuriyah, to the northeast of Baghdad, killing six Iraqi security forces.

In Syria, the fight against ISIL continued, with news arising that United States-led coalition forces were carrying out air strikes there.

Spillover violence from Syria was at the same time arising in Lebanon where Islamic militants were engaged in battles with Lebanese military forces in the northern city of Tripoli. Fierce battles went on for days and left Lebanese soldiers, civilians, and Islamic extremist fighters dead. However, Lebanese authorities were ultimately able to gain the upper hand and re-assert control over the city.

Of concern was the fact that the Islamist militants appeared to be a mix of Lebanese and Syrian fighters aligned with ISIL and the al-Nusra Front. This development pointed to a closer alliance between the two extremist entities than previously thought.

As October 2014 was drawing to a close, estimates from the ground in Syria suggested that approximately 550 people had been killed in United States-led air strikes in Syria -- the vast majority of them being Islamic State and other militant fighters operating in the region.

As November 2014 began, Iraqi Kurdish fighters had joined the battle against ISIL terrorists in Kobane and were backed by United States-led coalition air strikes. Kurdish peshmerga fighters from Iraq were using long-range artillery and semi-heavy weaponry, which was aiding the effort. In the first week of November 2014, fighting was reported as being heavier than in the past.

As the world was focused on Kobane, ISIL was making gains elsewhere in Syria, particularly with regard to the control over a gas field in the central province of Homs.

That being said, there was a glimmer of hope for the Syrian civil war in the second week of November 2014. At issue was a United Nations proposal for a truce in the northern flashpoint city of Aleppo, which has been Ground Zero of the Syrian civil war and remained divided between rebel and government control at the time. According to United Nations envoys, the Assad regime showed genuine and constructive interest in the plan that would include a ceasefire and access for humanitarian aid. It was to be seen if this truce proposal -- admittedly to be applied in a limited form only to Aleppo -- would actually progress beyond the theoretical stage.

Meanwhile, joint coalition forces were also conducting air strikes against ISIL units in Anbar province close to Baghdad. There, ISIL's reign of terror was continuing. A disturbing report

Syria Review 2016 Page 182 of 540 pages Syria emerged in late October 2014 regarding the massacre of 300 members of the Albu Nimr tribe -- including women and children -- in the village of Zauiyat Albu Nimr in western Anbar. According to the Iraqi government, ISIL terrorists killed them because they resisted control. They then dumped all the bodies into a well. It was yet another manifestation of the barbarism that had come to characterize the Islamic terror group.

Regional human rights observers were watching the impending religious festival of Ashura dubiously, with fears arising that Sh'ite pilgrims would undoubtedly be favored targets for ISIL -- an extremist Sunni terror group. Indeed, on Nov. 2, 2014, almost 40 Shi'ite pilgrims died in a series of bomb attacks in Baghdad.

A week later on Nov. 8, 2014, a car bomb in Baghdad's mostly Shi'ite Sadr City left eight people dead, although in conjunction with other attacks in the capital, in Baquba to the northeast of Baghdad, and in the western city of Ramadi, the total death toll was closer to 30.

On Nov. 11, 2014, the Iraqi city of Bayji was the site of violence as a suicide bomber killed eight people, including six soldiers. Of note was the fact that the attack ensued even as United States- led air strikes targeted the city, with an eye on wresting control from ISIL fighters who have surrounded the oil refinery there. A separate attack ensued on the same day when a suicide bomber rammed his vehicle into a military outpost in the Baghdad district of Tarmiyah. Seven soldiers died as a result of that attack while at least a dozen others were injured.

In the third week of November 2014, a suicide car bombing occurred in Irbil -- the capital of Iraq's Kurdistan region. The suicide bomber and five victims died in the attack. Typically, Kurdistan has been somewhat insulated from the types of suicide bombings that plague Baghdad and other parts of the country. Thus, this act of violence was a warning to the Kurds that despite being under pressure by coalition-led air strikes, ISIL was still capable of striking at the heart of the Kurdish semi-autonomous region. Meanwhile, around the same period, at least three bomb attacks ensued in Baghdad

U.S.-led strikes on the battle zone and U.S. foreign policy relating to the campaign --

In the second week of November 2014, there were news reports that United States-led airstrikes were targeting gatherings of Islamic State or ISIL leadership in Iraq close to the border with Syria. There were soon suggestions by Iraq's Defense and Interior Ministries that ISIL leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, may have been injured in the strikes; however, United States officials were not prepared to comment on the matter. Later, ISIL itself was releasing videotaped footage purportedly proving that the leader of the terrorist group was still alive.

That being said, the United States continued aerial bombardment of ISIL targets in Syria and Iraq, offering air support to anti-ISIL operations on the Syrian town of Kobane where Kurds were under

Syria Review 2016 Page 183 of 540 pages Syria attack, in Sinjar where the minority population there was also under attack, and on other Iraqi targets in Mosul, Bayji, Falluja, and Ramadi. Iraqi forces, with United States support, were wresting control of the strategic oil refinery at Bayji back from ISIL. Another key aspect of the United States' operations in Iraq involved United States military advisers in Anbar -- an ISIL stronghold -- and their effort there to train Iraqi forces.

As well, the United States acknowledged that it was going after the al-Qaida linked terror entity, known as the Khorosan Group, based in Syria. A highly skilled group of al-Qaida specialist terrorists, the Khorosan Group initially operated in the Afghan-Pak region before relocating to Syria and resuming operations under one of the main al-Qaida linked groups in Syria -- al-Nusra Front. The area hit by the strikes included Sarmada in Idlib province, close to the border with Turkey and to the west of the Syrian city of Aleppo. A key target in that operation was a French- born militant and Islamic convert, David Drugeon, who was known to be a bomb maker. United States officials were not prepared to comment in detail on the matter. Instead, the military was said to be assessing the success of the strikes.

For his part, the United States appeared to be intensifying its footprint in the region and in the fight against ISIL with President Barack Obama approving the deployment on an additional 1,500 more troops to Iraq, for the purpose of advising and training Iraqi forces to fight the Islamic State terrorists. The additional troops effectively doubled the presence of United States military forces in Iraq, irrespective of the official stance that United States troops were not in Iraq to carry out active combat roles.

In the aftermath of mid-term elections that left President Obama with hostile Republican Congress in control of both chambers, the United States leader nonetheless looked to close ranks in the interests of national security. To that end, President Obama announced he would ask the Republican-controlled Congress to move forward with a fresh authorization for the use of military force against Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. Speaking of this push for congressional approval, President Obama said, "The world needs to know we are united behind this effort and the men and women of our military deserve our clear and unified support." President Obama added that the fight against Islamic militants and terrorists in the region had reached a "new phase." He explained, "We now have a different type of enemy. The strategy is different, and how we partner with Iraq and other Gulf countries and the international coalition, that has to be structured differently." As such, he noted that there was a need for a new "Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF)" that would reflect the existing challenges and the associated strategy moving forward.

On Nov. 17, 2014, it was confirmed that ISIL had brutally decapitated yet another American hostage. The videotaped footage depicting the gruesome remains of Peter Kassig was released by ISIL, who also ominously promised to "slaughter" Americans at home "in the streets." United States President Barack Obama reacted to the latest act of barbarism from the Islamic group by casting it as "an act of pure evil by a terrorist group that the world rightly associates with

Syria Review 2016 Page 184 of 540 pages Syria inhumanity." Of note that Kassig was actually a convert to Islam and known by the name Abdul- Rahman. His killing by ISIL suggested that the terror group was not simply targeting non-Muslims or apostates, but that they were interested in killing Western nationals for supremely political and Jihadist reasons.

While the death of Kassig cast a shadow on the global anti-ISIL effort, the United States Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff reminded the world that the United States-led global effort against the terror group was yielding results. During a surprise visit to Baghdad, General Martin Dempsey said that the United States' military re-engagement had helped rescue Iraq "from the precipice" and now the momentum was with joint international anti-ISIL forces. He said, "And now, I think it's starting to turn. So well done."

As November 2014 was drawing to a close, part of the United States' plan to fight ISIL in Iraq included a proposal to fund weapons for Sunni tribesmen willing to oppose the Islamic militant terrorists in Anbar province. The price tag for the weaponry was around $24 million and illustrated the view from the United States Pentagon that Sunni tribesmen would have to play an integral role in the anti-ISIL strategy in Anbar -- a Sunni enclave where Iraqi security forces would not be particularly welcomed. It should be noted that the procurement of the weaponry would go through the government of Iraq, in keeping with existing policy.

Other United States foreign policy developments related to the fight against ISIL in December 2014 included an effort from the Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to advance a fresh authorization for the use of military force against that terror group in Iraq and Syria.

At the defense level, an additional 1,500 troops were being deployed to Iraq, bringing the total to 4,600, according to Lieutenant General James Terry, who was responsible for the fight against ISIL. Terry offered a cautiously optimistic view of the engagement in the region, and specifically the effort to build up Iraqi security forces as he said: "While [the Iraqi security forces] have a long way to go I think they're becoming more capable every day." He continued, "When you start now to balance the different capabilities out across the coalition, I think we're doing pretty well in terms of boots on the ground."

Meanwhile, in the first half of December 2014, the United States-led coalition continued to carry out air strikes against ISIL targets inside Syria and Iraq. Indeed, as of mid-December 2014, the United States-led coalition continued to conduct air strikes against ISIL militants in Iraq and Syria.

Other recent developments with regard to Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Iran --

As November 2014 drew to a close, Syrian forces had carried out aerial bombardment of ISIL targets in Raqqa. The strikes reportedly hit an industrial zone and a marketplace, killing 60 people -- half of whom were believed to be civilians.

Syria Review 2016 Page 185 of 540 pages Syria

In the first part of December 2014, three journalists from a Syrian opposition television channel, known as Orient News, died while reporting the war in the southwestern part of Syria. Orient News accused the Assad regime's forces of targeting the journalists. Regardless of the reliability of this claim, the fact of the matter was that as many as 70 journalists -- most of them being local reporters -- have been killed while covering the war in Syria since its start in 2011.

Also in early December 2014, suggestions emerged that Iran was carrying out air strikes on ISIL targets in Iraq. While Iran officially dismissed the claims, there was videotaped footage from the media outlet, Al Jazeera, of a jet identified by Jane's Defense as an F-4 Phantom striking ISIL in Diyala province. Because only Iran and Turkey were known to operate F-4 Phantom jets regionally, and because of Turkey's reluctance to become engaged in the fight against ISIL, all indications were that the strikes were carried out by Iran. United States Secretary of State John Kerry was reticent about commenting on the matter, saying, "I am not going to make any announcements or confirm or deny the reported military action of another country in Iraq. It is up to them (the Iranians) or up to the Iraqis to do that if it did indeed took place.” HOwever, Kerry later noted that any Iranian action against ISIL in Iraq should be regarded as a "positive" development. To this end, he said, "If Iran is taking on (IS) in some particular place... and it has an impact, then it's going to be net effect (that) is positive."

Around the same time in early December 2014, Lebanon's interior ministry said that its security forces apprehended a woman believed to be the wife of ISIL leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, along with a child born to the couple. The detainment actually took place months earlier, but Lebanon was only now acknowledging the development. It should also be noted that Iraqi sources poured doubt on the claim that Saja al-Dulaimi was actually Baghdadi's wife, suggesting she was more likely to be the sister of a man convicted of bombings in southern Iraq. Lebanese sources nevertheless cast her detainment as part of a foreign intelligence operation. They said that the detainment of Dulaimi would be used as levearge in negotiations aimed at releasing 27 members of the Lebanese security forces who were seized by Islamist militants along the border with Syria.

In December 2014, the United States-led coalition continued to carry out air strikes against ISIL targets inside Syria and Iraq. But despite the pressure being placed on ISIL, Islamist terrorists continued to carry out a campaign of horror in Iraq and Syria at the end of 2014 .

Meanwhile, the toll of the war in Syria was increasing. As 2014 came to a close, the United Kingdom-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said that more than 30,000 civilians had been killed during the year in the civil war in Syria. Including fighters, the death toll for the year was more than 76,000. According to United Nations, the number of people killed since the start of the conflict in 2011 was 191,000.

Recent developments in the battlefields --

Syria Review 2016 Page 186 of 540 pages Syria

At the start of 2015, progress was being made in the effort against ISIL. Iraqi Kurdish forces, backed by United States air power, had regained control over most of the territory lost since the summer of 2014. This claim was made by Falah Mustafa Bakir, the head of the department of foreign relations for the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), in an interview with Voice of America. But Bakir indicated that the Iraqi army continued to present a weak point in the fight against ISIL. He posed the following question: “Where is the Iraqi army and where are the Sunnis?” Of course, the fact of the matter was that the Iraqi city of Mosul remained in ISIL hands and Bakir was urging an effort to liberate that city as he said, “Mosul is key.” The defeat of ISIL at the location where the terror group declared its caliphate would make it easier to dislodge them from across the region.

United States Pentagon Press Secretary Navy Rear Admiral John Kirby appeared to share a similar assessment as Bakir. At a press briefing, Kirby said, “What we haven't seen in the last several weeks has been any renewed offensive moves by ISIL of any significance. They have largely taken a defensive posture in the last several weeks.” Kirby cautioned that “nobody is taking that progress for granted.” Instead, Kirby noted that ISIL retained control over Mosul, Baiji, wide swaths of Anbar province, and remained a threat to the Yazidi minority in the region of Mount Sinjar. With an eye on a possible offensive on ISIL in Mosul, the Pentagon said it would train 12 new army brigades in Iraq including three in the Kurdish region.

As of Jan. 21, 2015, the United States was leading air strikes on Mosul.

An effort in Syria was also in the offing with the United States military set to deploy approximately 400 soldiers to train Syrian rebels to fight ISIL. Several countries, including Turkey, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia have expressed interest in hosting the training. The United States government of Barack Obama had already authorized the deployment of some 3,000 troops to advise and train Iraqi and Kurdish forces.

While Syria has welcomed the United States' effort to fight ISIL in the region, it draws the line at training Syrian rebels, regarding all such groups as a threat to its power, and has a blanket assessment of all opponents, from Syrian moderate rebels to ISIL, as terrorists. Thus, the Syrian state news agency. SANA, accused the United States of "continuing to support terrorism in Syria."

But in the last week of January 2015, Syrian President Assad called for an agreement with the United States over the air strikes against ISIL targets in Syrian territory. In an interview with the magazine, Foreign Affairs, Assad said, "With any country that is serious about fighting terrorism, we are ready to make cooperation, if they [the United States] are serious." He continued, noting that the United States should "make legal cooperation with Syria and start by asking permission from our government to make such attacks." Assad also said that Washington should urge Turkey to refrain from funding and arming rebels in northern Syria.

Syria Review 2016 Page 187 of 540 pages Syria

For Washington, it was quite conceivable that it believed its obligations were fulfilled when it informed Damascus of its impending air strikes on ISIL in Syria in the autumn of 2014.

On Jan. 26, 2015, it was announced that the Kurdish city of Kobane, where a long-standing battle with ISIL was ongoing, had finally come under Kurdish control. Kurdish forces had driven Islamic State militants from the city and were flying their flag high. Kurdish fighters were proceeding carefully into the city due to fears about landmines planted by the Islamic terrorists; however, Kurds were seen celebrating in the streets and jets were seen flying over Kobane. The recapture of Kobane was a significant and hard-fought victory in the Kurds' fight against ISIL.

By the start of February 2015, Kurdish forces, backed by United States-led air strikes, were advancing on the rural areas surrounding Kobane, driving Islamic State militants further away. In an interview with Reuters News, Redur Xelil, a spokesperson for the Syrian Kurdish militia, said: "The fighting organization of Daesh ... is in a state of complete collapse at present and cannot hold ground." (Note: "Daesh" is a pejorative term for Islamic State which that terror group rejects, but while the anti-Islamic State activists have used in defiance.)

Complex Geopolitcs --

Not all the news was positive. A complex hostage crisis was playing out as ISIL continued its campaign of barbarism and terror, threatening to kill two Japanese hostages -- Kenji Goto, a freelance journalist and film-maker, and Haruna Yukawa, a self-declared security consultant. ISIL terrorists demanded an unrealistically high ransom demand of $200 million for the Japanese hostages, while the government of Japan warned that it would not negotiate with terrorists. Indeed, while some countries have been prepared to pay ransoms to secure the release of their kidnapped nationals, other countries, such as the United States, have argued that the ransom funds are used to pay for continued terrorism. Regardless, with a ransom left unpaid by Japan in this case, the pattern of tragedy and terror unfolded as a 72-hour deadline passed, and ISIL released a gruesome video depicting the beheading death of Yukawa.

Soon thereafer, a twist on the hostage sage occurred as ISIL suggested it might consider releasing Goto and a Jordanian pilot, Moaz al-Kasasbeh, if Jordan were to consider a prisoner exchange. Kasasbeh was shot down over Syria in December 2014 on a mission to support the United State- led military coalition effort against Islamic State.

At the center of the prisoner exchange for ISIL was a female Iraqi militant, Sajida al-Rishawi. She and her husband, Hussein Ali al-Shamari, attempted to carry out double suicide bombings at the Radisson hotel in the Jordanian capital of Amman in 2005. While her husband completed his mission, and 60 people died as a result, the explosives failed to detonate in her case and she was arrested, imprisoned, and sentenced to death. She remained alive only because in 2006, Jordan

Syria Review 2016 Page 188 of 540 pages Syria imposed a moratorium on the death penalty. Of note is the fact that the moratorium expired at the close of 2014 and executions have resumed in Jordan. Rishawi is regarded as a high value prisoner by ISIL due to the fact that she was the sister of the "right hand man" of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. For ISIL, any one in Zarqawi's inner circle was regarded highly since he was leader of al-Qaida in Iraq -- the terror group that ultimately gave birth to ISIL.

At the end of January 2015, the Jan. 29, 2015, deadline imposed by ISIL passed. Two days later, another gruesome video, typical of the Islamist terror group, was released showing a British ISIL terrorist beheading Goto. While the Japanese government has expressed horror and outrage over the horrific killing of two of its citizens, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has nonetheless maintained a resolute stance, as he declared that Japan "would not give in to terrorism." Moreover, Prime Minister Abe vowed that Japan would do more in the global effort against ISIL.

Meanwhile, Jordanian officials said they were exploring all their options related to the release of Kasasbeh. However, they were calling for some sort of proof of life sign. By the start of February 2015, Jordan made clear that because Kasasbeh was a military asset, and because Rishawi had not been successful in her attempted act of terrorism, it was willing to pursue the prisoner exchange path. As noted by Mohammed al-Momeni, a Jordanian spokesperson in an interview with the official Petra news agency, the government was doing "everything it can to save the life and secure the release of its pilot." Momeni continued, "All state organizations have been mobilized to secure the proof of life that we require so that he can be freed and returned to his home."

On Feb. 3, 2015, however, the tragic news emerged that although ISIL had been using Kasasbeh as a bargaining chip, they had actually burned him to death in a cage a month earlier. As before, Islamic State terrorists released another highly-produced but entirely gruesome video depicting their vicious act of cruelty and horror.

King Abdullah of Jordan, who was in the United States for security talks, cut short his visit but was sure to meet with President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden before returning home to deal with what had become a national tragedy. The Obama White House condemned the killing of Kasasbeh and Vice President Joe Biden reinforced "America's ironclad support" for Jordan. The European Union issued a statement of solidarity with Jordan over the killing of Kasasbeh, while Japan, whose constitution prevents it from being militarily engaged, nonetheless vowed to do its part in the fight against Islamic State. Japan also made clear that it shared the pain of Jordan having similarly suffered the brutal beheadings of two of its own citizens by the hand of ISIL terrorists.

Several Arab countries were compelled to issue statements on the murder of Kasasbeh. The Saudi Arabian state news agency described the killing as a "barbaric, cowardly act, which is not sanctioned by the principles of tolerant Islam... and cannot be perpetrated except by the bitterest enemies of Islam." From Egypt, Sheikh Ahmed al-Tayeb, the Grand Imam of al-Azhar University

Syria Review 2016 Page 189 of 540 pages Syria in Egypt and one of the leading authorities on Sunni Islam, made it clear that burning Kasasbeh to death was a violation of Islam, which prohibits the mutilation of bodies. As well, Arab League Secretary General Nabil al-Arabi said the killing of Kasasbeh was "brutal" and "beyond belief." Arabi noted that Islamic State was "a menace which should be stopped."

At home in Jordan, citizens took the streets in spontaneous demonstrations to denounce the terror group, ISIL, which anti-extremist Arabs derisively refers to as "Daesh," and demanded revenge. Among those calling for a harsh response by Jordan was Kasasbeh's father, Safi al-Kasasbeh, who said, "I demand Islamic State should be wiped out... I call for [ISIL] to be eliminated completely."

Clearly, Jordan's outrage was being felt globally, with the civilized world angered that ISIL clearly had no intention of acting in good faith on their proposed prisoner exchange, since Kasasbeh had been killed a full month prior. The terror group had essentially been negotiating in bad faith and clearly were willing to manipulate and exploit the circumstances to their benefit. While this tactic may have worked -- with tragic consequences for the two Japanese hostages and the lone Jordanian hostage -- it was not something that could easily be replicated. First, there were only a limited number of Western hostages known to be in ISIL hands, and second, the cruel murder of Kasasbeh had motivated the global community to take more decisive action against the terror group. As noted by United States President Barack Obama, "I think it will redouble the vigilance and determination on the part of the global coalition to make sure they [Islamic State terrorists] are degraded and ultimately defeated."

Upon arriving back home in Jordan on Feb. 4, 2015, King Abdullah made his voice -- and that of his country -- heard as he declared: "The blood of martyr Moaz al-Kasasbeh will not be in vain and the response of Jordan and its army after what happened to our dear son will be severe." King Abdullah essentially declared relentless war on Islamic State in the following statement: "Jordan and its Arab army's response to what its son had suffered in the criminal and cowardly act, will be harsh, because this terrorist organization is not only fighting us, but fighting the true Islam and its values. We are fighting this war to protect our faith, our values and humanitarian principles, and our fight for these values will be relentless, we will be on the lookout for the criminals and hit them in their own homes."

It was assumed that response would involve a greater military involvement by Jordan in the global effort against Islamic State. To that end, President Barack Obama's nominee for defense secretary, Ashton Carter, said he would resolve a delay in the sale of arms from the United States to Jordan.

Note that on Feb. 5, 2015, Jordanian fighter jets were pounding ISIL targets in Syria. According to media sources, the strikes were on the eastern province of Deir al-Zor and near the Islamic State stronghold of Raqqa where Kasasbeh was executed. This news appeared to be verified by King Abdullah himself, who was overheard by witnesses telling the family of Kasasbeh that the Jordanian forces were striking at the heart of ISIL territory in Raqqa.

Syria Review 2016 Page 190 of 540 pages Syria

On Feb. 8, 2015, Jordan continued to carry out air strikes against Islamic State bases and hideouts in Syria. Jordanian Air Force chief, General Mansour al-Jbour, said, "We achieved what we aimed at." He added that as many as 20 percent of all the sorties by the United States-led coalition in Syria had been carried out by Jordan, and that a sgnificant portion of Islamic State's capacities had been degraded.

For its part, Islamic State announced that one of the Jordanian air strikes had killed a United States aid worker, Kayla Mueller, the remaining American hostage being held by the terror group. Mueller's death was soon verified; however, United States officials said there was no evidence to support ISIL's claims that that aid worker was killed in a Jordanian air strike. United States authorities also made clear that the only group responsible for the death of Mueller was ISIL.

In mid-February 2015, a new battleground of Islamic State merged in Libya when more than 20 Coptic Christians from Egypt were brutally killed. In keeping with the terror group's favorite mode of assassination, the victims were beheaded. As with the horrific immolation of a Jordanian pilot by Islamic State at the start of 2015 in Syria, the decapitations of the Egyptian Christian workers in Libya stood as an imprimatur for yet another Arab country to enter the global effort to defeat the Islamist Jihadist terror group.

Six weeks earlier at the start of January 2015, masked gunmen kidnapped the 13 Coptic Christians in northern Libya. The Coptic Christians were workers from Egypt living at a residential compound in the city of Sirte. The gunmen entered the compound and demanded to see identification papers of the workers; Christians and Muslims were separated with the Christians being taken away in handcuffs. A week prior, a group of seven Christians from Egypt were similarly attacked and kidnapped from a phony checkpoint in the very same Libyan city of Sirte. In a separate attack, an Egyptian-born Coptic Christian doctor and his wife were attacked and killed in their own home in Sirte. These acts of kidnapping and murder, with Coptic Christians as the targets, appeared to be the latest manifestation of the manifold instability plaguing Libya. In the post-Qadhafi era, Libya was now beset by violence at the hands of rival militias, and a stronghold for extremist fighters aligned with Islamic State for whom Christians present a prime target for attack.

The ghastly targeting of Christians by Islamic State reached a new nadir in mid-February 2015. As discussed here, videotaped footage emerged depicting the gruesome beheadings of the more than 20 Coptic Christians from Egypt who had been kidnapped by Islamic State terrorists in Libya. As has become a favored pattern by Islamic State, the revolting footage showed the victims dressed in orange jumpsuits, forced to kneel down, and then decapitated in a barbaric theatre of horror. Adding to the tradgedy was the fact that most of the victims were from poor villages in Upper Egypt who were forced to work in Libya due to their socio-economic plight.

Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi made a point of visiting St Mark's Cathedral in Cairo to

Syria Review 2016 Page 191 of 540 pages Syria offer his condolences to the Coptic Christian Pope Tawadros II. For its part, the Coptic Christian Church of Egypt expressed grave sadness over the deaths of the victims but said it was "confident" that the Egyptian authorities would respond appropriately. To that end, the Egyptian government declared a week of mourning and banned all travel by Egyptian citizens to Libya.

It should be noted that Egyptian President Sisi condemned the repugnant murders of Coptic Christians, calling their assassins "inhuman criminal killers." The Egyptian leader wasted little time in asserting that it was his country's prerogative to exact retribution. Sisi also made clear that there was a global war emerging as the world confronted Islamist Jihadists. He said, "Egypt and the whole world are in a fierce battle with extremist groups carrying extremist ideology and sharing the same goals."

Soon, Egyptian forces were striking various Islamic State satellite targets in Libya -- from terror training camps and sites to weapons depots in the city of Derna. Meanwhile, Libya forces -- under the instruction of the internationally-recognized government of that country and in coordination with Egypt -- were hitting Islamic State targets in Sirte and Bin Jawad. Egyptian authorities soon said that the plan would be to target all Islamic State locations in Libya. Egyptian authorities also called on the United States-led international coalition against Islamic State to provide support to Egypt in its efforts against the bloodthirsty Islamist Jihadist terror group. Moreover, President Sisi called for a United Nations resolution facilitating an international intervention into Libya. In an interview with French media, the Egyptian leader explained that there was no other alternative, saying, "We will not allow them to cut off the heads of our children."

Following the commencement of Egypt's air strike campaign, Libya was struck by violence when Islamic State militants launched a spate of suicide attacks. The terrorists packed cars with explosives, which were then detonated in the eastern town of Qubbah, ultimately killing 40 people. Islamic State said that the attacks were being carried out in retaliation for Egyptian air strikes on pro-ISIL targets in Derna, Libya (as discussed above). The claim of responsibility statement by Islamic State of Cyrenaica read as follows: "They killed and wounded tens in revenge for the bloodshed of Muslims in the city of Derna."

Other recent developments --

In the battlefield in Syria in the second week of February 2015, pro-Assad government forces were making gains in the south against rebel forces backed by Lebanese Hezbollah fighters. The operation appeared to be targeting a rebel-held zone stretching from Deraa city to Quneitra and to the southwest of Damascus, and seemed to be aimed at protecting the capital from being penetrated by insurgents.

The fight against ISIL in Iraq and Syria was ongoing in mid-February 2015. On Feb. 13, 2015, Iraqi security forces repelled an attack by ISIL on an air base in Anbar province in Iraq where

Syria Review 2016 Page 192 of 540 pages Syria

United States Marines were providing training to Iraqi troops. Fighting was also going on in the town of al-Baghdadi.

Days later on Feb. 17, 2015, that town was the site of a massacre when ISIL terrorists burned 45 people to death. Around the same period in Syria, pro-Assad military forces were advancing on the rebel-held northern stronghold of Aleppo, capturing several villages in the area, and engaging in heavy battles. Backed by Hezbollah forces from Lebanon, the Assad army was also launching a serious assault in southern Syria.

For his part, Syrian President Assad said in an interview with BBC News that although there was no direct cooperation with the United States, third parties, such as Iraq, had been passing on information to Damascus about the United States-led air campaign against ISIL in Syria. Assad said: "Through third parties, more than one party, Iraq and other countries, sometimes they convey a message, a general message, but there is nothing tactical." He added that there was no actual dialogue with the United States via third parties, saying, "There is no dialogue. There is, let's say, information, but not dialogue."

In the same interview, Assad denied that Syria was turning into a failed state, insisting that Syrian government institutions continued to fulfill "their duty toward the Syrian people." He also dismissed that his forces were dropping barrel bombs on insurgents. He said, "They're called bombs. We have bombs, missiles and bullets ... There is no barrel bombs, we don't have barrels."

Note that in February 2015, United States-led air strikes in Syria was bearing fruit with the recapture of several villages, previously held by Islamic State, in the terrorist-held stronghold of Raqqa province.

In the battlefields in Iraq and Syria in late February 2015, ISIL continued its campaign of terror. In northern Syria, the terror group abducted at least 150 Assyrian Christians, including women, children, and senior citizens. There was no word on their condition. On the Iraqi side of the border, as many as 100 Sunni tribesmen were abducted near the city of Tikrit. Also in Iraq, the capital of Baghdad was struck with terrorism when bombs exploded in the Jisr Diyala district, killing two dozen people.

In a more positive development, United States officials charged with training fighters in Syria have said that a more significant number of moderates have come forward with a willingness to fight Islamic State. Along a similarly encouraging note, Kurdish YPG militia fighters -- already in the trenches in Syria -- have seen increasing success in their efforts to go after Islamic State targets in northeastern Syria, with the notable capture of the town of Tel Hamis. Backed by United States- led air strikes, the Kurdish YPG militias have also managed to regain control over several other villages in the region.

Syria Review 2016 Page 193 of 540 pages Syria

In early March 2015, pro-Assad Syrian forces enjoyed significant success when an air strike hit the commander of the militant Islamist rebel group, al-Nusra Front. According to reports on social media, Abu Homam al-Shami was eliminated along with three other al-Nusra leaders in the strike; although that aspect of the new emerging from Syria remained unconfirmed.

In the Syrian civil war, spurred by the Arab Spring, al-Nusra Front emerged as one of the most powerful anti-government entities in the battlefield. Nusra Front's ties to the terror group, al- Qaida, have been at the forefront of the calculations of the United States government, which has been reluctant to offer unlimited support to anti-Assad rebels due to its fears that they might be inadvertently assisting this terror affiliate. Now, however, with the death of the Nusra Front commander, the edge was with the Syrian Assad forces who had managed to stake out a strategic victory in what they called a "unique operation."

Of note, however, was the fact that with the rise of Islamic State in Syria and Iraq, al-Nusra has lost its Jihadist cachet to some degree. In fact, al-Nusra was rpeorted to be interested in cutting ties with al-Qaida and currying favor with certain Arab Gulf states, such as Qatar, known for funding anti-Assad rebels.

Meanwhile, in mid-March 2015, bombing and ground attacks by anti-Assad rebels targeted a government security building in Aleppo. That attack on the Air Force Intelliigence compound left dozens of people dead and the building destroyed.

But pro-Assad Syrian forces enjoyed significant success when an air strike hit the commander of the militant Islamist rebel group, al-Nusra Front. According to reports on social media, Abu Homam al-Shami was eliminated along with three other al-Nusra leaders in the strike; although that aspect of the news emerging from Syria remained unconfirmed.

Of note, however, was the fact that with the rise of Islamic State in Syria and Iraq, al-Nusra has lost its Jihadist cachet to some degree. In fact, al-Nusra was reported to be interested in cutting ties with al-Qaida and currying favor with certain Arab Gulf states, such as Qatar, known for funding anti-Assad rebels.

In the same period, President Assad signaled an interest in possible overtures from the United

Syria Review 2016 Page 194 of 540 pages Syria

States as regards the resolution of the civil war gripping his country. At issue was a statement from United States Secretary of State John Kerry intimating that the end to the war could only be secured with a negotiated settlement, and such negotiations would have to include the Syrian leader. In an interview with CBS News, Secretary of State Kerry said the Obama administration was "working very hard with other interested parties to see if we can reignite a diplomatic outcome" to the Syrian war. In answer to the question as to whether the diplomatic process would include Assad, Secretary of State Kerry said, "We have to negotiate in the end." Later, the State Department finessed Kerry's answer, indicating that theoretic negotiations would entail representatives for the Syrian regime and not Assad himself.

It should be noted that in mid-April 2015, the United States Pentagon confirmed that Islamic State lost more than a quarter of the territory, across the border in Iraq, which it held prior to the air campaign that was launched in August 2014. While it was deemed too early to confirm that the momentum was no longer with the brutal terror group, according to United States Pentagon spokesperson, Colonel Steve Warren, "some damage" had been inflicted and Islamic State was "slowly being pushed back." To this end, Colonel Warren noted that the frontlines of the zone held by Islamic State was being forced further to the south and to the west in Iraq.

It should also be noted that whereas progress had been noted in Iraq, the prevailing dynamics remained in place in Syria where Islamic State continued to hold sway over large swaths of that country. United States Pentagon spokesperson, Colonel Steve Warren, said that while Islamic State had been defeated in Kobane on the Turkish border, it had nonetheless made gains around Damascus and Homs.

Meanwhile, the United States' plan to train moderate Syrian rebels was coming under scrutiny. At issue were anxieties that the training of some rebels would spark power struggles among the opposition ranks. As well, there were claims that without directly targeting the Syrian government, the training program would likely see only limited results. Of course, still other critics noted that the prevailing problem of inadvertently helping extremists was not yet reconciled. They argued that there was no clear understanding of who could actually be classified as a "moderate," and as such, could leave the United States actually assisting rebel enclaves with links to Sunni Isamist terrorists. In the backdrop was the Obama administration's continued reticence about becoming entagled in the Syrian crisis.

That being said, the United States-led coalition and Iraqi forces were enjoying some success in their effort against Islamic State. Of note was the announcement on May 13, 2015 that the deputy leader of the terror group was killed in an air strike in northern Iraq. According to Iraqi authorities, Abdul Rahman Mustafa al-Qaduli, also known as Abu Alaa al-Afari -- the second most senior leader of Islamic State -- was eliminated as a result of a United States-led air strike on a mosque near Tal Afar in Nineveh. While the United States had no comment on the matter beyond acknowledging that an air strike had been conducted at Tal Afar, Iraqi defense sources released

Syria Review 2016 Page 195 of 540 pages Syria videotaped footage purportedly showing the strike that killed Qaduli (also known as Afari) and several other militants with whom he was meeting.

In the background of this news was the claim by Iraqi sources that Islamic State leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, had been sidelined with injuries following an air strike in March 2015. Since that time, Afari had reportedly taken over control of the terror group's operations. Assuming this news of Afari's death is confirmed, it would be regarded as a major accomplishment in the fight against Islamic State. Indeed, with the leader incapacitated and the deputy dead, the terror group would have suffered two successive blows at the very top of its Islamist terror institution.

Of course, it should be noted that these two claims by Iraqi authorities of the incapacitation of Baghdadi and the eimination of Afari were yet to be confirmed by United States authorities. The Iraqi government's record on announcing high profile deaths of militants has been spotty, with many claims being refuted when the said militants emerge alive and well later. To this end, on May 14, 2015, Islamic State released videotaped footage depicting Baghdadi alive and well -- presumably in an attempt to disprove claims that the terror group's leader was injured and unable to function.

In the case of Syria, a fresh attempt to find some end to the Syrian civil war commenced in the first week of May 2015 with United Nations-backed peace talks in Geneva, Switzerland. However, as before, there were few high hopes that the meeting between United Nations envoys, Syrian government representatives, and delegates from select rebel groups would yield groundbreaking results. In fact, expectations were so low that the talks were not being classified as negotiations; instead, they were being referred to as "consulations."

In mid-May 2015, the pro-Assad Syrian military, backed by the Lebanon-based militant based entity, Hezbollah, appeared to be preparing for a major offensive in the border area between the two countries. For some time, Hezbollah -- an ally of the Alawite Assad regime -- has been backing President Assad in Syria, and bolstering the fight against Sunni rebel groups (many of them of the extremist Islamist type, such as al-Nusra Front) with whom the regime has been ensconced in a civil war since the start of the Arab Spring in 2011. Now, however, with the Sunni Islamist rebel groups gaining strength in the region, and with the Qalamoun mountains becoming a stronghold for Sunni militants and terrorists, joint Syrian military and Lebanese-based Hezbollah forces were advancing on the area. Their aims were to regain control in strategic areas, such as Assal al-Ward and Qarna Heights, and to cut off a major supply route for weapons and militants.

It should be noted that some anti-Hezbollah political factions in Lebanon have decried the operation, warning that it will stimulate violence within Lebanese borders.

Meanwhile, Islamic State was bearing down on the Syrian town of Tadmur, the location of Palmyra -- one of the world's most significant archaeological sites. There were serious fears that

Syria Review 2016 Page 196 of 540 pages Syria

Islamic State would make Palmyra its newest target in its campaign of horrific cultural destruction.

The eastern city of Aleppo was the focus of both the pro-Assad regime and the opposing militant forces in Syria in mid-2015. Aleppo has, for some time, been a key center of the Syrian civil war, with it being held by militant rebels in the early years of the conflict before reverting to government hands. In recent times, the militant rebels have seen success in taking wide swaths of Syrian territory from pro-Assad government forces; however, at the start of the year, pro-Assad government forces were looking to lay siege on the rebel stronghold in the territory surrounding Aleppo. Now, in June 2015, it was clear that momentum was on the rebel side and regaining control over Aleppo was their renewed focus point.

In an interview with regional media -- specifically, the opposition-aligned television station, Halab Today, a rebel commander presaged a major battle for Aleppo to come. Yasser Abdul Rahim of Nour al Din al Zinki said, "The big battle of Aleppo you can say has started in its preparatory phases." He continued, "There is a decisive final blow coming that will expel the regime from Aleppo and to liberate the city completely." That being said, the militant rebels' plans for Aleppo were somewhat upended by an assault by Islamic State.

Still, the Assad regime was having its own successes, having repelled a a major rebel offensive to capture positions and villages in Quneitra province, close to the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights. That area had been subject to successive days of heavy shelling and gunfire. By mid-2015, pro- Assad government troops, supported by Lebanon-based Hezbollah was apparently concentrating its effort in the Syrian town of Zabadani, whch was under rebel control but not by Islamic State militants. Through these efforts, the Assad regime was making clear that its priority was not on fighting Islamic State but simply on holding onto power Shi'a areas of Syria.

For his part, despite paying lip service to the fight against Islamic State in Syria, President Assad has concentrated his effort on the fight againt militant rebels -- some of whom have been backed by the West and regional Arab governments, such as the Free Syrian Army, and others that tend to be extremist terrorists, such as Nusra Front. This willful disregard for the threat posed by Islamic State made clear that Assad's priority was a matter of holding onto power as the president of Syria in Damascus, even if it meant ceding government-control of wide swaths of Syrian territory. In fact, in the spring of 2015, the Assad regime had lost control of large portions of Idlib province to to the militant rebels.

Meanwhile, with the fight going on in those areas, Islamic State has taken advantage of the Assad regime's focus elsewhere by making territorial gains elsewhere on Syrian territory. As well, Islamic State was also going after rival groups. While there was no actual claim of responsibility at the time it happened, a bombing at a mosque in Syria's Idlib province at the start of July 2015 that killed at least 25 members of the al-Qaida ally, al-Nusra Front, was attributed to Islamic State.

Syria Review 2016 Page 197 of 540 pages Syria

In a rare case of good news, Kurdish fighters in the third week of June 2015 were able to liberate the Liwa military base from Islamic State to the north of the terrorists' self-declared capital of Raqqa.

The United States-led global coalition was also doing its part against Islamic State as it carried out a series of air strikes on the terror group's main Syrian stronghold of Raqqa. The strikes in mid-2015 on the so-called capital of the caliphate constituted one the most sustained assaults on Islamic State since the global coalition was launched. Approximately two dozen Islamic State terrorists were eliminated in the strikes, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. For its part, the United States military confirmed the action with a military spokesperson, Lieutenant Colonel Thomas Gilleran saying, "The significant air strikes tonight were executed to deny Daesh [Islamic State] the ability to move military capabilities throughout Syria and into Iraq."

Also of note in mid-2015 was Islamic State's capture of the historic site of Palmyra. In the spring of 2015, Islamic State advanced on the Syrian town of Tadmur, the location of one of the world's most significant archaeological sites known as Palmyra. Dating back to the 1st and 2nd centuries of the Common Era when the area was under the rule of the Romans, Palmyra was home to the temple of Baal while also bearing elements of the Roman imprint. Antiquities and historic experts were fearful that Islamic State would target Palmyra in its latest barbaric act of cultural and historic destruction.

To that end, in June 2015, Islamic State was planting mines and explosives in Palmyra -- presumably with the objective of destroying the historic ruins. In an interview with Reuters News, the person in charge of Syria's antiquities, Maamoun Abdulkarim, warned that the Palmyra's historic legacy was at risk. He said, "The city is a hostage in their hands, the situation is dangerous."

By July 2015, Islamic State had released videotaped footage depicting the destructon of the artifacts from the ancient historic site of Palmyra in Syria. Of particular note was the sight of Islamic State adherents using sledgehammers to destroy statues, as well as the destruction of two Islamic shrines near Palmyra. The imagery showing the destruction of the statues was shown along with a statement by the Muslim Prophet Mohammed, which read as follows: "Do not leave any statue without obliterating it or any high grave without levelling it." Meanwhile other antiquities were being plundered on a large scale basis from heritage sites in Syria and Iraq, and then placed on the global black market. According to Unesco's Director-General Irena Bokova, the illicit sale of such objects was now being used to finance the group's terrorist activities.

Islamic State was not limiting its activities in Palmyra to cultural destruction. There were also reports of 25 men being shot dead inside Palmyra's amphitheatre with a crowd witnessing the bloodshed. They were said to have been captured in Homs and some of the footage indicated that

Syria Review 2016 Page 198 of 540 pages Syria the males were actually adolescents.

Note on Turkish and Kurdish dimensions --

In mid-2015, a terror attack in the Turkish town of Suruc and the killing of a Turkish soldier at the hands of the notorious terror group, Islamic State, shocked Turkey and placed pressure on the government in Ankara to respond. With the security threat posed by Islamic State directly -- rather than indirectly -- impacting Turkey in mid-2015, the Turkish government shifted its calculus regarding its engagement in the international fight against the terror group. Turkey had to this point refrained from involving itself in the global coalition against Islamic State, and has instead focused its energies on seeing the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria come to an end. Now, with the deaths of university students in Suruc and the killing of a soldier on the border with Syria, Turkey was being forced to move to a more frontline position in the effort against Islamic State.

That position would entail more close cooperation with the United States, which was leading the international coalition against Islamic State. To this end, there were reports emerging that Turkey would permit the United States military to launch air strikes against Islamic State militants from the strategic Incirlik air base in southern Turkey. The White House in the United States, meanwhile, acknowledged that President Barack Obama has spoken with Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan and agreed to increase their cooperation in the battle against Islamic State.

By the last week of July 2015, Turkey's air force was carrying out strikes on Islamic State positions in Syria. Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu noted that certain key areas of northern Syria would be purged is Islamic State fighters and, instead, be transposed into "safe zones." The strategy of purging northern Syria of Islamic State was outlined later as part of a joint United States-Turkey operation as the two country pledged to work together to establish an "Islamic State-free zone" along the Syria-Turkish border in the interests of greater regional stability. As noted by United States Department spokesperson, Mark Toner, in an intrview with BBC News, "It's an effort to defeat, destroy, degrade ISIL (IS) in northern Syria, create an area there that is ISIL-free, if I could put it that way."

The operation in northern Syria would, however, inevitably raise tension with Kurdish fighters, such as the Kurdish People's Protection Units (Yekineyen Parastina Gel in Kurdish or YPG), who hold sway in the same region of northern Syria, and who have been deeply engaged in the fight against Islamic State. Indeed, the YPG has been vociferously opposed to a militart intervention in the region by Turkey. Note that the YPG is to be distingushed from the Kurdistan Worker’s Party or PKK, with whom the Turkish government has been embroiled in an ongoing conflict for decades, as noted below.

Of significance was an announcement by the government of Turkey that it was also carrying out strikes in areas regarded to be strongholds of Kurdish extremists as part of its burgeoning

Syria Review 2016 Page 199 of 540 pages Syria campaign against terrorists of all stripes. It was to be seen how this effort would affect an ongoing ceasefire declared by the Kurdistan Worker’s Party (PKK). After decades of hostilities, that fragile self-imposed ceasefire by the PKK in 2013 was regarded with relief; now, however, the truce was at risk of crumbling due to this fresh anti-PKK offensive by Turkish authorities. It was quite possible that Turkey was exploiting the globally-sanctioned fight against Islamic State to settle its domestic grievances against Kurdish militant separatists. It was certainly clear that the PKK was intepreting the move as both a provocation and an imprimatur to end the truce. As stated by the PKK on the website of the Kurdish extremist group: "The truce has no meaning any more after these intense air strikes by the occupant Turkish army."

Meanwhile, the objection by the YPG to a Turkish military campaign in northern Syria was strengthened by a claim by the Kurdish people's protection units in Zormikhar, close to Kobane, were attacked by Turkey. Should this claim be verified, it would complicate the position of the United States and other Western powers who were already working with the YPG to go after Islamic State, but were nonetheless courting cooperation by Turkey. The scenario promised to be a difficult tightrope to be traversed by the West.

Note that as July 2015 came to a close, Turkey requested a special meeting of NATO ambassadors to discuss the military operations against both Islamic State and the PKK. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said that Turkey was within its rights as a NATO member country to request the special meeting under the aegis of Article 4 of the NATO Treaty, which permits such calls if its territorial integrity or security was threatened.

Latest Developments related to civil war and Islamic State

In mid-August 2015, reports from the ground in Syria indicated that close to 100 people were killed and more than 200 others wounded as a result of government air strikes on a marketplace in the rebel-held town of Douma close to the capital of Damascus. As a stronghold of anti-Assad rebels, Douma has long been targeted with air strikes and barrel bombs, with civilians as well as militants dying as a result of this ongoing assault.

While pro-Assad forces have been intent on stopped the Islamist rebel group, Jaysh al-Islam (Army of Islam), from firing rockets from Douma into Damascus, their efforts often are carried out indiscriminately and without regard to civilian life. Stephen O'Brien, the United Nations humanitarian chief, condemned the government's air strikes on Douma, saying he was "appalled" over the deaths of civilians. O'Brien added that he "horrified" by the violence in Syria, warning that indiscriminate aerial bombardment that hurts non-combatants was "unlawful, unacceptable and must stop."

A week later, attention shifted to the national security crisis as the terrorist group, Islamic State, killed the famed archaeologist, Khaled al-Asaad, who cared for the ancient ruins of Palmyra in

Syria Review 2016 Page 200 of 540 pages Syria

Syria for 40 years and was colloquially known as "Mr. Palmyra." Islamic State left the elderly Asaad's decapitated body to be found along with a sign casting him to be an apostate beholden to Palmyra's "idols," accusing him of representing Syria at cultural conferences attended by "infidels," and ultimately being supportive of the Assad regime.

Going back to the spring of 2015, Islamic State advanced on the Syrian town of Tadmur, the location of one of the world's most significant archaeological sites and a Unesco World Heritage site. Indeed, Palmyra dated back to the 1st and 2nd centuries of the Common Era when the area was under the rule of the Romans. It was home to the temple of Baal while also bearing elements of the Roman imprint. Antiquities and historic experts were fearful that Islamic State would target Palmyra in its latest barbaric act of cultural and historic destruction.

To that end, in June 2015, Islamic State was planting mines and explosives in Palmyra -- presumably with the objective of destroying the historic ruins. In an interview with Reuters News, the person in charge of Syria's antiquities, Maamoun Abdul Karim, warned that the Palmyra's historic legacy was at risk. He said, "The city is a hostage in their hands, the situation is dangerous."

By July 2015, Islamic State had released videotaped footage depicting the destruction of the artifacts from the ancient historic site of Palmyra in Syria. Of particular note was the sight of Islamic State adherents using sledgehammers to destroy statues, as well as the destruction of two Islamic shrines near Palmyra. The imagery showing the destruction of the statues was shown along with a statement by the Muslim Prophet Mohammed, which read as follows: "Do not leave any statue without obliterating it or any high grave without levelling it." Meanwhile other antiquities were being plundered on a large scale basis from heritage sites in Syria and Iraq, and then placed on the global black market. According to Unesco's Director General Irena Bokova, the illicit sale of such objects was now being used to finance the group's terrorist activities.

Returning to the fate of the famed archaeologist, Khaled al-Asaad, it should be noted that he had held in captivity since the time Palmyra was initially seized by Islamic State months earlier. According to Syria's director of antiquities, Maamoun Abdul Karim, Islamic State terrorists tried to force Asaad to disclose where antiquities and treasures were hidden. When those efforts failed, the bloodthirsty terrorists beheaded the 81-year old archaeologist. In August 2015, after news of the horrific murder of "Mr. Palmyra" was made public, Karim memorialized Assad as "one of the most important pioneers in Syrian archaeology in the 20th Century." He also referred to Islamic State as "a curse."

Syria Review 2016 Page 201 of 540 pages Syria

The co-director of cultural heritage initiatives at the American Schools of Oriental Research (ASOR), Abdalrazzaq Moaz, said in an interview with BBC News that Asaad had devoted his whole life to the historic Palmyra site. Of heartbreaking significance was the fact that the 81-year old scholar died trying to protect the historic site and its treasures from Islamic State's horrific attacks on the region's cultural heritage.

Unesco condemned Asaad's killing in the harshest terms. Unesco Director General Irina Bokova issued an official statement of the tragic murder of Asaad at the hands of Islamic State, which read as follows: "They killed him because he would not betray his deep commitment to Palmyra. His work will live on far beyond the reach of these extremists. They murdered a great man, but they will never silence history."

But Islamic State's barbaric assault on human culture and heritage went on even after the ghastly murder of Asaad. It was reported that the Islamist terror movement destroyed Palmyra's Baalshamin temple. In an interview with Agence France Presse, Syria's director of antiquities, Maamoun Abdul Karim, said that the Islamc State "placed a large quantity of explosives in the temple of Baalshamin and then blew it up causing much damage." He added, "The cella (inner area of the temple) was destroyed and the columns around collapsed." It seemed that Palmyra's Baalshamin temple was the latest casualty in the terror group's campaign of cultural destruction.

It was apparent that Islamic State was intent on destroying the record of the region's human history and cultural heritage -- as well as the scholars committed to protecting that historic record. Unesco reacted to the destruction of ancient sites in Syria and Iraq by characterizing it as "a war crime" and acts of "cultural cleansing." To these ends, Unesco Director-General Irina Bokova said: "The systematic destruction of cultural symbols embodying Syrian cultural diversity reveals the true intent of such attacks, which is to deprive the Syrian people of its knowledge, its identity and history." Bokova added that those responsible "must be accountable for their actions."

In September 2015, the civil war between the Assad regime and anti-Assad rebels continued to rage on in Syria. As well, the brutal terror group continued to hold sway over wide swaths of Syrian territory. Of note were two car bombings in the Syrian city of Hassakeh that left at least 20 people dead and 40 more wounded in mid-September 2015. The first bomb struck Kurdish forces in the Khashman district, while the second bomb struck pro-Assad forces in the center of Hassakeh. It was unclear who carried out the attacks in a city partly held by Kurds and partly held by the government, although all eyes were on Islamic State, which has made repeated attempts to capture Hassakeh.

Also in mid-September 2015, Syrian forces were carrying out their own offensive against Islamic State, via no shortage of air strikes on the terror stronghold of Raqqa. To date, the Assad regime has preferred to battle anti-government rebels and concentrate on holding the areas around

Syria Review 2016 Page 202 of 540 pages Syria

Damascus. These air strikes on Raqqa denoted a shift in strategy to some extent.

In the autumn of 2015, the geopolitical dynamics of the region were complicated by the news that Russian military forces were operating in Syria to help shore up the Assad regime. Reports were emerging about no shortage of Russian fighter jets in Syria, as well as infantry forces, battle tanks and other military Russian military resources at an airfield near the Syrian city of Latakia. As well, Russia deployed military advisers to Syria and staged naval exercises off Syria.

Also of note was the fact that a U.S.-led global coalition was already carrying out air strikes against Islamic State targets in Iraq and Syria. With both Russia and the United States-led Western coalition likely to be carrying out air strikes on Islamic State targets in the same region, the two countries were discussing modes of cooperation and coordination that would prevent accidents in their respective air campaigns.

To this end, regardless of their frosty bilateral relations, Russian President Vladimir Putin and United States President Barack Obama met on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly meeting to discuss this matter. Russian President Putin characterized that meeting as follows: "Our talks were very constructive, business-like and surprisingly frank." A Russia aide to the president added to Putin's assessment of the meeting with Obama and their intent to work cooperatively as he said: “We have clarity on their objectives. Their objectives are to go after ISIL and to support the government."

Both leaders expressed the importance of avoiding air collisions between their respective air strike fleets; however, their visions for Syria's future remained quite different. While Putin has argued that Syria's stability and anti-terrorism efforts can only be maintained by keeping the Assad regime in power. Obama, by contrast, has cast Assad as a tyrant who was responsible for no shortage of gross abuses against his own people, and whose record should not be sanitized in the effort to go after Islamic State. For President Obama, there was a need for "a new [Syrian] leader and an inclusive government that united the Syrian people in the fight against terrorist groups."

Nevertheless, with Islamic State continuing to pose one of the most pressing threats to global security, President Obama expressed a pragmatic stance suggesting that there might be a "managed transition" from Assad's rule. This policy appeared to be backed by other Western leaders, namely United Kingdom Prime Minister David Cameron. Of concern was the reality that the loss of Assad at the helm might produce a power chasm that Islamic State and other unsavory actors could exploit. To this end, President Obama said, "There is no room for accommodating an apocalyptic cult like ISIL and the United States makes no apology for using our military as part of a broad coalition to go after it." He added, "Realism dictates that compromise will be required to end the fighting and ultimately stamp out ISIL. But realism also requires a managed transition away from Assad and to a new leader and an inclusive government that recognizes there must be an end to this chaos." President Obama also noted that his country was willing to work with other partner

Syria Review 2016 Page 203 of 540 pages Syria nation states in the effort to vanquish Islamic State and ultimately stabilize Syria. To this end, he said, "The United States is prepared to work with any nation, including Russia and Iran, to resolve the conflict. But we must recognize that there cannot be, after so much bloodshed, so much carnage, a return to the pre-war status quo."

United States Secretary of State John Kerry and his Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, further elaborated their two countries' respective interests in Syria by noting that they had agreed on "some fundamental principles." In an interview with MSNBC News, Kerry explained, "There was agreement that Syria should be a unified country, united, that it needs to be secular, that ISIL needs to be taken on, and that there needs to be a managed transition." Kerry also added that with the Syrian crisis raging on, and with the human toll increasing alarmingly, there was a need for cooperation . He said, "Everybody understands that Syria is at stake, and the world is looking rapidly for some kind of resolution."

It should be noted that the Syrian National Coalition -- Syria's political opposition in exile -- has made it clear that it rejects any role for Assad in a transitional government. That unrelenting stance was sure to complicate any joint effort by Russia and the West to facilitate a "managed transitions of power" in Syria.

Meanwhile, there remained some questions about the actual goals and purpose of Russia's military intervention into Syria. Was it actually aimed at assisting the global effort against the world's most notorious and brutal terror group, Islamic State? Or was it actually more craven and aimed at ensuring that Russian President Vladimir Putin's ally, Bashar al-Assad, could hold onto power? To that latter end, in late September 2015, United States officials reported to the news outlet, CNN, that Russian fighter jets had turned off their transponders to evade detection as they flew into Syrian territory. United States officials also confirmed that Russian drones were flying in the area of the city of Latakia. Since this was not exactly Islamic State territory, the conclusion was that Russia was more focused on supporting Assad's regime than actually fighting terrorism. Separately, other Western countries were reaching the same conclusion. As noted by French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, "You have to look at who is doing what. The international community is striking Daesh [IS]. France is striking Daesh. The Russians, for the time being, are not at all."

It should be noted that, the prospect of Russia intervening into Syria to shore up President Assad was not being well-received by Gulf Arab countries, who argued that such a move would only deepen the conflict. Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir characterized the Russian intervention as an "escalation" and emphasized his country's view that a stable Syria in the future would not involve Assad at the helm of power. For Russia, though, which was an ally of Assad-led Syria, and which had a naval base at Tartous in Syria, supporting the Assad regime would also preserve a level of Russian influence in the region.

Syria Review 2016 Page 204 of 540 pages Syria

On Sept. 30, 2015 -- shortly after agreeing to work with the United States to go after Islamic State -- Russian fighter jets were carrying out strikes on the anti-Assad rebel strongholds of Homs and Hama. The United States was informed of the Russian strikes only one hour before they commenced. For its part, Russia claimed that it was also carrying out missions against Islamic State Islamic State military equipment, ammunition, communications, and fuel supply targets, however, United States officials noted this did not appear to be the case. The Russians' actual choices of air strike targets in Homs and Hama, along with United States assessments, made clear that the Russian intervention into Syria was clearly for the purpose of bolstering the Assad regime.

That being said, later air strikes reported by the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights at the start of October 2015 indicated that Russia was also targeting command posts in the Islamic State de facto capital of Raqqa. That effort appeared to be forcing residents there to cancel prayers.

For its part, the United States reacted to this news by making clear that it would remained focused on the goal of vanquishing Islamic Sate. United States department of state spokesperson, John Kirby, said: "The U.S.-led coalition will continue to fly missions over Iraq and Syria as planned and in support of our international mission to degrade and destroy ISIL."

Right-wing and neoconservative critics of the Obama administration in the United States have argued that President Obama's reticent approach to getting involved in Syria and the rest of the Middle East created an opening for Russia to intensify its footprint in the region. But the Obama administration has defended its policy of avoiding military entanglements in the Middle East by pointing to the mistakes committed by the previous Bush administration in Iraq, which resulted in a decade of war and socio-political destabilization that actually created the conditions for Islamic State to take root. Moreover, both President Obama himself and his top diplomat, Secretary of State John Kerry, have warned that Russia was becoming ensconced in a regional sectarian quagmire by aligning itself with Iran-backed Hezbollah to prop up the Alawaite Assad regime in Syria against a much larger bloc of Sunni Arab countries in the Middle East who want to see regime change in Syria. As noted by President Obama himself, by picking the Shi'ite side of this evolving sectarian battle, Russia was very likely strengthening Islamic State by undermining the moderate opposition and inspiring more Sunni Jihadists to the cause. The United States leader explained, "The Russian policy is driving the moderate opposition underground and strengthening ISIL." Left unstated -- but pertinent nonetheless -- was the fact that Russia was already bogged down due to its involvement in the Ukrainian crisis. Together with its economic woes, Russia's recent adventurism in the Middle East was not likely to be helpful to its long-term prospects either. However, for those seeking a more muscular foreign policy and a more deeply hegemonic imprint from the United States, such arguments were likely to fall on deaf ears.

By the start of October 2015 -- shortly after the start of Russia's foray into Syria -- a geopolitical imbroglio was sparked when Russian fighter jets twice violated Turkish air space. Russia explained one such violation as a mistake due to weather conditions; however, Turkey was not

Syria Review 2016 Page 205 of 540 pages Syria receptive to that explanation, with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan issuing the following warning: "If Russia loses a friend like Turkey, with whom it has been cooperating on many issues, it will lose a lot, and it should know that" He added that "an attack on Turkey means an attack on NATO." For its part, NATO -- of which Turkey was a member state -- also refused to accept that explantation, noting that the Russian incursions "did not look like an accident" and with NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg noting that the Russian violations of Turkish air space "lasted for a long time." Stoltenberg further cast the Russian incursions as "unacceptable," and warned that the North Atlantic security bloc was viewing the situation "very seriously."

It should be noted that bilateral ties between Turkey and Syria have been a downward spiral largely due to Turkey's criticism of the Assad regime's brutal crackdown on anti-government factions. The ties between the two countries reached a new low in mid-2012 when Syrian air defenses shot down a Turkish fighter jet, but deteriorated further in October 2012 when Syrian mortar fire killed five Turkish civilians in a border town. The Turkish parliament at the time authorized military action against Syria in the aftermath of that incident. The geopolitical scene grew more complicated later in 2012 when Turkish jets forced a Syrian plane, which was suspected of "non- civilian cargo," to land in Turkey. Authorities in that country said that the move was aimed at preventing the passage of weapons through its airspace into Syria. The geopolitical complexity was exacerbated when Russia and Syria decried the move by Turkey. In late 2012, it was announced that the United States would send 400 troops and two Patriot air defense missile batteries to Turkey to help defend its NATO ally against possible threats from Syria. Tensions between Turkey and Syria emerged again in March 2014 when Turkey downed a Syria aircraft, which (according to Turkey) had violated its air space. In 2015, as discussed here, with the entry of Russian forces into the Syrian crisis, so too came violations of Turkish air space by Russian jets operating in Syria. In many senses, Turkey was becoming a key inflection point in the ongoing Syrian crisis.

Meanwhile, Russia reported that it carried out repeated air strikes on Islamic State targets in the first week of October 2015. But as before, the lion's share of Russia's activity in Syria appeared aimed at helping the Assad regime hold its territory and go after opposition rebel groups, with an eye on regaining territory. Of note were Russian continued strikes in anti-Assad rebel strongholds. Around the same period in October 2015, Syrian forces were reported to be preparing for a ground offensive, which would presumably be backed Russian air strikes and cruise missile strikes from their fleet in the Caspian Sea.

The success of the Russian effort was very much a subject of debate, despite claims of Russia being an emerging actor in the region. For all its air strikes in Syrian territory, reports from the ground indicated that Russian strikes were more successful at hitting moderate rebel and civilian targets than Islamic State targets.

In the background of these developments were continued overtures between Russia and the United

Syria Review 2016 Page 206 of 540 pages Syria

States aimed at establishing rules of engagement and protocols of conduct related to their respective campaigns in Syria. However, the United States Defense Secretary Ash Carter ruled out further cooperation with Russia regarding the Syrian crisis as he declared the Russian strategy to be clearly aimed at bolstering the Assad regime. He said, “We believe Russia has the wrong strategy. They continue to hit targets that are not ISIL. This is a fundamental mistake."

Nevertheless, as October 2015 came to a close, United States and Russian military officials signed a memorandum of understanding covering "de-conflicting" procedures and protocols to be undertaken by their pilots in order to avoid an accidental incidences over Syria as they respectively carry out air strikes in the same territory. A Pentagon spokesperson, Peter Cook, said that the two countries would "form a working group to discuss any implementation issues that follow" but that the actual agreement covered all coalition members, such as Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. The State Department was clear in noting that the agreement was geared towards keeping pilots safe and did not extend into the realm of strategic cooperation. As noted by State Department spokesperson, John Kirby, “It's not a treaty of cooperation or anything like that ... It doesn't connote cooperation or coordination or joint targeting."

Meanwhile, in the same period of late October 2015, United States President Barack Obama indicated a policy shift regarding Syria, as it was reported that dozens of special operations troops would be deployed to northern Syria to advise opposition groups as they battle Islamic State. The deployment indicated a departure from President Obama's "no combat boots on the ground" in Syria stance, although the White House insisted that the mission would have a circumscribed and highly limited "train, advise, and assist" role. White House spokesperson, Josh Earnest, explained the president's position as follows: "This is a dangerous place on the globe and they are at risk, and there's no denying that. But I think if we were envisioning a combat operation, we probably would be contemplating more than 50 troops on the ground."

It should be noted that President Obama was also supplementing this limited deployment with A- 10s and F-15 war planes, which would be deployed to the Incirlik air base in Turkey, presumably to carry out air strikes against Islamic State targets. The deployments of both military advisers and aircraft in northern Syria was part of a mission by Syrian rebels to target the Islamic State stronghold of Raqqa. Meanwhile, the diplomatic effort was afoot to try to find a political solution for Syria that would include an Assad-free future while not allowing the country to sink into the morass of lawlessness.

Amidst these developments on the geopolitical landscape was the reality that Islamic State continued to pose a threat in the region, and even advance deeper into Syrian territory. Of particular note was the fact that at the start of November 2015, the terror group was able to capture the Syrian town of Maheen, located in the central Homs Province. Maheen had been held by government forces but was now under Islamic State control. Battles were taking place in nearby towns as Islamic State sought to extend its grip in the region. In the crosshairs was the

Syria Review 2016 Page 207 of 540 pages Syria

Assyrian Christian town of Sadad where inhabitants spoke the ancient Aramaic language.

In the first week of November 2015, despite the addition of the Russian campaign in Syria to support Assad, anti-government rebels were able to capture control over the town of Morek to the north of the flashpoint city of Hama. Fares al-Bayoush, a commander for the rebel group Fursan al-Haq, which has been operating under the auspices of the Free Syrian Army, said the strategically located town of Morek had been "liberated." He explained the strategic value of controlling Morek as follows: "It was a center for the gathering of regime forces and a point of departure for its operations." In the same period, rebels in Idlib province recaptured Tal Skik, which had gone under Hezbollah-backed Syrian control a month earlier. These gains for anti-Assad factions indicated that despite Russia's intervention into the Syrian civil war, rebel factions continued to make their presence known.

A two year siege by Islamic State at the Kweires air base in Aleppo in northern Syria came to an end in the second week of November 2015 when Syrian soldiers stormed the facility and rescued soldiers trapped there. The operation could well be regarded as one of the most significant victories for Assad's forces in Syria in recent times.

Meanwhile, ahead of scheduled multilateral talks on Syria, Russia released a blueprint for the country's future. That initiative called for the Assad regime and the opposition to find consensus in a constitutional reform process that would last 18 months and be followed by a presidential election. Significantly, the proposal would not prevent Bashar al-Assad from contesting the presidential contest. This latter element promised to be a deal-breaker of sorts for the opposition. As noted by Monzer Akbik of the Western-backed Syrian National Coalition, "The Syrian people have never accepted the dictatorship of Assad and they will not accept that it is reintroduced or reformulated in another way."

Western powers, several Sunni Arab countries in the region, and Turkey were not expected to accept a plan that included a pathway for Assad to hold onto power in Syria. Indeed, those various players made clear that they would not sign onto a plan that did not include an exit strategy for Assad, whom they viewed as one of the main sources of Syria's crisis. That being said, there were other viable aspects of the proposal, such as a process for distinguishing rebel groups with terror ties and legitimate opposition entities -- the latter of which could become key players in a future peace and reconciliation plan. As well, there were provisions for a soft partitioning of power and security into Assad-led zones and non-Assad led zones across Syria.

In the same period, the effort against Islamic State was ongoing. Indeed, on Nov. 12, 2015, the United States Pentagon reported that it had targeted to notorious Islamic State terrorist known as "Jihadi John" in an apparent drone strike in Syria. The Kuwaiti-born British national had already been identified as Mohammed Emwazi; he gained notoriety as the ominous masked figure in Islamic State propaganda videos who carried out beheadings of international journalists and

Syria Review 2016 Page 208 of 540 pages Syria humanitarian workers. According to United States authorities, Emwazi had been "tracked carefully over a period of time" and was finally targeted for elimination in a drone strike near the Islamic State stronghold of Raqqa. Defense Department personnel initially stopped short of confirming Emwazi's death with Press Secretary Peter Cook simply saying: "We are assessing the results of tonight's operation and will provide additional information as and where appropriate." By Nov. 13, 2015, United States authorities said they were "reasonably certain" that drone strike in Syria had killed Emwazi.

In this period, the United States' air strike effort was aggressively geared towards hitting Islamic State's oil producing resources, which essentially funds the terror group. The air strike campaign, called "Tidal Wave II," was thus concentrating on oil tanker trucks, oil rigs, pumps and storage tanks. The objective was the hit the targets so as to disrupt the oil related activities for a significant period of time, but without either destroying these oil facilities completely or just inflicting minor damage that could be repaired in short order.

In mid-November 2015, the situation was grave as Russia and France intensified their efforts to go after Islamic State targets in Syria following devastating terror attacks by the Islamist terror network that killed hundreds of Russian and French citizens. At issue was the fact that Islamic State was claiming responsibility for a bomb that exploded on a Russian jet flying from the Egyptian resort of Sharm-el-Sheikh, killing more than 200 Russians on board. Also at issue was the Islamic State claim of responsibility for a spate of appalling terror attacks in the French capital city of Paris, which killed approximately 130 people. Islamic State made clear that its brutal acts were being carried out because of the international community's engagement in Syria. Islamic State also promised that attacks were to come in the United States and other Western countries.

In response to what could only be understood as acts of war by Islamic State, Russian and French warplanes wasted no time before stepping up their respective air campaigns in Syria, targeting Islamic State targets in the terror group's stronghold of Raqqa in a sustained manner. France also deployed its air craft carrier, the Charles de Gaulle, to the Middle Eastern region for the purpose of supporting the effort against Islamic State. Of note was the fact that France was not limiting its air strike campaign from the Charles de Gaulle only to Islamic State targets in Syria, such as the terror group stronghold of Raqqa; indeed, France soon expanded its scope to hit Islamic State targets in Ramadi and Mosul in Iraq.

While the United Kingdom was not, at the time, engaged in the Syrian crisis, the British government gave France the use of its air base in Cyprus from which it could strike Islamist terror groups in the region. United Kingdom Prime Minister David Cameron said that his country would provide air-to-air refueling services and that he would recommend that the British parliament vote in favor of the his country joining the United States-led air campaign to strike Islamic State targets.

To that end, a vote in the United Kingdom's House of Commons on Dec. 3, 2015 ended with

Syria Review 2016 Page 209 of 540 pages Syria overwhelming support for that country to enter the multilateral air campaign against Islamic State in Syria. Following more than 10 hours of passionate debate in the British legislative chamber, 397 members of parliament voted in favor of the measure while 223 members of parliament voted against it. The vote tally was bipartisan with 66 members of parliament from the Labour Party siding with Prime Minister Cameron's Conservatives. Prime Minister Cameron hailed the vote outcome, saying that the House of Commons had "taken the right decision to keep the country safe." British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond said the vote was a move in the right direction as he declared, "Military strikes alone won't help Syria, won't keep us safe from Daesh. But this multi-strand approach will." Of course, the vote outcome generated outrage from both inside and outside parliament. Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, insisted that the United Kingdom's engagement in Syria would only make the country less safe. Outside the parliamentary buildings, anti-war ranks protesters from various groups including the "Stop the War" Coalition gathered to oppose the move.

Across the Atlantic in the United States was taking the terror threat posed by Islamic State and other radical Islamist terror groups seriously, with the United States Department of State issuing a global travel alert. The warning read as follows: "Current information suggests that Islamic State, al-Qaida, Boko Haram, and other terrorist groups continue to plan terrorist attacks in multiple regions. Authorities believe the likelihood of terror attacks will continue as members of (Islamic State) return from Syria and Iraq. Additionally, there is a continuing threat from unaffiliated persons planning attacks inspired by major terrorist organizations but conducted on an individual basis.

Meanwhile. as a result of their shared interest in defeating Islamic State, Russian and United States forces were said to be more closely coordinating their respective strikes on Islamic State targets in Syria despite strained relations between the two countries. Overall, Russia, France, and the United States were now respectively changing their calculations, cognizant that the Islamist terror group was no longer simply seeking to build its Caliphate but, instead, transposing its goals to more of an Islamic Jihadist orientation. The result was an international security crisis.

In addition to the killing of Russian and French nationals in the autumn of 2015, in the same period, Islamic State had also claimed responsibility for double bombings in a Shi'a district of the Lebanese city of Beirut, killing more than 40 people. The general consensus was that the Beirut bombings were inflicted due to activities of the Lebanese Shi'a Islamic militant group, Hezbollah, in Syria. Specifically, Hezbollah has been militarily engaged in the Syrian civil war for the purpose of backing the Assad regime in that country. But the result has been a high price in blood as spill-over violence from the Syrian civil war was reaching Lebanese terrain.

The attacks on Lebanese, Russian, and French targets constituted a terrorist trifecta for Islamic State, and could only be understood as manifestations of the terror group's effort to demonstrate its relevance and resilience -- even as it was being subject to strikes from various international

Syria Review 2016 Page 210 of 540 pages Syria actors.

Indeed, the terror enclave was certainly under pressure from a United States-led international coalition, as well as a bombing campaign by Russia. Earlier in November 2015 Islamic State lost control of Sinjar in Iraq as a result of a fierce offensive by Kurdish peshmerga fighters backed by United States air power. In the same period, as discussed above, the United States Pentagon reported that it had targeted the "face" of Islamic State in a drone strike -- the notorious terrorist "Jihadi John" who was shown in barbaric videotaped footage with international hostages who were executed via decapitation. The Pentagon indicated that the drone strike was very likely successful, thus inflicting a symbolic blow against the terror group. Around the same period, Islamic State was reported to be losing control in Aleppo in Syria.

While these losses were recent, the downward trajectory for Islamic State had been occurring for several months. As such, the terror enclave's evolving imperative might be to show that it still had power and influence. No longer able to expand its territorial advances, Islamic State was very likely transforming its efforts. Rather than concentrating on building and expanding its so-called Caliphate, Islamic State could be refocusing its ambitions in the direction of international Jihadism. Should this working theory gain support , it would suggest an acute threat to global security.

Given this burgeoning global security threat, neoconservative critics of President Obama in the United States were clamoring for him to articulate a more muscular foreign policy in regard to Islamic State. At the G20 summit in Turkey, an unusually angry President Obama dismissed the notion of warfare without careful consideration, saying, It’s best that we don’t shoot first and aim later." In response to the call for him to extrovert American hegemony and leadership in a robust manner, President Obama said, “If folks want to pop off and have opinions about what they want to do, present a specific plan. What I am not interested in doing is posing, or pursuing some notion of American leadership or America winning or whatever other slogans they come up with ... I’m too busy for that.” He added, “What I do not do is to take actions either because it is going to work politically or somehow make America look tough, or make me look tough. And maybe part of the reason is that every few months I go to Walter Reed [a military hospital] and I see a 25- year-old kid who is paralysed or has lost his limbs. And some of those are people who I have ordered into battle. So I can’t afford to play some of the political games that others play.”

Syria Review 2016 Page 211 of 540 pages Syria enemy but rather as a terrorist network. President Obama said, “Our goals here have to be aggressive and leave no stone here, but also recognize this is not conventional warfare. We play into the ISIL narrative when we act as if they are a state and we use routine military tactics that are designed to fight a state that is attacking another state. That’s not what’s going on here.”

In the background of these developments was the growing sense of anxiety about refugees streaming across the Mediterranean to Europe, whose resources were being stretched by the influx of migrants from war torn areas of the Middle East, such as Syria. The United States had agreed to take some Syrian migrants; however, in the wake of the Paris attacks and the news that one terrorist had used a Syrian passport (regardless of whether it was actually a forged document), there was a loud chorus of opposition. That opposition was coming from the public at large and from Republican politicians who together angrily complained that Syrian refugees posed a national security threat. President Obama lambasted both Republicans in the United States and their counterparts in Europe for attempting to keep these refugees out, making clear it was unAmerican to close the doors to people in need.

The geopolitical complexity of Syrian civil war grew more complicated in the last week of November 2015 when Turkey shot down a Russian fighter jet on the basis of accusations that the Russian aircraft violated Turkish air space. Russia disputed that claim, insisting that the jet was operating in Syrian air space as part of the fight against Islamic State. Russia also referred to the tragic incident as a betrayal and instituted sanctions against Turkey as a result.

With Turkey being a NATO member, Russia's wrath could potentially affect all Western countries participating in the United States-led coalition fighting Islamic State in the region. Hopes for greater cooperation between the West and Russia against the terror group were thus dimmed. In a small positive sign, however, both Moscow and Ankara made clear that they were not interested in escalating tensions and facilitating the path of war. As well, despite being NATO allies, France and the United States called on Turkey to do a better job of monitoring its borders which Islamic State terrorists were using to traverse in and out of Syria. Of particular note was a stretch of the Syrian-Turkish border north of the Syrian city of Aleppo where Turkey had not closed the border, and which was being used by the terror group to transport militants and supplies.

Of course, the truth of the matter was that neither Turkey nor Russia has been involved in the Syrian civil war for the principal purpose of fighting Islamic State in the first place. Turkey was one of the initial voices calling for Bashar Assad to go and has directly supported Sunni rebel groups fighting the Assad regime in Syria. At the same time, Turkey has exploited the excuse of fighting Islamic State to instead go after Kurdish extremists, which it deems to be a political threat. On the other side of the equation, Russia has been a long-time backed of the Assad regime, and has often treated Syria like a client state. Russia entered the Syrian quagmire on the basis of claims that it was fighting Islamic State but it, instead, hit rebel targets in Syrian territory that were opposed to the Assad regime. In many senses, Turkey and Russia were already in opposed

Syria Review 2016 Page 212 of 540 pages Syria political "camps" with regard to the Syrian crisis before the latest contretemps over Turkey shooting down a Russian jet.

As November 2015 drew to a close, French President Francois Hollande traveled to the United States to meet with President Barack Obama to discuss the threat posed by Islamic State in the aftermath of the horrific Paris terror attacks and with the Islamist terror group threatening to go after American targets. At the conclusion of their meeting, President Obama and President Hollande agreed to intensify and expand their military operations against Islamic State and also to coordinate intelligence on domestic threats. During a joint news conference at the White House, President Obama noted the long-standing and historic friendship between his country and France, dating back to the 18th century and distinguishing France as the United States' oldest ally. For his part, the French president said that he and President Obama were united in their "relentless determination to fight terrorism anywhere and everywhere." PresidentHollande said, "We will not let the world be destroyed. To face Daesh (Islamic State), we must have a common, collective and implacable response. We must destroy Daesh wherever it is, cut its financial resources, hunt down its leaders, dismantle its networks and reconquer the territory it controls."

Questions of War and Peace

In early December 2015, the United States was struck by a massacre in the California city of San Bernadino. President Barack Obama said that the assailants were inspired by Islamic State. In his national address on Dec. 6, 2015, President Obama cast the bloodshed in San Bernadino as "an act of terrorism designed to kill innocent people" and promised to "hunt down terrorist plotters" anywhere they are. At the same time, he insisted that there would be no renewed ground war using United States blood and treasure in the Middle East as he declared, "We should not be drawn once more into a long and costly ground war in Iraq or Syria." President Obama's address spurred his hardline conservative rivals to blast his anti-terrorism strategy and argue for a more aggressive approach, marked by a massive ground force engagement in the region. However, President Obama had already augmented the air strike campaign against Islamic State in Iraq and Syria with the deployment of military advisors, and at the start of December 2015, he supplemented these forces with a special operations expeditionary force to fight Islamic State. United States Defense Secretary Ashton Carter outlined the goals the special operations expeditionary force as follows: "These special operators will over time be able to conduct raids, free hostages, gather intelligence and capture ISIL leaders." For the Obama administration, the imperative was to exploit the special operations expertise in a targeted strategy against Islamic State, rather than the conventional warfare.

In late 2015 into the start of 2016, even as the military effort against Islamic State was ongoing, so too was the parallel diplomatic track, with most world leaders understanding that a long-term solution for Syria was vital, and would be the only pathway for stamping out terrorism in the region. In truth, the Syrian peace process has, to date, been largely an exercise in futility.

Syria Review 2016 Page 213 of 540 pages Syria

However, with the attacks by Islamic State hurting the citizens of so many countries across the world, the most recent efforts appeared to be moving in a more unprecedented direction. The Russian proposal, which included a two year timeline leading up to Syrian elections, has been accepted by both the West and some Middle Eastern countries, with reservations. The biggest sticking issue, as noted above, was the fate of Assad with many key players advocating for a clear exit strategy for the Assad regime.

That being said, there was an impending meeting set for Dec. 18, 2015, in New York, to be followed by talks between the Syrian government and the opposition in early 2016. The success of the December 2015 meetings would rest on the success in trying to bring together Syrian opposition and rebel groups. The classification of these Syrian entities as either moderates or terrorists would determine who would actually be positioned to sit at the negotiating table. To these ends, Saudi Arabia was hosting meetings intended to unite Syria's fractured opposition ranks and rebel groups.

Meanwhile, United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon was urging success in the peace process, noting that Syria was in desperate need of a ceasefire for humanitarian reasons. He said, "In New York I hope we will have a firm and solid basis so that the ceasefire can be launched as well as the political process."

The talks in Saudi Arabia ended in success with Syrian opposition politicians and rebels agreeing to a statement of principles, which would direct the guide peace talks with the Assad government. Within the statement was a provision that outlined a new "pluralistic regime that represents all sectors" in Syria, and which would keep President Assad and his inner cadre out of any transitional executive entity. This measure would be something of a compromise since (1) opposition groups and rebels had earlier demanded that Assad be removed from power before the negotiations process could commence regarding Syria's future, and (2) pro-Assad interests have conversely argued for Assad to remain in power in order to preclude a power vacuum. Now Assad would remain in place until a transitional executive government could be formed in Syria. As such, a framework was in place prior to the peace summit set to commence on Dec. 18, 2015, in New York.

Even as the diplomatic track was seeing success, Syria continued to be plagued by horrific violence. On Dec. 11, 2015, Islamic State launched three bombings in the northeastern province of Hasaka, under the control of the Kurdish YPG militia. The blasts struck a residential area, a market, and a hospital. As many as 50 people were killed and 80 others were injured as a result. The attack was a setback for the Kurdish fighters, who -- backed by United States power -- have made notable advances in late 2015.

Negotiations over the Syrian peace process saw success in the third week of December 2015 in New York when the United States and Russia worked together to craft the text of the proposed

Syria Review 2016 Page 214 of 540 pages Syria deal, which would be transposed into a draft resolution at the United Nations. Of significance was the fact that the United Nations Security Council unanimously approved that resolution formalizing the Syrian peace process blueprint, which included calls for a ceasefire, and provisions for a timeline leading to a national unity government and future elections. It was an unprecedented show of unity from the world's major veto-wielding powers on the United Nations Security Council, and was distinguished as a landmark moment of hope after years of horror that have characterized the Syrian civil war.

Following the vote in the United Nations Security Council, United States Secretary of State John Kerry said, "This council is sending a clear message to all concerned that the time is now to stop the killing in Syria and lay the groundwork for a government that the long-suffering people of that battered land can support."

With the United Nations Security Council resolution approved and activated, the path was set for peace talks to go forward in Geneva, Switzerland at the end of January 2016. The immediate goals of the Geneva summit would be to establish a ceasefire within one month of the aforementioned United Nations Security Council resolution, then find common ground on the formation of a national unity government for Syria within two years, with elections to be held further down the line in the future. Also ensconced in the resolution and on the agenda for the future would be the continuing effort to defeat the notorious terror group, Islamic State.

As before, the fate of President Assad remained largely undefined, with a great deal of disagreement on whether or not he should remain in power. As noted by United States Secretary of State John Kerry, "We are under no illusions about the obstacles that exist. There obviously remain sharp differences within the international community, especially about the future of President Assad." Nevertheless, all the major world powers appeared to find some concurrence on the overall goals of the peace process, and seemed willing to sidestep the Assad issue for the moment. They were all cognizant of the need to refocus attention on stabilizing Syria and going after Islamic State, which was using the terrain as a base to carry out brutal acts of terrorism.

It should be noted that the goodwill associated with the peace deal was somewhat challenged in late December 2015 when Russian air strikes killed a top Syrian rebel leader. The United States Department of State warned that the Russian air strike that killed Zahran Alloush, the leader of Jaysh al Islam, sent out the wrong message to groups it was trying to bring together to end the conflict. United States Department of State spokesperson, Mark Toner, noted that Jaysh al Islam was both involved in fighting Islamic State rebels and in participating in the political dialogue to end Syria's civil war. Toner thus said, "So the strike on Alloush and others in Jaysh al Islam and other opposition groups do in fact complicate efforts to bring about meaningful political negotiations and a nationwide ceasefire." He added, "It doesn't send the most constructive message to carry out a strike like that."

Syria Review 2016 Page 215 of 540 pages Syria

In the third week of January 2016, there were doubts that peace talks set to take place in Geneva, Switzerland on Jan. 25, 2016 would take place. At issue was the decision by the United Nations to refrain from issuing invitations to the Syria's government and the opposition to the summit until all the major players could come to some agreement on the particular rebel groups who should attend. Meanwhile, opposition groups were demanding that the Syrian government and Russian forces cease their strikes on Syrian towns. A spokesperson for the United Nations, Farhan Haq, said, "At this stage the U.N. will proceed with issuing invitations when the countries spearheading the ISSG (International Syria Support Group) process come to an understanding on who among the opposition should be invited." This decision by the United Nations was being regarded as a de facto delay but not an insurmountable obstacle to the peace agenda.

By the start of February 2016, the United Nations announced that the Syrian peace talks had commenced in the Swiss city of Geneva, with delegates from the opposition and representatives from the Assad regime meeting with United Nations Envoy Staffan de Mistura. The two sides were not at the same table for these negotiations; instead, these "proximity talks" were ensuing in separate rooms.

It should be noted that the peace talks occurred even as Syria's pro-Assad forces, backed by Russian air strikes, were carrying out a massive offensive operation close to Aleppo. Syrian rebels pointed to the fact that this operation was going on despite the understanding that such actions should cease in order to give the peace process a chance. As such, the United Nations called on world powers to do the work needed to bring about a ceasefire. Also on the agenda were plans to implement humanitarian aid corridors and prisoner releases. But before any progress on these matters could be made, on Feb. 3, 2016, the United Nations suspended the talks, with both rival sides blaming one another for the roadblock to peace.

In mid-February 2016, United States Secretary of State John Kerry announced that an agreement had been forged to seek a cessation of hostilities in Syria, and which would set the path for humanitarian aid to be transported to war-torn cities. In remarks to the media, he said, "What we got last night on this cessation of hostilities represents what the opposition wanted. They wanted it called and defined as a cessation of hostilities. That is very much in line with their thinking and their hopes." Secretary of State Kerry noted that the agreement applied to opposition groups and not terror groups, such as Islamic State and al-Nusra Front. Other provisions of the deal included accelerated and expanded delivery of humanitarian aid, which would be directed by the United Nations. Peace talks would also resume in Geneva, with United States Secretary of State John Kerry and his Russian counterpart, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, expected to chair the meetings together.

Despite this favorable development, the fact of the matter was that Russian air power continued to strike targets in Syria deemed to be enemies of the Assad regime. As well, Syrian President Assad was intensifying his forces' efforts to regain control over Aleppo, which he indicated would only be

Syria Review 2016 Page 216 of 540 pages Syria the start of a national campaign to retake control of the country.

Secretary of State Kerry thus warned that the aforementioned agreement to end hostilities would only remain relevant if Syria and its Russian and Iranian allies made good on their commitments. He said, "If the Assad regime does not live up to its responsibilities and if the Iranians and the Russians do not hold Assad to the promises that they have made...then the international community obviously is not going to sit there like fools and watch this. There will be an increase of activity to put greater pressure on them...There is a possibility there will be additional ground troops." French officials signaled a similar warning, with one French diplomat noting in remarks to the international media that Russia would be to blame if it maintained its bombing campaign and the peace process failed. The diplomat said, "The Russians said they will continue bombing the terrorists. They are taking a political risk because they are accepting a negotiation in which they are committing to a cessation of hostilities. If in a week there is no change because of their bombing, then they will bear the responsibility."

By the start of the last week of February 2016, the United States and Russia appeared to have reached some concurrence and issued a joint statement announcing that the ceasefire would commence on Feb. 27, 2016 and would apply to all parties in the Syrian conflict, with terrorist groups such as the Islamic State and al-Nusra being the exceptions. The United States authorities acknowledged that monitoring the ceasefire would be "challenging," with United States Secretary of State Joh Kerry saying, "Over the coming days, we will be working to secure commitments from key parties that they will abide by the terms of this cessation." He further said in regard to the feasibility of the deal, "The proof will be in the actions that come in the next days. We’re going to know in a month or two whether or not this transition process is really serious ... Assad himself is going to have to make some real decisions about the formation of a transitional governance process that’s real. If there isn’t ... there are certainly Plan B options being considered." The nature of that "Plan B" went unspecified at the time.

The office of the United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon lauded the agreement and called on all parties to abide with it. Meanwhile, there would be a delay with regard to the return to the peace negotiations. Instead, the immediate goal would be a cessation of hostilities.

On Feb. 25, 2016 -- ahead of the scheduled cessation of hostilities to go into force -- Syrian forces carried out an assault on the Daraya suburb of Damascus, and Russia jets bombed rebel-held targets in northwestern Syria. There were indications that the assault on Daraya would continue despite the ceasefire since it was controlled by the terror group, Nusra Front. The Russian strikes in Latakia were in a separate category since there were high hopes that the Assad regime could retake control there before the cessation of hostilities deal would go into force.

Nevertheless, all parties agreed to move forward with the cessation of hostilities deal, including the opposition alliance, which said it would heed the plan for two weeks despite its deep reservations.

Syria Review 2016 Page 217 of 540 pages Syria

But within a day of the fragile ceasefire taking effect, in an interview with Al Arabiya al Hadath TV, Asaad al-Zoub -- a Syrian opposition official -- said the plan faced "complete nullification" because the government continued to carry out attacks. Zoubi said, "We are not facing a violation of the truce... we are facing a complete nullification." He added, "I believe the international community has totally failed in all its experiments, and must take real, practical measures towards the regime." Should this stance prevail, it was difficult to see how United Nations-brokered peace talks set to resume in March 2016, could go forward. In fact, the ceasefire was holding and March 2016 saw the resumption of peace talks.

Moscow announced withdrawal of Russian troops from Syria

In mid-March 2016, President Vladimir Putin announced that "the main part" of the Russian "military contingent" operating in Syria would be withdrawn. The Russian leader said that the move was made in order to facilitate United Nations-brokered peace talks, which had now resumed and were intended to bring an end to the Syrian civil war. Syrian authorities made clear that there was no distance in the positions of Damascus and Moscow, insisting that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad had agreed to the plan during a telephone call with Putin. The surprise announcement from Putin came suddenly and triggered speculation about Moscow's ulterior motives with some quarters suggesting that Russia was laying the groundwork for a settlement that would include an exit of the Assad regime. However, in his address, Putin said that Russian forces had met their goal of turning the tide in Syria. Putin said, "The effective work of our military created the conditions for the start of the peace process. I believe that the task put before the defense ministry and Russian armed forces has, on the whole, been fulfilled." He added, that joint Russian and Syrian forces "have been able to achieve a fundamental turnaround in the fight against international terrorism." Moreover, Putin indicated no actual timeline for the withdrawal and in fact made clear that Russian forces would stay in place at a seaport and airbase in Latakia.

Senior Islamic State leader killed in Syria

On March 25, 2016, the United States announced that it has eliminated several leading Islamic State (IS) militants in recent weeks, including the second-in-command - Abdul Rahman Mustafa al- Qaduli. Defense Secretary Ashton Carter offered no details about the operation that killed Qaduli, although he noted that said the deaths of Islamic State's de facto "cabinet" would negatively affect the terror group's ability to carry out its operations. As noted by Carter, "We are systematically eliminating Isil's cabinet."

Syrian forces make gains in recapturing Palmyra from Islamic State

In the last week of March 2016, Syrian pro-Assad government forces, supported by Russian air strikes, carried out a campaign against Islamic State in the area of the ancient cultural city of

Syria Review 2016 Page 218 of 540 pages Syria

Palmyra. The capture of Palmyra, as well as the destruction of historically significant features and statues, has long been lamented as a horrific attack on the cultural legacy of Syria. The recapture of Palmyra by Syrian forces was thus being lauded as a major shift on the terrain in Syria -- both in terms of the war, and also symbolically. To that latter end, Syria's antiquities chief, Mamoun Abdelkarim, said in an interview with Reuters news, "Palmyra has been liberated. This is the end of the destruction in Palmyra." He added, "How many times did we cry for Palmyra? How many times did we feel despair? But we did not lose hope."

The continued presence of Russian forces on the scene -- despite a claim from Russian President Putin a week before that his country was withdrawing from Syria, confirmed suspicions that the Russian footprint would continue to be strong in Syria. For his part, Syrian President Assad said in an interview with Russian news that recent gains in Syria would help settle the conflict in his country.

In early April 2016, once Syrian forces recaptured Palmyra, it was announced that a mass grave was discovered there containing scores of bodies. The revelation was a reminder of the terror group's bloodthirsty and brutal tactics. Nevertheless, Syrian forces, backed by Russian air strikes, continued to make gains, effectively driving Islamic State out of al-Qaryatain located 60 miles to the west of Palmyra. The Syrian military announced that this strategic victory resulted in them securing the oil and gas routes between Damascus and eastern Syria, while simultaneously cutting off Islamic State's supply routes.

Government air strike undermines truce

On April 19, 2016, air strikes in the town of Maarat al-Numan, and in the nearby town of Kafranbel, quite likely at the hands of government forces, left close to 50 people dead and scores more injured, including children. The air strikes appeared to target vegetable markets in both towns and served to send the prevailing truce into a state of collapse. Already, with the rising violence and claims of ceasefire violations by the Assad regime, the main Syrian opposition umbrella group announced that it was suspending its participation in the United Nations-brokered peace talks in Geneva. The aerial bombardment of Maarat al-Numan and Kafranbel would likely underline that entire endeavor, although it should be noted that several other villages and towns in Idlib province were also struck by apparent government forces, although there was no statement from the Assad regime on the matter.

Syrian forces bombard Aleppo with deadly results despite prevailing cessation of hostilities deal --

In the last two weeks of April 2016, the Syrian city of Aleppo was being subject to a relentless campaign of aerial bombardment from Syrian forces. Known to be a stronghold of the opposition and a hotbed of anti-Assad sentiment, in recent times, Aleppo has been divided into portions under

Syria Review 2016 Page 219 of 540 pages Syria government control and zones under rebel control. As such, Aleppo has long been a prime target for the Russian-backed Assad regime in Syria, which wished to capture full control for both strategic and symbolic reasons.

Despite the existence of the prevailing cessation of hostilities agreement intended to stabilize Syria and facilitate the peace process, the Syrian military was carrying out air strikes on rebel-held portions of Aleppo. The campaign of air strikes commenced around April 22, 2016, and by the close of the month had left at least 250 people dead. With electrical power and water cut and the city under pressure, the scene in Aleppo was quite grim.

The scene in Aleppo took a particularly disturbing turn on April 28, 2016, when air strikes hit a hospital, killing at least 50 people. Included in the dead were six medics. The strike on the al-Quds hospital run by the French medical charity, Medecins sans Frontieres, was condemned internationally since strikes on medical facilities are prohibited by international law.

Reacting to these developments with outrage, the main opposition group in Syria abandoned the peace talks being held in Geneva, Switzerland, essentially upending the peace process. As well other opposition entities railed against the Syrian government for violating the ceasefire. That being said, there were reports that rebels were also firing shells into government-held areas of Aleppo essentially painting a picture of complexity.

On April 28, 2016, the Syrian army announced it would implement a period of "calm," with the intent of trying to save the ceasefire agreement. That lull in hostilities applied in the capital of Damascus, the suburb of Eastern Ghouta, and the coastal area of Latakia. However, with the Syrian military resuming air strikes the very next day in Aleppo, the notion of "calm" seemed more an exercise on theory than actuality.

With an eye on salvaging the crumbling peace path, United States Secretary of State John Kerry, who traveled to Geneva, Switzerland, asked Russia to use its influence to restore the ceasefire. Meanwhile the United Nations expressed concern over the collapse of the peace process. In order to prevent such an end, the United States top diplomat was calling on Russia to persuade the Assad regime to stop carrying out aerial attacks on Aleppo. Speaking to this goal, Secretary of State Kerry said, "These are critical hours. We look for Russia’s cooperation, and we obviously look for the regime to listen to Russia and to respond."

On May 1, 2016, Russia said there were discussions taking place that would provide for a halt to the aerial campaign in Aleppo. But the fact of the matter was that on that day, pro-government war planes were carrying out strikes on Aleppo while rebels were shelling government-held targets.

On May 3, 2016, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said his country was working with the United States and the United Nations to extend the Syrian government's ceasefire to Aleppo.

Syria Review 2016 Page 220 of 540 pages Syria

There were hopes that the "regime of calm" already in place elsewhere in Syria might soon be applied to hard-hit Aleppo.

To this end, United Nations Special Envoy to Syria, Staffan de Mistura, was in Moscow to participate in the discussion about applying the cessation of hostilities on a national basis across Syria. As stated by Special Envoy Mistura, "We all hope that... in a few hours we can relaunch the cessation of hostilities. If we can do this, we will be back on the right track." For his part, Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov said of the ceasefire that the plan was to "ideally make it indefinite."

Meanwhile, from Washington D.C., United States Secretary of State John Kerry warned of consequences if Syrian President Bashar al-Assad continued to violate the ceasefire with the offensive operations. He said, "If Assad does not adhere to this, there will clearly be repercussions, and one of them may be the total destruction of the ceasefire and then go back to war. I don't think Russia wants that."

Before any ceasefire extension measures could be implemented, rocket attacks by rebels on government targets in Aleppo killed 19 people. One target of attack was a hospital were at least three people died. The death toll was now up to 279 civilians at the start of May 2016 after two weeks of the government's aerial bombardment campaign.

For its part, the United Nations Security Council passed a resolution prohibiting the targeting of hospitals, clinics and medical professionals in war zones. In truth, this prohibition was already in place with such targets being off limits under international law; however, the strikes on hospitals in war zones in recent times appeared to have spurred the "reminder" resolution.

Note: At the start of May 2016, the Red Cross warned that Aleppo was edging "to the brink of humanitarian disaster." Thus, the announcement on May 4, 2016, that the United States and Russia had agreed to extend the cessation of hostilities agreement to include Aleppo, was welcomed.

The Russian Presence in Syria --

Going back to March 2016, President Vladimir Putin announced that "the main part" of the Russian "military contingent" operating in Syria since 2015 would be withdrawn. The Russian leader said that the move was made in order to facilitate United Nations-brokered peace talks, which at the time had resumed, and which were intended to bring an end to the Syrian civil war.

Syrian authorities made clear that there was no distance in the positions of Damascus and Moscow, insisting that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad had agreed to the plan during a telephone call with Putin. The surprise announcement from Putin came suddenly and triggered speculation about Moscow's ulterior motives with some quarters suggesting that Russia was laying the groundwork

Syria Review 2016 Page 221 of 540 pages Syria for a settlement that would include an exit of the Assad regime. In an address at the time, however, Putin said that Russian forces had met their goal of turning the tide in Syria. Putin said, "The effective work of our military created the conditions for the start of the peace process. I believe that the task put before the defense ministry and Russian armed forces has, on the whole, been fulfilled." He added, that joint Russian and Syrian forces "have been able to achieve a fundamental turnaround in the fight against international terrorism." Moreover, Putin indicated no actual timeline for the withdrawal and in fact made clear that Russian forces would stay in place at a seaport and airbase in Latakia.

In May 2016, it was evident that the Russian military presence in Syria was significant and unlikely to actually be redeployed anytime soon despite claims of a withdrawal discussed above. Indeed, according to CNN, Russia appeared to have accumulated "substantial ground forces" across Syria. CNN reports indicated that there were several thousand well-armed troops on the ground in Syria. Of note particularly was the Hmeymim air base on the edge of Latakia, where there was a Syrian military air base, which appeared to house modern military equipment, and which appeared to be used by Russian military units. Among the Russian military arsenal there were tanks, armored personnel carriers, surface-to-air missile systems, fighter jets, and combat helicopters. The recaptured historic city of Palmyra was another such site being used by Russian forces.

Islamic State shifts to terror attacks after losing territory

Going back to 2015, terror attacks on Lebanese, Russian, and French targets constituted a terrorist trifecta for Islamic State, and could only be understood as manifestations of the terror group's effort to demonstrate its relevance and resilience -- even as it was being subject to strikes from various international actors.

Indeed, the terror enclave was certainly under pressure from a United States-led international coalition, as well as a bombing campaign by Russia. In November 2015 Islamic State lost control of Sinjar in Iraq as a result of a fierce offensive by Kurdish peshmerga fighters backed by United States air power. In the same period, as discussed above, the United States Pentagon reported that it had targeted the "face" of Islamic State in a drone strike -- the notorious terrorist "Jihadi John" who was shown in barbaric videotaped footage with international hostages who were executed via decapitation. The Pentagon indicated that the drone strike was very likely successful, thus inflicting a symbolic blow against the terror group. Around the same period, Islamic State was reported to be losing control in Aleppo in Syria.

Syria Review 2016 Page 222 of 540 pages Syria

Caliphate, Islamic State could be refocusing its ambitions in the direction of international Jihadism. Should this working theory gain support , it would suggest an acute threat to global security.

Given this burgeoning global security threat, neoconservative critics of President Obama in the United States were clamoring for him to articulate a more muscular foreign policy in regard to Islamic State. At the G20 summit in Turkey, an unusually angry President Obama dismissed the notion of warfare without careful consideration, saying, "It’s best that we don’t shoot first and aim later." In response to the call for him to extrovert American hegemony and leadership in a robust manner, President Obama said, “If folks want to pop off and have opinions about what they want to do, present a specific plan. What I am not interested in doing is posing, or pursuing some notion of American leadership or America winning or whatever other slogans they come up with ... I’m too busy for that.” He added, “What I do not do is to take actions either because it is going to work politically or somehow make America look tough, or make me look tough. And maybe part of the reason is that every few months I go to Walter Reed [a military hospital] and I see a 25- year-old kid who is paralysed or has lost his limbs. And some of those are people who I have ordered into battle. So I can’t afford to play some of the political games that others play.”

One flashpoint issue in the discussion of United States policy regarding Islamic State was President Obama's claim that the terror group had been "contained." Asked how he could make that claim given the ongoing terror activity by Islamic State, President Obama explained, “When I said that we are containing their spread in Iraq and Syria -– in fact, they control less territory than they did last year. The more we shrink that territory, the less they can pretend they are somehow a functioning state and the more it becomes apparent that they are simply a network of brutal killers.” He also insisted that it was vital that Islamic State not be treated as a conventional state enemy but rather as a terrorist network. President Obama said, “Our goals here have to be aggressive and leave no stone here, but also recognize this is not conventional warfare. We play into the ISIL narrative when we act as if they are a state and we use routine military tactics that are designed to fight a state that is attacking another state. That’s not what’s going on here.”

In December 2015 when the United States was struck by a massacre in the California city of San Bernardino. President Barack Obama said that the assailants were inspired by Islamic State. In his national address on Dec. 6, 2015, President Obama cast the bloodshed in San Bernardino as "an act of terrorism designed to kill innocent people" and promised to "hunt down terrorist plotters" anywhere they are. At the same time, he insisted that there would be no renewed ground war using United States blood and treasure in the Middle East as he declared, "We should not be drawn once more into a long and costly ground war in Iraq or Syria."

President Obama's address spurred his hardline conservative rivals to blast his anti-terrorism strategy and argue for a more aggressive approach, marked by a massive ground force engagement in the region. However, President Obama had already augmented the air strike

Syria Review 2016 Page 223 of 540 pages Syria campaign against Islamic State in Iraq and Syria with the deployment of military advisors, and at the start of December 2015, he supplemented these forces with a special operations expeditionary force to fight Islamic State. United States Defense Secretary Ashton Carter outlined the goals the special operations expeditionary force as follows: "These special operators will over time be able to conduct raids, free hostages, gather intelligence and capture ISIL leaders." For the Obama administration, the imperative was to exploit the special operations expertise in a targeted strategy against Islamic State, rather than the conventional warfare.

By the spring of 2016, Islamic State was under intensified pressure, faced with significant territorial losses, and thus accelerating its terror attacks. In the first part of 2016, there had been close to 890 attacks, according to reports, which killed more than 2,000 people, As noted by Matthew Henman, the head of IHS Jane's Terrorism and Insurgency Center, which produced the report, "The group is resorting more and more to mass-casualty violence as it comes under heavy pressure from multiple angles."

Meanwhile, the United States Department of Defense said that Islamic State's territory in Iraq has shrunk by about 40 percent and by 20 percent in Syria. Of note was the fact that Iraq's military had success retaking control over the western city of Ramadi and advancing west towards the Syrian border. The northern effort, in the direction of Mosul, was slower but ongoing nonetheless. Across the border in Syria, Russian-backed government forces captured significant territory from Islamic State, including the historic city of Palmyra.

As noted by Henman, the aforementioned head of IHS Jane's Terrorism and Insurgency Center, "High profile, mass casualty attacks are a tried and tested method of changing the narrative and deflecting attention away from the problems it is facing." He added, "This is done for internal consumption just as much as external."

Note that Syrian cities of Jableh and Tartous on Syria's Mediterranean coast were struck by bombings that killed 150 people and injured more than 200 others at the end of May 2016. Islamic State claimed responsibility for the attacks and made clear that it was targeting members of President Bashar al-Assad's Alawite minority.

Editor's Note on Campaign of Cultural Destruction

Amidst the intensified effort to vanquish Islamic State, the fact of the matter was that the Islamist Jihadist terror group was still in control of vast swaths of Iraqi and Syrian territory, and thus able to continue its disturbing campaign of cultural destruction.

Since 2014, the barbaric terror group has been carrying out this campaign, targeting historic objects and sites deemed to be violations of its strict notions of Islam. In 2014, Islamic State destroyed the tomb of the Prophet Jonah revered by Jews, Christians, and Muslims alike. The tomb of Biblical

Syria Review 2016 Page 224 of 540 pages Syria

Daniel was also reported to have been decimated. Several other heritage sites around Mosul, such as the centuries-old shrine to Seth -- believed to be the son of Adam and Eve, the Prophet Jirjis Mosque, and the Awn al-Din Shrine, were also demolished. To the west of Mosul in the town of Tal Afar, several Shi'ite shrines and mosques were destroyed by Islamic State.

Now, in 2015, the latest targets were the cultural treasures of the ancient Assyrian city of Nimrud, dating back 13 centuries. Once the cultural treasures of Nimrud were either destroyed or stolen, Islamic State moved on to the ancient city of Hatra, which was founded by the Parthian Empire over 2,000 years ago. Also in the crosshairs of ISIL were the ancient carvings, statues, and other historic valuables at the museum in Mosul. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) responded by condemning Islamic State, and characterizing the terror group's actions as both "cultural cleansing" and a war crime. UNESCO"s head, Irina Bokova, decried the "deliberate destruction of cultural heritage," which she said should be regarded as "the heritage of the whole of humanity."

Undeterred, by the spring of 2015, Islamic State was advancing on the Syrian town of Tadmur, the location of one of the world's most significant archaeological sites known as Palmyra. Dating back to the 1st and 2nd centuries of the Common Era when the area was under the rule of the Romans, Palmyra was home to the temple of Baal while also bearing elements of the Roman imprint. Antiquities and historic experts were fearful that Islamic State would target Palmyra in its latest barbaric act of cultural and historic destruction. In mid-2015, Islamic State had released videotaped footage depicting the destruction of the artifacts and statues from Palmyra. In August 2015, the tragic news came that Islamic State had murdered the famed archaeologist, Khaled al- Asaad, who attended to the ancient ruins of Palmyra in Syria for 40 years and was colloquially known as "Mr. Palmyra." According to reports, Islamic State terrorists tried to force Asaad to disclose where antiquities and treasures were hidden. When those efforts failed, the terrorists beheaded the 81-year old archaeologist.

Meanwhile there were reports that antiquities were being plundered on a large scale basis from heritage sites across Syria and Iraq, and then placed on the global black market. The illicit sale of such objects was now being used to finance the group's terrorist activities.

The actions of Islamic State were reminiscent of the Taliban in Afghanistan in the late 1990s and early 2000s, as well as al-Qaida-aligned Ansar Dine in Mali in 2012. Both extremist Islamist enclaves have been aligned with the terror enclave, al-Qaida, and were responsible for cultural and historic destruction in these two countries, for the purpose of obliterating any monuments they viewed as insufficiently Islamic. Often, such holy sites are declared by Islamist zealots to be places of "apostasy" instead of prayer, thus resulting in their destruction. Clearly, Islamic State was yet another Islamist terror group dedicated to the task of decimating some of the world's greatest archaeological artifacts and historic sites.

Syria Review 2016 Page 225 of 540 pages Syria

It should be noted that Islamic State retained some mercenary instincts, looting several artifacts, presumably to be sold to black market antiquities merchants to raise money to fund the activities of the terror group.

Editor's Note on Islamic State

Islamic State (alternatively referred to as ISIL and ISIS), has gained notoriety for its particularly brutal tactics, ranging from the abductions and mass murders of religious and ethnic minorities, which they view as apostates, and their beheadings of soldiers and journalists. The group has said that it aims to establish an Islamic "caliphate" that would be ruled according to Islamic Shari'a law. Its ambitions are Jihadists and not simply limited to Iraq and Syria; in fact, ISIL has made clear that it intends to extent its control to Jordan and Lebanon. A satellite venue of Islamic State has opened up in post-Arab Spring Libya as extremists have taken advantage of the power chasm there. Another ambition for ISIL is the cause of Palestine. Adherents are required to swear their allegiance to the ISIL leader, Ibrahim Awad Ibrahim Ali al-Badri al-Samarrai, known in the public sphere as Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. Baghdadi's appeal has, to some degree, been fed by his mystery as he has only rarely been seen in public.

In terms of legacy, ISIL is actually an outgrowth of al-Qaida in Iraq, led by the Jordanian-born terrorist, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. After Zarqawi's death in 2006, al-Qaida in Iraq transposed itself into Islamic State in Iraq. Although it was weakened by the United States-led "surge" in Iraq to deal with the Sunni insurgency, and which included the involvement of Sahwa (Awakening) councils by Sunni Arab tribesmen , Islamic State in Iraq experienced a resurgence in 2010 under Baghdadi. Once Syria was embroiled in a civil war in 2011, Islamic State was able to establish a foothold in Syria, essentially uprooting other extremist and terror groups, such as al-Nusra Front and al-Qaida, by 2013, and ultimately holding control over wide swaths of territory from Syria to Iraq as of 2014, and extending to Libya as of 2015. ISIL's ability to take over Anbar province and then the northern city of Mosul in Iraq in 2014 were key developments in the entrenchment of ISIL in the region.

ISIL's genocidal practices have been characterized most acutely by their infamous and gruesome beheadings of foreign nationals and apostates, but have also included other revolting and repugnant means of execution, such as crucifixions, immolations, and mass shootings. These bloodthirsty techniques of terror and tactics of murder, which are professionally videotaped and disseminated for maximum effect, have been so ghastly that other militant Islamist movements have sought to distance themselves from ISIL. Indeed, the Yemeni wing of al-Qaida (known as al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula) went so far as to note that beheadings, and the videotaping of decapitations, were to be regarded as un-Islamic. Meanwhile, Lebanon-based Hezbollah, which has been deemed to be a terrorist organization by some countries of the West, made clear that ISIL's tactics of terror were inhumane. These stances by al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula and Hezbollah suggested that even among extremists, militants, Jihadists, and Islamist terrorists, there remained some degree of a

Syria Review 2016 Page 226 of 540 pages Syria

"code" that ISIL had apparently violated.

It should be noted that ISIL's barbarism and brutality has had a double effect. First, the brutality appears to have functioned as a recruitment tool for other murderous Islamist extremists across the world. To date, it is not known how many ISIL fighters exist in the Middle East although estimates suggest that as many as 30,000 Islamic State fighters are in the Iraq-Syria region. These fighters come from across the world although, as Libya has slipped further into failed state status, it is believed to be the largest single source of terrorists to the cause. That being said, ISIL has attracted disgruntled youth from Europe and the Americas as well, with recruits often traveling through Turkey to enter ISIL-controlled territory. Second, even as ISIL's barbarism has been a recruitment tool, it has simultaneously stimulated the reluctant engagement of a United States-led international coalition in an anti-Islamic State mission.

Socio-economic strife is a popular -- and often facile -- explanation for extremism and activism. It certainly applies to the roots of the Arab Spring and specifically the Jasmine Revolution in Tunisia, for example, but does not apply to ISIL. Yes, the power chasms created in the wake of the Arab Spring -- specifically in Libya but also in other countries in the region -- certainly created the conditions for recruitment. But creating fertile ground for recruitment still does not address the reason why people would be attracted to ISIL.

Likewise, the call for more education may have resonance in countries where young people are educated only about Islam in Madrassas, or in impoverished regions where people simply have no access to education at all. But these cases do not properly apply to ISIL recruits and sympathizers. The problem is not a lack of education -- most of these recruits are computer savvy and were recruited via the Internet while using their own laptops or in Internet cafes. Indeed, many youth ISIL recruits were from middle class or even wealthy families -- certainly not backgrounds without marked by socio-economic hardship.

Of note was the revelation that the so-called "Jihadi John" shown in the gruesome beheading propaganda videos used by Islamic State was actually a well-educated and well-heeled Kuwaiti- born man, Mohammed Emwazi, who later settled in the United Kingdom where he graduated from the University of Westminster with a degree in computer programming. The theory that extremists, such as Emwazi, would be drawn to terrorism as a result of economic strife or due to a lack of education, is simply inoperable in such cases. (Note that Emwazi was killed in a United States' drone strike in November 2015.)

It should also be noted that recruits and sympathizers to the Islamic State cause are also not necessarily from strict Muslim families; indeed, there were reports that many ISIL recruits were actually fairly new to hardline Islam with translations of instructional introductory texts on Islam being a particularly popular purchase for them.

Syria Review 2016 Page 227 of 540 pages Syria

It would seem that many recruits to ISIL appeared to be the same type of profile as vulnerable youth likely to join gang or cults, susceptible to brainwashing, and thus excellent candidates for adherence to Islamic State's religious ideology.

That being said, to properly understand the attraction of ISIL, it is imperative to address the ideological appeal of hardline and regressive Islam, which embraces barbaric practices of execution, such as beheadings and crucifixion, while integrating socio-governing practices such as conquest and the enslavement of women. Well-meaning public figures have cast these tactics of terror and abuses of humanity as "perversions" of Islam. Left unsaid is that fact that they are actually clear dictates that come from historic Islam, and which have been embraced by ISIL as the "true" path to salvation, irrespective of the fact that their practices are a violation of modern understandings of human rights.

Indeed, Islamic State must be an apocalyptic and millenarian death cult, with a strict Medieval interpretation of Islam at the core and a gruesome theatre of murder as the main attraction for persons with a sense of psychopathic piety. Relying on apocalyptic prophesies of Islamic Jihadist ascendancy and an ultimate "Day of Judgement," the expansion of Islamic State territory in Iraq and Syria, and even Libya, was being understood as a sign of "victory." Stated differently, the rapid rate of expansion (read: victory) by ISIL in Iraq and Syria in 2014 functioned to empower sympathizers and recruits to the ISIL cause.

Given this paradigm, the only prescription for defeat would be the disruption of what looks like an unstoppable juggernaut by ISIL. That being said, the texture of that defeat would have to be carefully -- and globally -- crafted since ISIL militants believe in the apocalyptic prophesy of a "final" confrontation with the West. Rather than facilitating that end, international stakeholders have noted that the preferable path would be to target this Islamist Jihadist terror entity as part of a global coalition. With United States-led air strikes only going so far to destroy ISIL, there would ultimately be a need for ground forces. An effective strategy against ISIL would be one that looks to Arab "boots on the ground" rather than feeding the hunger by Islamists for a Crusades-style war with the West. It was to be seen if the attacks by Islamic State on a Russian jetliner and in Paris, which yielded hundreds of deaths, would change this calculus.

It should be noted that Islamic State is sometimes pejoratively referred to as "Daesh." Islamic State rejects this term of reference, which sounds roughly in Arabic to the words "Daes" which means "one who crushes something underfoot" and "Dahes" which means "one who sows discord." For precisely these negative associations, the enemies of Islamic State have increasingly used the term "Daesh" to describe the terror group in defiance.

Special Entry: Syrian migrant crisis rocks Europe

Syria Review 2016 Page 228 of 540 pages Syria

In September 2015, a humanitarian crisis was rocking Europe as displaced Syrians desperate to escape the destructive civil at home, along with the threat of brutal terrorism at the hands of Islamic State, sought refuge in Europe. Most of the migrants were attempting to reach Western Europe by traveling either by boat across the Mediterranean to Cyprus, and then traveling north through Greece, the Balkan countries, and Hungary. The migrants were not eager to remain in those countries as their goal was to reach a destination in Western Europe. But because of prevailing laws and Hungary's hardline stance, many of the migrants were essentially trapped in Hungarian asylum-seekers' processing centers due to restrictions on movement. At issue were European Union regulations requiring refugees to seek asylum in the first country where they land. Many of the migrants in Hungary were soon insisting they would walk by foot to Germany and Austria if the Hungarian government continued to impede their travel.

Pope Francis -- the leader of the Roman Catholic Church and the head of the Holy See -- entered the fray and called on Catholic parishes, churches, and monasteries across Europe to provide sanctuary to migrants seeking refuge. Meanwhile, private groups (i.e. with no governmental ties) have sprouted up in Europe to assist in transporting migrants from Hungary to more hospitable ground in Austria and Germany.

While the Hungarian government has received criticism for its hardline stance regarding migrants, in contrast to Austria and Germany, which have eased European Union restrictions and allowed migrants to bypass the normal asylum seeking process, the legal landscape was set to change. Of note were signals from Austria and Germany indicating that they would soon phase out the special measures in place allowing migrants to get to western Europe. Acknowledging that they had made exceptions due to the dire nature of the crisis, the governments of Austria and Germany noted that they would soon by returning to normal conditions whereby asylum seekers would have to be registered and processed in the first European Union country where they arrive.

The migrant crisis had been ongoing for some time; however, it captured global attention when the body of a young Kurdish boy washed onto the shores of a Turkish resort. The boy along with his brother and mother perished in the sea when the person paid to help them escape Syria abandoned their boat before it landed at the Greek island of Kos. The visual image of a young child being the innocent casualty of the war and bloodshed wrought by those in power was reminiscent of another notorious image decades earlier in Vietnam. In 1972, the photograph Kim Phuc who had been burned by napalm and was running naked in the streets to escape the bombing was seared in the minds of people across the world, and is credited with helping bring the war to an end. It is to be determined if the heartbreaking image of the body of young Alan Kurdi would have the same impact in 2015. It was nevertheless drawing attention on the humanitarian crisis sweeping across Europe as Syrians sought refuge from the horrendous conditions of a country destroyed by war and terrorism.

Note that by mid-September 2015, Hungary was militarizing its southern border to prevent the

Syria Review 2016 Page 229 of 540 pages Syria infiltration by Syrians seeking asylum. The Hungarian government also passed legislation (likely to be illegal under international law) profiting irregular entry into its borders -- even by asylum seekers. Hungary additionally erected a border fence to keep the Syrians and other migrants out, even going so far as to deploy riot police, who used tear gas and water cannons on the refugees at the border with Serbia.

United Nations Human Rights Commissioner Ra'ad al Hussein Zeid condemned the Hungarian government for its harsh and inhumane tactics, which the United Nations said violated international law. A statement from the Human Rights Commission at the United Nations read as follows: "High Commissioner Zeid (Ra'ad al Hussein) deplored the xenophobic and anti-Muslim views that appear to lie at the heart of current Hungarian government policy." Zeid himself entered the fray, saying, “I am appalled at the callous, and in some cases illegal, actions of the Hungarian authorities in recent days, which include denying entry to, arresting, summarily rejecting and returning refugees, using disproportionate force on migrants and refugees, as well as reportedly assaulting journalists and seizing video documentation." He added: "Seeking asylum is not a crime, and neither is entering a country irregularly.”

With the migrants unable to enter Hungary en route to Western Europe, they were traveling an alternate route from Serbia through Croatia. The government in Croatia implored the international community to intervene since their resources were over-stretched and unable to properly deal with the mass influx of migrants. Crucially, the refugee crisis was soon sparking regional conflicts as governments of these countries attempted to manage the crisis. Of note was the fact that Serbia was moving migrants through its country by placing them on buses and transporting them to the border with Croatia. In response, Croatia announced that it would halt all cargo traffic from eastern countries, saying that it simply could not deal with the vast influx of refugees. Indeed, the Croatian channel has become increasingly clogged since Hungary militarized its borders. For its part, Serbia said it would consider "counter-measures."

In Germany, there were plans to impose controls on the border with Austria, with an eye on adhering to international law, which dictates that refugees must seek asylum in their initial European Union "landing" countries. As noted by German Interior Minister Thomas de Maiziere, refugees cannot "choose" their host countries. He added that the imposition of new controls was intended to return to a regime consistent with international law, as he said, "The aim of these measures is to limit the current inflows to Germany and to return to orderly procedures when people enter the country." In Denmark, rail links with Germany were temporarily suspended to stem the tide of Syrian migrants for the same reason.

Meanwhile, given the crisis sweeping across the region, European Commission President Jean- Claude Juncker said that plans were afoot for a "swift, determined and comprehensive" response that would adhere to principles of "humanity and human dignity" via a quota system. Soon thereafter, European Council President Donald Tusk announced that an extraordinary summit of

Syria Review 2016 Page 230 of 540 pages Syria

European Unions leaders was scheduled for Sept. 23, 2015, to consider options for accommodating the approximately 120,000 asylum seekers across the regional bloc.

To that end, the European Union approved a plan that would distribute the 120,000 refugees at stake across its 28 member states. Four former east bloc countries -- Czech Republic, Slovakia, Romania, and Hungary -- voted against the proposal, arguing it was a violation of their sovereignty; they also suggested that accepting Muslims from Middle Eastern countries could impact their national cultures. Leaders of those countries insisted that they would resist the quotas and do whatever necessary not to accept the refugees into their borders.

European Commission Vice President Frans Timmermans said the measure would be implemented irrespective of opposition from the four recalcitrant countries. He said, "We know some member states were not in favor of the proposal, but those member states said: Let's have a vote, we will respect the outcome of the vote. And so all the member states respect the outcome." He added, "The Commission is under an obligation to enforce what was agreed." French President Francois Hollande went further, warning that there would be consequences for countries failing to live up to their obligations. He said, "The sanctions exist. So these countries will be putting themselves in a situation where what they are receiving from Europe could be suspended. You cannot ask Europe for support and refuse when Europe asks for solidarity."

Germany led the charge in arguing that the burdens of providing for people in need had to be shared by all countries of the European Union. German Chancellor Angela Merkel also reminded the people of her country and member states of the European Union that there was a moral imperative to provide aid to refugees in need.

Editor's Note on Syria's Humanitarian Crisis

Even as the global community remained ensconced in the ongoing debate on how to end the violence and bloodshed in Syria, human rights groups were accumulating the evidence against the Assad regime on the matter of human rights violations and abuses. To this end, a report issued by Amnesty International included the accusation that the Syrian regime was using torture and other forms of ill-treatment against detainees in that country at unprecedented levels. The report, which was titled, "I Wanted to Die: Syria's Torture Victims Speak Out," documented 31 methods of torture and other abusive tactics -- including gender-based torture, sexual violence, and electric shock -- which Amnesty International said were used by Syrian security forces against detainees. Amnesty International's Ann Harrison said, "Testimonies we have heard give disturbing insights into a system of detention and interrogation which appears intended primarily to humiliate and terrify its victims into silence." Harrison went on to note that the scale of torture and abuse was at a level not seen since the 1970s and 1980s, when Hafez Assad ruled Syria.

In a separate but related development, Human Rights Watch reported that Syrian troops were

Syria Review 2016 Page 231 of 540 pages Syria laying down land mines near the borders with Turkey and Lebanon. It should be noted that these border regions have recently become escape paths for Syrians trying to flee the bloodshed. Thus, the planting of land mines in such areas could possibly be interpreted as the Syrian government's desire to punish civilians for trying to escape. Massacres and extra-judicial executions by government forces and rebels respectively, in addition to the allegations in 2013 of the use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime, only accentuate the climate of human rights abuse plaguing conflict-ridden Syria.

In August 2013, the United Nations' refugee agency, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), as well as the United Nations' children's fund, United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund (UNICEF), confirmed that as many as two million children in Syria were displaced as a result of the civil war plaguing the country. Adding to the cache of disturbing statistics was the finding that children constituted half of all refugees (separate from the internally displaced persons) fleeing Syria, with a full 75 percent of those children being under the age of 11. Antonio Guterres, the United Nations high commissioner for refugees said: "The youth of Syria are losing their homes, their family members, and their futures."

By the start of September 2013, the number of Syrian refugees (separate from the millions internally displaced) increased by a full one million people in only a space of six months, with the number of Syrian refugees now exceeding two million. In a statement, the United Nations refugee agency declared: "Syria is hemorrhaging women, children, and men who cross borders often with little more than the clothes on their backs." The millions of Syrians forced to flee the country as refugees, in combination with the millions internally displaced within the country as a result of the war, compelled the United Nations refugee agency to admit that one-third of Syria's entire population was being affected by the civil war. As noted by the UNHCR head, Guterres: "It clearly demonstrates that we are witnessing a conflict in constant escalation."

Meanwhile, the death toll in Syria was steadily increasing from tens of thousands of people to more than 100,000 in 2013. United Nations Human Rights Commissioner Navi Pillay was on the record characterizing the bloodshed in Syria as "truly shocking." In 2013, the fact of the matter was that in addition to the 100,000 dead since the start of the war in 2011, there were as many as millions of displaced persons within Syria due to the ravages of the war, with even more millions fleeing their homes for neighboring countries in order to escape the crossfire of violence. As well, more than 2.5 million Syrians were in need of humanitarian assistance with as many as one million Syrians going hungry due to the inability of aid agencies to deliver food, according to the World Food Program.

In 2014, Syria had replaced Afghanistan as the source of the world's largest refugee population. As well, the United Nations commission of inquiry concluded that war crimes had been committed on both sides of the Syrian civil war; the commission of inquiry blamed world powers for allowing the Syrian regime and the rebel movement to respectively function with impunity. Also in 2014,

Syria Review 2016 Page 232 of 540 pages Syria the head of the United Nations humanitarian wing, Valerie Amos, warned that despite a prevailing Security Council resolution aimed at ensuring that Syria benefited from humanitarian aid, the situation in that country was deteriorating. She said, "Far from getting better, the situation is getting worse." Amos also pointed to the fact that only 10 percent of people living in war-torn areas were able to access much-needed humanitarian assistance.

The Syrian civil war has generated an overwhelming and appalling human cost. By 2015 -- four years after the start of the Syrian uprising -- at least 250,000 Syrians had died, and more than a million others have been injured. Meanwhile, more than 11 million people have been displaced, with four million of them fleeing Syria and seeking refuge abroad. As succinctly stated by United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon: "The status quo in Syria is indefensible." However, the spate of attacks at the hands of the terror enclave, Islamic State, across the world in October and November 2015 was expected to dampen the effort to resettle Syrian refugees in the West.

Note: As of 2016, a ceasefire agreement and peace discussions were being regarded as a pathway to restore Syria to stability. However, war, violence, and bloodshed continued to characterize the landscape. In 10 days alone in April 2016, air strikes from Syrian forces and shelling from rebels produced the deaths of 250 people in Aleppo. Overall, in the first part of 2016 -- February 2016 to be precise -- the Syrian Center for Policy Research said that the death toll since the start of the Syrian conflict stood at the horrific figure of 470,000. This number would be close to twice the number of dead registered by the United Nations the year prior. Meanwhile, despite all the ambitions for a viable peace process, as of May 2016, there was no real end in sight to the ongoing nightmare of the Syrian crisis.

-- June 2016

Written by Dr. Denise Youngblood Coleman, Editor in Chief, www.countrywatch.com ; see Bibliography for research sources.

Political Risk Index

Syria Review 2016 Page 233 of 540 pages Syria

Political Risk Index

The Political Risk Index is a proprietary index measuring the level of risk posed to governments, corporations, and investors, based on a myriad of political and economic factors. The Political Risk Index is calculated using an established methodology by CountryWatch's Editor-in-Chief and is based on varied criteria* including the following consideration: political stability, political representation, democratic accountability, freedom of expression, security and crime, risk of conflict, human development, jurisprudence and regulatory transparency, economic risk, foreign investment considerations, possibility of sovereign default, and corruption. Scores are assigned from 0-10 using the aforementioned criteria. A score of 0 marks the highest political risk, while a score of 10 marks the lowest political risk. Stated differently, countries with the lowest scores pose the greatest political risk. A score of 0 marks the most dire level of political risk and an ultimate nadir, while a score of 10 marks the lowest possible level of political risk, according to this proprietary index. Rarely will there be scores of 0 or 10 due to the reality that countries contain complex landscapes; as such, the index offers a range of possibilities ranging from lesser to greater risk.

Country Assessment

Afghanistan 2

Albania 4

Algeria 6

Andorra 9

Angola 4

Antigua 8

Argentina 4

Syria Review 2016 Page 234 of 540 pages Syria

Armenia 4-5

Australia 9.5

Austria 9.5

Azerbaijan 4

Bahamas 8.5

Bahrain 6

Bangladesh 3.5

Barbados 8.5-9

Belarus 3

Belgium 9

Belize 8

Benin 5

Bhutan 5

Bolivia 5

Bosnia-Herzegovina 4

Botswana 7

Brazil 7

Brunei 7

Syria Review 2016 Page 235 of 540 pages Syria

Bulgaria 6

Burkina Faso 4

Burma (Myanmar) 4.5

Burundi 3

Cambodia 4

Cameroon 5

Canada 9.5

Cape Verde 6

Central African Republic 3

Chad 4

Chile 9

China 7

China: Hong Kong 8

China: Taiwan 8

Colombia 7

Comoros 5

Congo DRC 3

Congo RC 4

Syria Review 2016 Page 236 of 540 pages Syria

Costa Rica 8

Cote d'Ivoire 4.5

Croatia 7

Cuba 4-4.5

Cyprus 5

Czech Republic 8

Denmark 9.5

Djibouti 4.5

Dominica 7

Dominican Republic 6

East Timor 5

Ecuador 6

Egypt 5

El Salvador 7

Equatorial Guinea 4

Eritrea 3

Estonia 8

Ethiopia 4

Syria Review 2016 Page 237 of 540 pages Syria

Fiji 5

Finland 9

Fr.YugoslavRep.Macedonia 5

France 9

Gabon 5

Gambia 4

Georgia 5

Germany 9.5

Ghana 6

Greece 4.5-5

Grenada 8

Guatemala 6

Guinea 3.5

Guinea-Bissau 3.5

Guyana 4.5

Haiti 3.5

Holy See (Vatican) 9

Honduras 4.5-5

Syria Review 2016 Page 238 of 540 pages Syria

Hungary 7

Iceland 8.5-9

India 7.5-8

Indonesia 6

Iran 3.5-4

Iraq 2.5-3

Ireland 8-8.5

Israel 8

Italy 7.5

Jamaica 6.5-7

Japan 9

Jordan 6.5

Kazakhstan 6

Kenya 5

Kiribati 7

Korea, North 1

Korea, South 8

Kosovo 4

Kuwait 7 Syria Review 2016 Page 239 of 540 pages Syria

Kuwait 7

Kyrgyzstan 4.5

Laos 4.5

Latvia 7

Lebanon 5.5

Lesotho 6

Liberia 3.5

Libya 2

Liechtenstein 9

Lithuania 7.5

Luxembourg 9

Madagascar 4

Malawi 4

Malaysia 8

Maldives 4.5

Mali 4

Malta 8

Marshall Islands 6

Syria Review 2016 Page 240 of 540 pages Syria

Mauritania 4.5-5

Mauritius 7

Mexico 6.5

Micronesia 7

Moldova 5

Monaco 9

Mongolia 5

Montenegro 6

Morocco 6.5

Mozambique 4.5-5

Namibia 6.5-7

Nauru 6

Nepal 4

Netherlands 9.5

New Zealand 9.5

Nicaragua 5

Niger 4

Nigeria 4.5

Syria Review 2016 Page 241 of 540 pages Syria

Norway 9.5

Oman 7

Pakistan 3.5

Palau 7

Panama 7.5

Papua New Guinea 5

Paraguay 6.5-7

Peru 7

Philippines 6

Poland 8

Portugal 7.5

Qatar 7.5

Romania 5.5

Russia 5.5

Rwanda 5

Saint Kitts and Nevis 8

Saint Lucia 8

Saint Vincent and Grenadines 8

Syria Review 2016 Page 242 of 540 pages Syria

Samoa 7

San Marino 9

Sao Tome and Principe 5.5

Saudi Arabia 6

Senegal 6

Serbia 5

Seychelles 7

Sierra Leone 4.5

Singapore 9

Slovak Republic (Slovakia) 8

Slovenia 8

Solomon Islands 6

Somalia 2

South Africa 7

Spain 7.5

Sri Lanka 5

Sudan 3.5

Suriname 5

Swaziland 5 Syria Review 2016 Page 243 of 540 pages Syria

Swaziland 5

Sweden 9.5

Switzerland 9.5

Syria 2

Tajikistan 4.5

Tanzania 6

Thailand 6.5

Togo 4.5

Tonga 7

Trinidad and Tobago 8

Tunisia 6

Turkey 7

Turkmenistan 4.5

Tuvalu 7

Uganda 6

Ukraine 3.5-4

United Arab Emirates 7

United Kingdom 9

Syria Review 2016 Page 244 of 540 pages Syria

United States 9.5

Uruguay 8

Uzbekistan 4

Vanuatu 7

Venezuela 4

Vietnam 5

Yemen 3

Zambia 4.5

Zimbabwe 3

*Methodology

The Political Risk Index is calculated by CountryWatch's Editor-in-Chief and is based on the combined scoring of varied criteria as follows --

1. political stability (record of peaceful transitions of power, ability of government to stay in office and carry out policies as a result of productive executive-legislative relationship, perhaps with popular support vis a vis risk of government collapse)

2. political representation (right of suffrage, free and fair elections, multi-party participation, and influence of foreign powers)

3. democratic accountability (record of respect for political rights, human rights, and civil liberties, backed by constitutional protections)

4. freedom of expression (media freedom and freedom of expression, right to dissent or express political opposition, backed by constitutional protections)

5. security and crime (the degree to which a country has security mechanisms that ensures safety

Syria Review 2016 Page 245 of 540 pages Syria of citizens and ensures law and order, without resorting to extra-judicial measures)

6. risk of conflict (the presence of conflict; record of coups or civil disturbances; threat of war; threats posed by internal or external tensions; threat or record of terrorism or insurgencies)

7. human development (quality of life; access to education; socio-economic conditions; systemic concern for the status of women and children)

8. jurisprudence and regulatory transparency (the impartiality of the legal system, the degree of transparency within the regulatory system of a country and the durability of that structure)

9. economic conditions (economic stability, investment climate, degree of nationalization of industries, property rights, labor force development)

10. corruption ( the degree of corruption in a country and/or efforts by the government to address graft and other irregularities)

Editor's Note:

As of 2015, the current climate of upheaval internationally -- both politically and economically -- has affected the ratings for several countries across the world.

North Korea, Afghanistan, Somalia, and Zimbabwe -- retain their low rankings.

Several Middle Eastern and North African countries, such as Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Syria, Iraq and Yemen were downgraded in recent years due to political instability occurring in the "season of unrest" sweeping the region since 2011 and continuing today. The worst downgrades affected Syria where civil war is at play, along with the rampage of terror being carried out by Islamist terrorists who have also seized control over part of Syrian territory. Iraq has been further downgraded due to the rampage of Islamist terrorists and their takeover of wide swaths of Iraqi territory. Libya has also been downgraded further due to its slippage into failed state status; at issue in Libya have been an ongoing power struggle between rival militias. Yemen continues to hold steady with a poor ranking due to continued unrest at the hands of Houthi rebels, secessinionists, al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, and Islamic State. Its landscape has been further complicated by the fact that it is now the site of a proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia. Conversely, Tunisia and Egypt have seen slight upgrades as these countries stabilize.

In Africa, Zimbabwe continues to be one of the bleak spots of the world with the Mugabe regime effectively destroying the country's once vibrant economy, and miring Zimbabwe with an

Syria Review 2016 Page 246 of 540 pages Syria exceedingly high rate of inflation, debilitating unemployment, devolving public services, and critical food shortages; rampant crime and political oppression round out the landscape. Somalia also sports a poor ranking due to the continuing influence of the terror group, al-Shabab, which was not operating across the border in Kenya. On the upside, Nigeria, which was ineffectively dealing with the threat posed by the terror group, Boko Haram, was making some strides on the national security front with its new president at the helm. Mali was slightly upgraded due to its efforts to return to constitutional order following the 2012 coup and to neutralize the threat of separatists and Islamists. But the Central African Republic was downgraded due to the takeover of the government by Muslim Seleka rebels and a continued state of lawlessness in that country. South Sudan -- the world's newest nation state -- has not been officially included in this assessment; however, it can be unofficially assessed to be in the vicinity of "3" due to its manifold political and economic challenges. Burkina Faso, Burundi and Guinea have been downgraded due to political unrest, with Guinea also having to deal with the burgeoning Ebola crisis.

In Europe, Ukraine was downgraded due to the unrest facing that country following its Maidan revolution that triggered a pro-Russian uprising in the eastern part of the country. Russia was also implicated in the Ukrainian crisis due to its intervention on behalf of pro-Russian separatists, as well as its annexation of the Ukrainian territory of Crimea. Strains on the infrastructure of southern and eastern European countries, such as Serbia, Croatia, and Hungary, due to an influx of refugees was expected to pose social and economic challenges, and slight downgrades were made accordingly. So too, a corruption crisis for the Romanian prime minister has affected the ranking of that country. Meanwhile, the rankings for Spain, Portugal, Ireland, and Italy were maintained due to debt woes and the concomitant effect on the euro zone. Greece, another euro zone nation, was earlier downgraded due to its sovereign debt crisis; however, no further downgrade was added since the country was able to successfully forge a bailout rescue deal with creditor institutions. Cyprus' exposure to Greek banks yielded a downgrade in its case.

In Asia, Nepal was downgraded in response to continuous political instability and a constitutional crisis that prevails well after landmark elections were held. Both India and China retain their rankings; India holds a slightly higher ranking than China due to its record of democratic representation and accountability. Increasing violence and political instability in Pakistan resulted in a downgrade for this country's already low rating. Meanwhile, Singapore retained its strong rankings due to its continued effective stewardship of the economy and political stability.

In the Americas, ongoing political and economic woes, as well as crime and corruption have affected the rankings for Mexico , Guatemala, and Brazil. Argentina was downgraded due to its default on debt following the failure of talks with bond holders. Venezuela was downgraded due to its mix of market unfriendly policies and political oppression. For the moment, the United States maintains a strong ranking along with Canada, and most of the English-speaking countries of the Caribbean; however, a renewed debt ceiling crisis could cause the United States to be downgraded in a future edition. Finally, a small but significant upgrade was attributed to Cuba due to its recent

Syria Review 2016 Page 247 of 540 pages Syria pro-business reforms and its normalization of ties with the Unitd States.

Source:

Dr. Denise Youngblood Coleman, Editor in Chief, CountryWatch Inc. www.countrywatch.com

Updated:

2015

Political Stability

The Political Stability Index is a proprietary index measuring a country's level of stability, standard of good governance, record of constitutional order, respect for human rights, and overall strength of democracy. The Political StabilityIndex is calculated using an established methodology* by CountryWatch's Editor-in-Chief and is based on a given country's record of peaceful transitions of power, ability of a government to stay in office and carry out its policies vis a vis risk credible risks of government collapse. Threats include coups, domestic violence and instability, terrorism, etc. This index measures the dynamic between the quality of a country's government and the threats that can compromise and undermine stability. Scores are assigned from 0-10 using the aforementioned criteria. A score of 0 marks the lowest level of political stability and an ultimate nadir, while a score of 10 marks the highest level of political stability possible, according to this proprietary index. Rarely will there be scores of 0 or 10 due to the reality that countries contain complex landscapes; as such, the index offers a range of possibilities ranging from lesser to greater stability.

Country Assessment

Afghanistan 2

Syria Review 2016 Page 248 of 540 pages Syria

Albania 4.5-5

Algeria 5

Andorra 9.5

Angola 4.5-5

Antigua 8.5-9

Argentina 7

Armenia 5.5

Australia 9.5

Austria 9.5

Azerbaijan 5

Bahamas 9

Bahrain 6

Bangladesh 4.5

Barbados 9

Belarus 4

Belgium 9

Belize 8

Benin 5

Syria Review 2016 Page 249 of 540 pages Syria

Bhutan 5

Bolivia 6

Bosnia-Herzegovina 5

Botswana 8.5

Brazil 7

Brunei 8

Bulgaria 7.5

Burkina Faso 4

Burma (Myanmar) 4.5

Burundi 4

Cambodia 4.5-5

Cameroon 6

Canada 9.5

Cape Verde 6

Central African Republic 3

Chad 4.5

Chile 9

China 7

Syria Review 2016 Page 250 of 540 pages Syria

China: Hong Kong 8

China: Taiwan 8

Colombia 7.5

Comoros 5

Congo DRC 3

Congo RC 5

Costa Rica 9.5

Cote d'Ivoire 3.5

Croatia 7.5

Cuba 4.5

Cyprus 8

Czech Republic 8.5

Denmark 9.5

Djibouti 5

Dominica 8.5

Dominican Republic 7

East Timor 5

Ecuador 7

Syria Review 2016 Page 251 of 540 pages Syria

Egypt 4.5-5

El Salvador 7.5-8

Equatorial Guinea 4.5

Eritrea 4

Estonia 9

Ethiopia 4.5

Fiji 5

Finland 9

Fr.YugoslavRep.Macedonia 6.5

France 9

Gabon 5

Gambia 4.5

Georgia 5

Germany 9.5

Ghana 7

Greece 6

Grenada 8.5

Guatemala 7

Syria Review 2016 Page 252 of 540 pages Syria

Guinea 3.5-4

Guinea-Bissau 4

Guyana 6

Haiti 3.5-4

Holy See (Vatican) 9.5

Honduras 6

Hungary 7.5

Iceland 9

India 8

Indonesia 7

Iran 3.5

Iraq 2.5

Ireland 9.5

Israel 8

Italy 8.5-9

Jamaica 8

Japan 9

Jordan 6

Kazakhstan 6 Syria Review 2016 Page 253 of 540 pages Syria

Kazakhstan 6

Kenya 5

Kiribati 8

Korea, North 2

Korea, South 8.5

Kosovo 5.5

Kuwait 7

Kyrgyzstan 5

Laos 5

Latvia 8.5

Lebanon 5.5

Lesotho 5

Liberia 3.5-4

Libya 2

Liechtenstein 9

Lithuania 9

Luxembourg 9.5

Madagascar 4

Syria Review 2016 Page 254 of 540 pages Syria

Malawi 5

Malaysia 8

Maldives 4.5-5

Mali 4.5-5

Malta 9

Marshall Islands 8

Mauritania 6

Mauritius 8

Mexico 6.5-7

Micronesia 8

Moldova 5.5

Monaco 9.5

Mongolia 6.5-7

Montenegro 8

Morocco 7

Mozambique 5

Namibia 8.5

Nauru 8

Syria Review 2016 Page 255 of 540 pages Syria

Nepal 4.5

Netherlands 9.5

New Zealand 9.5

Nicaragua 6

Niger 4.5

Nigeria 4.5

Norway 9.5

Oman 7

Pakistan 3

Palau 8

Panama 8.5

Papua New Guinea 6

Paraguay 8

Peru 7.5

Philippines 6

Poland 9

Portugal 9

Qatar 7

Syria Review 2016 Page 256 of 540 pages Syria

Romania 7

Russia 6

Rwanda 5

Saint Kitts and Nevis 9

Saint Lucia 9

Saint Vincent and Grenadines 9

Samoa 8

San Marino 9.5

Sao Tome and Principe 7

Saudi Arabia 6

Senegal 7.5

Serbia 6.5

Seychelles 8

Sierra Leone 4.5

Singapore 9.5

Slovak Republic (Slovakia) 8.5

Slovenia 9

Solomon Islands 6.5-7

Somalia 2 Syria Review 2016 Page 257 of 540 pages Syria

Somalia 2

South Africa 7.5

Spain 9

Sri Lanka 5

Sudan 3

Suriname 5

Swaziland 5

Sweden 9.5

Switzerland 9.5

Syria 2

Tajikistan 4.5

Tanzania 6

Thailand 6

Togo 5

Tonga 7

Trinidad and Tobago 8

Tunisia 5

Turkey 7.5

Syria Review 2016 Page 258 of 540 pages Syria

Turkmenistan 5

Tuvalu 8.5

Uganda 6

Ukraine 3.5-4

United Arab Emirates 7

United Kingdom 9

United States 9

Uruguay 8.5

Uzbekistan 4

Vanuatu 8.5

Venezuela 4.5-5

Vietnam 4.5

Yemen 2.5

Zambia 5

Zimbabwe 3

*Methodology

The Political Stability Index is calculated by CountryWatch's Editor-in-Chief and is based on the combined scoring of varied criteria as follows --

Syria Review 2016 Page 259 of 540 pages Syria

1. record of peaceful transitions of power ( free and fair elections; adherence to political accords)

2. record of democratic representation, presence of instruments of democracy; systemic accountability

3. respect for human rights; respect for civil rights

4. strength of the system of jurisprudence, adherence to constitutional order, and good governance

5. ability of a government to stay in office and carry out its policies vis a vis risk credible risks of government collapse (i.e. government stability versus a country being deemed "ungovernable")

6. threat of coups, insurgencies, and insurrection

7. level of unchecked crime and corruption

8. risk of terrorism and other threats to national security

9. relationship with regional powers and international community; record of bilateral or multilateral cooperation

10. degree of economic strife (i.e. economic and financial challenges)

Editor's Note:

As of 2015, the current climate of upheaval internationally -- both politically and economically -- has affected the ratings for several countries across the world. The usual suspects -- North Korea, Afghanistan, and Somalia -- retain their low rankings. The reclusive and ultra-dictatorial North Korean regime, which has terrified the world with its nuclear threats, has exhibited internal instability. Of note was a cut-throat purge of hundreds of high ranking officials deemed to be a threat to Kim Jung-un. Despite their attempts to recover from years of lawlessness, war, and warlordism, both Afghanistan and Somalia continue to be beset by terrorism and turmoil. In Afghanistan, while international forces have seen success in the effort against the terror group, al- Qaida, the other Islamist extremist group, the Taliban, continues to carry out a vicious insurgency using terrorism. In Somalia, while the government attempts to do the nation's business, the terror group, al-Shabab continues to make its presence known not only in Somalia, but across the border into Kenya with devastating results/ Also in this category is Iraq, which continues to be rocked by horrific violence and terrorism at the hands of Islamic State, which has taken over wide swaths of Iraqi territory.

Syria Review 2016 Page 260 of 540 pages Syria

Syria, Libya, and Yemen have been added to this unfortunate echelon of the world's most politically unstable countries. Syria has been mired by the twin hazards of 1. a civil war as rebels oppose the Assad regime; and 2. the rampage of terror being carried out by Islamic State, which also seized control over vast portions of Syrian territory. Meanwhile, the post-Qaddhafi landscape of Libya has devolved into chaos as rival militias battle for control -- the elected government of the country notwithstanding. Rounding out this grim triad is Yemen, which was dealing with a Houthi rebellion, secesionists in the south, as well as the threat of terrorism from al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula as well as Islamic State, while also being the site of a proxy war between Shi'a Iran and Sunni Saudi Arabia.

Meanwhile, several Middle Eastern and North African countries, such as Tunisia, Egypt, and Bahrain were downgraded in recent years due to political instability occurring in the "season of unrest" sweeping the region since 2011 and continuing today. All three of these countries have stabilized in recent years and have been upgraded accordingly. In Bahrain, the landscape had calmed. In Egypt, the secular military-backed government has generated criticism for its crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood; however, the country had ratified the presidency via democratic elections and were on track to hold parliamentary elections as the country moved along the path of democratization. Perhaps the most impressive story was coming out of Tunisia -- the country whose Jasmine Revolution sparked the entire Arab Spring -- and where after a few years of strife, a new progressive constitution was passed into law and a secular government had been elected to power. Tunisia, Egypt, and Bahrain have seen slight upgrades as these countries stabilize.

In Africa, the Central African Republic was downgraded the previous year due to the takeover of the government by Muslim Seleka rebels. Although the country has been trying to emerge from this crisis, the fact of the matter was that it was difficult to halt the precipitous decline into lawlessness in that country. Zimbabwe has maintained its consistently poor ranking due to the dictatorial regime of Mugabe, who continues to hold a tight grip on power, intimidates the opposition, squashes dissent, and oppresses the white farmer population of the country. Moving in a slightly improved direction is Nigeria, which has sported abysmal ratings due to the government's fecklessness in dealing with the threat posed by the Islamist terror group, Boko Haram. Under its newly-elected government, there appears to be more of a concerted effort to make national security a priority action item. Mali was also slightly upgraded due to its efforts to return to constitutional order following the 2012 coup and to neutralize the threat of separatists and Islamists. Political instability has visited Burkina Faso and Burundi as the leaders of those countries attempted to side-step constitutional limits to hold onto power. In Burundi, an attempted coup ensued but quelled, and the president won a (questionable) new term in office; unrest has since punctuated the landscape. In Burkina Faso, the political climate has turned stormy as a result of a successful coup that ended the rule of the president, and then a putsch against the transitional government. These two African countries have been downgraded as a result.

Syria Review 2016 Page 261 of 540 pages Syria

It should be noted that the African country of South Sudan -- the world's newest nation state -- has not been officially included in this assessment; however, it can be unofficially assessed to be in the vicinity of "3" due to its manifold political and economic challenges. Guinea has endured poor rankings throughout, but was slightly downgraded further over fears of social unrest and the Ebola heath crisis.

In Europe, Ukraine was downgraded due to the unrest facing that country following its Maidan revolution that triggered a pro-Russian uprising in the eastern part of the country. Russia was also implicated in the Ukrainian crisis due to its intervention on behalf of pro-Russian separatists, as well as its annexation of the Ukrainian territory of Crimea. Serbia and Albania were slightly downgraded due to eruptions of unrest, while Romania was slightly downgraded on the basis of corruption charges against the prime minister. Spain, Portugal, Ireland, and Italy were downgraded due to debt woes and the concomitant effect on the euro zone. Greece, another euro zone nation, was downgraded the previous year due to its sovereign debt crisis; however, the country successfully forged a rescue deal with international creditors and stayed within the Euro zone. Greek voters rewarded the hitherto unknown upstart party at the polls for these efforts. As a result, Greece was actually upgraded slightly as it proved to the world that it could endure the political and economic storms. Meanwhile, Germany, France, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and the Scandinavian countries continue to post impressive ranking consistent with these countries' strong records of democracy, freedom, and peaceful transfers of power.

In Asia, Nepal was downgraded in response to continuous political instability well after landmark elections that prevails today. Cambodia was very slighly downgraded due to post-election instability that has resulted in occasional flares of violence. Despite the "trifecta of tragedy" in Japan in 2011 -- the earthquake, the ensuing tsunami, and the resulting nuclear crisis -- and the appreciable destabilization of the economic and political terrain therein, this country has only slightly been downgraded. Japan's challenges have been assessed to be transient, the government remains accountable, and there is little risk of default. Both India and China retain their rankings; India holds a slightly higher ranking than China due to its record of democratic representation and accountability. Increasing violence and political instability in Pakistan resulted in a downgrade for this country's already low rating.

In the Americas, Haiti retained its downgraded status due to ongoing political and economic woes. Mexico was downgraded due to its alarming rate of crime. Guatemala was downgraded due to charges of corruption, the arrest of the president, and uncertainty over the outcome of elections. Brazil was downgraded due to the corruption charges erupting on the political landscape, the stalling of the economy, and the increasingly loud calls for the impeachment of President Rousseff. Argentina was downgraded due to its default on debt following the failure of talks with bond holders. Venezuela was downgraded due to the fact that the country's post-Chavez government is every bit as autocratic and nationalistic, but even more inclined to oppress its political opponents. Colombia was upgraded slightly due to efforts aimed at securing a peace deal

Syria Review 2016 Page 262 of 540 pages Syria with the FARC insurgents. A small but significant upgrade was attributed to Cuba due to its recent pro-business reforms and its normalization of ties with the Unitd States. Meanwhile, the United States, Canada, Costa Rica, Panama, and most of the English-speaking countries of the Caribbean retain their strong rankings due to their records of stability and peaceful transfers of power.

In the Pacific, Fiji was upgraded due to its return to constitutional order and democracy with the holding of the first elections in eight years.

In Oceania, Maldives has been slightly downgraded due to the government's continued and rather relentless persecution of the country's former pro-democracy leader - former President Nasheed.

Source:

Dr. Denise Youngblood Coleman, Editor in Chief, CountryWatch Inc. www.countrywatch.com

Updated:

2015

Freedom Rankings

Freedom in the World

Editor's Note: This ranking by Freedom House quantifies political freedom and civil liberties into a single combined index on each sovereign country's level of freedom and liberty. The initials "PR" and "CL" stand for Political Rights and Civil Liberties, respectively. The number 1 represents the most free countries and the number 7 represents the least free. Several countries fall in the continuum in between. The freedom ratings reflect an overall judgment based on survey results.

Syria Review 2016 Page 263 of 540 pages Syria

Trend Country PR CL Freedom Status Arrow

Afghanistan 6 ? 6 Not Free

Albania* 3 3 Partly Free

Algeria 6 5 Not Free

Andorra* 1 1 Free

Angola 6 5 Not Free

Antigua and Barbuda* 3 ? 2 Free

Argentina* 2 2 Free

Armenia 6 4 Partly Free

Australia* 1 1 Free

Austria* 1 1 Free

Azerbaijan 6 5 Not Free

Bahamas* 1 1 Free

Bahrain 6 ? 5 Not Free ?

Bangladesh* 3 ? 4 Partly Free

Barbados* 1 1 Free

Belarus 7 6 Not Free

Belgium* 1 1 Free

Syria Review 2016 Page 264 of 540 pages Syria

Belize* 1 2 Free

Benin* 2 2 Free

Bhutan 4 5 Partly Free

Bolivia* 3 3 Partly Free

Bosnia-Herzegovina* 4 3 Partly Free

Botswana* 3 ? 2 Free

Brazil* 2 2 Free

Brunei 6 5 Not Free

Bulgaria* 2 2 Free

Burkina Faso 5 3 Partly Free

Burma 7 7 Not Free

Burundi* 4 5 Partly Free ⇑

Cambodia 6 5 Not Free ⇓

Cameroon 6 6 Not Free

Canada* 1 1 Free

Cape Verde* 1 1 Free

Central African Republic 5 5 Partly Free

Chad 7 6 Not Free

Syria Review 2016 Page 265 of 540 pages Syria

Chile* 1 1 Free

China 7 6 Not Free

Colombia* 3 4 Partly Free

Comoros* 3 4 Partly Free

Congo (Brazzaville ) 6 5 Not Free ⇓

Congo (Kinshasa) 6 6 Not Free ⇓

Costa Rica* 1 1 Free

Cote d’Ivoire 6 5 Not Free

Croatia* 1 ? 2 Free

Cuba 7 6 Not Free

Cyprus* 1 1 Free

Czech Republic* 1 1 Free

Denmark* 1 1 Free

Djibouti 5 5 Partly Free

Dominica* 1 1 Free

Dominican Republic* 2 2 Free ⇓

East Timor* 3 4 Partly Free

Ecuador* 3 3 Partly Free

Syria Review 2016 Page 266 of 540 pages Syria

Egypt 6 5 Not Free

El Salvador* 2 3 Free

Equatorial Guinea 7 7 Not Free

Eritrea 7 7 ? Not Free

Estonia* 1 1 Free

Ethiopia 5 5 Partly Free ⇓

Fiji 6 4 Partly Free

Finland* 1 1 Free

France* 1 1 Free

Gabon 6 5 ? Not Free ?

The Gambia 5 5 ? Partly Free

Georgia 4 4 Partly Free

Germany* 1 1 Free

Ghana* 1 2 Free

Greece* 1 2 Free

Grenada* 1 2 Free

Guatemala* 4 ? 4 Partly Free

Guinea 7 6 ? Not Free

Syria Review 2016 Page 267 of 540 pages Syria

Guinea-Bissau* 4 4 Partly Free

Guyana* 2 3 Free

Haiti* 4 5 Partly Free

Honduras 4 ? 4 ? Partly Free

Hungary* 1 1 Free

Iceland* 1 1 Free

India* 2 3 Free

Indonesia* 2 3 Free

Iran 6 6 Not Free ⇓

Iraq 5 ? 6 Not Free

Ireland* 1 1 Free

Israel* 1 2 Free

Italy* 1 2 Free

Jamaica* 2 3 Free

Japan* 1 2 Free

Jordan 6 ? 5 Not Free ?

Kazakhstan 6 5 Not Free ⇓

Kenya 4 4 ? Partly Free

Syria Review 2016 Page 268 of 540 pages Syria

Kiribati* 1 1 Free

Kosovo 5 ? 4 ? Partly Free ?

Kuwait 4 4 Partly Free

Kyrgyzstan 6 ? 5 ? Not Free ?

Laos 7 6 Not Free

Latvia* 2 1 Free

Lebanon 5 3 ? Partly Free

Lesotho* 3 ? 3 Partly Free ?

Liberia* 3 4 Partly Free

Libya 7 7 Not Free

Liechtenstein* 1 1 Free

Lithuania* 1 1 Free

Luxembourg* 1 1 Free

Macedonia* 3 3 Partly Free ⇑

Madagascar 6 ? 4 ? Partly Free

Malawi* 3 ? 4 Partly Free

Malaysia 4 4 Partly Free

Maldives* 3 ? 4 Partly Free

Syria Review 2016 Page 269 of 540 pages Syria

Mali* 2 3 Free

Malta* 1 1 Free ⇓

Marshall Islands* 1 1 Free

Mauritania 6 5 Not Free

Mauritius* 1 2 Free

Mexico* 2 3 Free

Micronesia* 1 1 Free

Moldova* 3 ? 4 Partly Free

Monaco* 2 1 Free

Mongolia* 2 2 Free ⇑

Montenegro* 3 2 ? Free ?

Morocco 5 4 Partly Free ⇓

Mozambique 4 ? 3 Partly Free

Namibia* 2 2 Free

Nauru* 1 1 Free

Nepal 4 4 Partly Free

Netherlands* 1 1 Free

New Zealand* 1 1 Free

Nicaragua* 4 4 ? Partly Free Syria Review 2016 Page 270 of 540 pages Syria

Nicaragua* 4 4 ? Partly Free

Niger 5 ? 4 Partly Free

Nigeria 5 4 Partly Free ⇓

North Korea 7 7 Not Free ⇓

Norway* 1 1 Free

Oman 6 5 Not Free

Pakistan 4 5 Partly Free

Palau* 1 1 Free

Panama* 1 2 Free

Papua New Guinea* 4 3 Partly Free

Paraguay* 3 3 Partly Free

Peru* 2 3 Free

Philippines 4 3 Partly Free ⇓

Poland* 1 1 Free

Portugal* 1 1 Free

Qatar 6 5 Not Free

Romania* 2 2 Free

Russia 6 5 Not Free ⇓

Syria Review 2016 Page 271 of 540 pages Syria

Rwanda 6 5 Not Free

Saint Kitts and Nevis* 1 1 Free

Saint Lucia* 1 1 Free

Saint Vincent and

Grenadines* 2 1 Free

Samoa* 2 2 Free

San Marino* 1 1 Free

Sao Tome and Principe* 2 2 Free

Saudi Arabia 7 6 Not Free

Senegal* 3 3 Partly Free

Serbia* 2 ? 2 Free

Seychelles* 3 3 Partly Free

Sierra Leone* 3 3 Partly Free

Singapore 5 4 Partly Free

Slovakia* 1 1 Free ⇓

Slovenia* 1 1 Free

Solomon Islands 4 3 Partly Free

Somalia 7 7 Not Free

South Africa* 2 2 Free

Syria Review 2016 Page 272 of 540 pages Syria

South Korea* 1 2 Free

Spain* 1 1 Free

Sri Lanka* 4 4 Partly Free

Sudan 7 7 Not Free

Suriname* 2 2 Free

Swaziland 7 5 Not Free

Sweden* 1 1 Free

Switzerland* 1 1 Free ⇓

Syria 7 6 Not Free

Taiwan* 1 ? 2 ? Free

Tajikistan 6 5 Not Free

Tanzania 4 3 Partly Free

Thailand 5 4 Partly Free

Togo 5 4 ? Partly Free

Tonga 5 3 Partly Free

Trinidad and Tobago* 2 2 Free

Tunisia 7 5 Not Free

Turkey* 3 3 Partly Free ⇓

Syria Review 2016 Page 273 of 540 pages Syria

Turkmenistan 7 7 Not Free

Tuvalu* 1 1 Free

Uganda 5 4 Partly Free

Ukraine* 3 2 Free

United Arab Emirates 6 5 Not Free

United Kingdom* 1 1 Free

United States* 1 1 Free

Uruguay* 1 1 Free

Uzbekistan 7 7 Not Free

Vanuatu* 2 2 Free

Venezuela 5 ? 4 Partly Free

Vietnam 7 5 Not Free ⇓

Yemen 6 ? 5 Not Free ?

Zambia* 3 4 ? Partly Free

Zimbabwe 6 ? 6 Not Free

Methodology: PR and CL stand for political rights and civil liberties, respectively; 1 represents the most free and 7 the least free rating. The ratings reflect an overall judgment based on survey results.

? ? up or down indicates a change in political rights, civil liberties, or status since the last survey.

Syria Review 2016 Page 274 of 540 pages Syria

⇑ ⇓ up or down indicates a trend of positive or negative changes that took place but that were not sufficient to result in a change in political rights or civil liberties ratings of 1-7.

* indicates a country’s status as an electoral democracy.

Source:

This data is derived from the latest edition of Freedom House’s Freedom in the World 2010 edition. Available at URL: http://www.freedomhouse.org

Updated:

Reviewed in 2015

Human Rights

Human Rights in Syria

Overview

The Syrian Arab Republic has a poor human rights record. There is widespread government corruption and a lack of transparency. Rule of law is also limited. As well, citizens of Syria have no right or ability to change the government.

In 1963, the Syrian government imposed emergency rule which continues today. Emergency rule has allowed the government to detain thousands of suspected political opponents without charge or trial, to arrest and detain human rights activists for "carrying out acts which could incite factional conflict in the nation." The London-based Syrian Human Rights Committee (SHRC) estimates 4,000 political prisoners are being held. The State of Emergency also allows the government to restrict freedoms of religion, speech, expression, press, assembly, association, and movement.

In recent years, numerous people with suspected ties to Islamist groups are often harassed, arrested, detained and tortured for extended periods of time.

Hundreds of prisoners of conscience remain in prolonged incommunicado detention without trial.

Syria Review 2016 Page 275 of 540 pages Syria

Many more are serving sentences imposed following unfair trials.

Other criminal detainees are subjected to torture and beatings. The security forces who perpetrate these actions do so with impunity. In the last year, several people died at the hands of security forces in questionable circumstances.

Kurds, who are the largest non-Arab ethnic minority in Syria, are the victims of systemic discrimination. Some 120,000 Syrian-born Kurds are currently denied citizenship. Security forces in Syria often use excessive force against Kurds, which often results in severe injuries and sometimes death.

Special Report on Unrest in Syria

Summary

Since early 2011, anti-government protests have spread and escalated across the Arab world; Syria emerged as an addition to the list of countries experiencing unrest in March 2011. At first, protesters stopped short of demanding the resignation of President Bashar al-Assad, instead demanding greater political freedom and efforts to end corruption. For his part, President Assad announced he would advance a reform agenda, which would include lifting the emergency laws that had been in place for decades, and increased rights to the country's disenfranchised Kurdish population. These moves were aimed at quelling the rising climate of unrest gripping the country. But over time, as protests continued, and as the Assad regime carried out a hard line crackdown on dissent, tensions escalated between the government and the protesters.

Syria has, meanwhile, been subject to sanctions by various countries and was sliding into pariah status in the international community. Assassinations, alleged massacres, geopolitical tensions with

Syria Review 2016 Page 276 of 540 pages Syria

Turkey and Israel, and most recently, suspicions about the use of chemical weapons, have since mired the Syrian landscape. Indeed, it was increasingly clear that Syria had slipped into a state of civil war and was facing a devastating humanitarian crisis. That crisis reached new heights in August 2013 with claims that Syrian forces launched a chemical attack on the outskirts of Damascus. Was this the clear sign that United States President Barack Obama's "red line" had definitively been crossed? And would the international community become more involved in the Syrian crisis? Would the September 2013 chemical weapons deal with Syria between the United States and Russia quiet the war drums? Would Syria actually abide by its international obligations set forth in that agreement? The answers to those questions were yet to be determined. In the meanwhile, the highly anticipated peace summit in Geneva ended without yielding any productive results.

NOTE: See "Political Condition" for details related to the "Season of Unrest" that rocked Syria in 2011, including the hardline crackdown on anti-government protesters by the Assad regime.

Editor's Note on Humanitarian Crisis:

In a separate but related development, Human Rights Watch reported that Syrian troops were laying down land mines near the borders with Turkey and Lebanon. It should be noted that these border regions have recently become escape paths for Syrians trying to flee the bloodshed. Thus, the planting of land mines in such areas could possibly be interpreted as the Syrian government's desire to punish civilians for trying to escape. Massacres and extra-judicial executions by government forces and rebels respectively, in addition to the allegations in 2013 of the use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime, only accentuate the climate of human rights abuse plaguing conflict-ridden Syria.

Since the conflict between anti-government protesters and the Assad regime broke out at the start of 2011, the number of people who have perished in Syria was reported to be a shocking 60,000,

Syria Review 2016 Page 277 of 540 pages Syria according to a study released by the United Nations at the start of 2013. Note that the death toll was later increased to 70,000, and again revised to 93,000 in June 2013. Note that at the close of July 2013, the death toll since the start of the war in Syria stood at 100,000.

United Nations Human Rights Commissioner Navi Pillay was on the record characterizing the bloodshed in Syria as "truly shocking." In 2013, the fact of the matter was that in addition to the 100,000 dead since the start of the war in 2011, there were as many as millions of displaced persons within Syria due to the ravages of the war, with even more millions fleeing their homes for neighboring countries in order to escape the crossfire of violence. As well, more than 2.5 million Syrians were in need of humanitarian assistance with as many as one million Syrians going hungry due to the inability of aid agencies to deliver food, according to the World Food Program. As succinctly stated by United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon: "The status quo in Syria is indefensible."

Note: As of 2014, Syria had replaced Afghanistan as the source of the world's largest refugee population. As well, a the United Nations commission of inquiry concluded that war crimes had been committed on both sides of the Syrian civil war; the commission of inquiry blamed world powers for allowing the Syrian regime and the rebel movement to respectively function with impunity.

Human Development Index (HDI) Rank:

Syria Review 2016 Page 278 of 540 pages Syria

See full listing of the Human Development Index located in the Social Overview of this report for this country's current rank.

Human Poverty Index Rank:

45th out of 103

Gini Index:

N/A

Life Expectancy at Birth (years):

70.9 years

Unemployment Rate:

12.3%

Population living on $1 a day (%):

N/A

Population living on $2 a day (%):

N/A

Population living beneath the Poverty Line (%):

20%

Internally Displaced People:

170,000 (likely to have changed since the 2011-2012 crackdown on protesters)

Syria Review 2016 Page 279 of 540 pages Syria

Note- Some 446,000 refugees, mainly Palestinian, are currently seeking asylum in Syria

Total Crime Rate (%):

N/A

Health Expenditure (% of GDP):

Public: 2.3%

% of GDP Spent on Education:

4.0%

Human Rights Conventions Party to:

• International Convention on the Prevention and Punishment and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide • International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination • International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights • International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights • Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women • Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment • Conventions on the Rights of the Child • Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Signed but not yet ratified)

*Human Development Index (HDI) is a composite index that measures the level of well-being in 177 nations in the world. It uses factors such as poverty, literacy, life-expectancy, education, gross domestic product, and purchasing power parity to assess the average achievements in each nation. It has been used in the United Nation’s Human Development Report since 1993.

*Human Poverty Index Ranking is based on certain indicators used to calculate the Human Poverty Index. Probability at birth of not surviving to age 40, adult literacy rate, population without sustainable access to an improved water source, and population below income poverty line are the indicators assessed in this measure.

*The Gini Index measures inequality based on the distribution of family income or consumption. A value of 0 represents perfect equality (income being distributed equally), and a value of 100 perfect

Syria Review 2016 Page 280 of 540 pages Syria inequality (income all going to one individual).

*The calculation of the total crime rate is the % of the total population which has been effected by property crime, robbery, sexual assault, assault, or bribery (corruption) related occurrences.

Government Functions

Constitution--

The Syrian constitution promulgated on March 13, 1973, vests the Arab Baath Socialist Party with leadership functions in the state and society, and provides broad powers to the president. The president, approved by referendum for a seven-year term, has the right to appoint ministers, to declare war and states of emergency, to issue laws (which, except in the case of emergency, require ratification by the People's Council) to declare amnesty, to amend the constitution, to appoint civil servants and military personnel, and to approve the state's five-year economic plans.

Note: The Assad regime pushed through constitutional reforms in 2012 aimed to tamp down mass unrest in Syria; see "Political Conditions" for details.

Presidency --

Although Syria's political system includes some institutions of democratic government, such as a parliament, the presidency remains the seat of almost absolute authority. The president, in consultation with a small cadré of Baath Party advisers, enacts domestic, international, and military policy decisions.

Parliament --

The parliament, called the People's Council or Majlis al-Shaab, is comprised of members of the ruling Baath Party, in conjunction with members of a limited number of other parties who coalesced to form a coalition called the National Progressive Fort (NPF). The parliament does not initiate legislation; it votes on and sometimes modifies laws proposed by the executive branch.

Syria Review 2016 Page 281 of 540 pages Syria

Judiciary --

At the judicial level, the Syrian constitution stipulates that although the president must be a Muslim, Islam is not officially the state religion. Islamic jurisprudence, however, is required to be the main source of legislation. Some elements of Ottoman and French law are also included. As such Islamic law guides the Syrian court system, and religious courts handle questions of personal and family law.

Party Politics --

Despite the appearance of a multi-party system under this guise, the Baath Party is guaranteed a majority in the parliament under the constitution. These other parties simply augment the Baath Party's primacy, and do not represent any opposing interests. In essence, they exercise little independent power and authority.

The Baath Party emphasizes socialism and secular Arabism. Although Baath Party doctrine seeks to build national rather than ethnic identity, ethnic, religious and regional allegiances remain important in Syria.

All three branches of government are guided by the view of the Baath party, whose platform is proclaimed succinctly in the party's slogan: "Unity, freedom, and socialism." The party is both socialist-advocating state ownership of the means of industrial production and the redistribution of agricultural land - and revolutionary, dedicated to carrying a socialist revolution to every part of the Arab world.

Founded in 1946 by Michel Aflag, a Syrian Christian, and Salah al-Din al-Bitar, a Syrian Sunni Muslim, the Baath Party embraces secularism and has attracted supporters of all faiths in many Arab countries, especially Iraq, Jordan and Lebanon. Since August 1990, however, the party has tended to de-emphasize socialism and to stress pan-Arab unity.

Government Structure

Syria Review 2016 Page 282 of 540 pages Syria

Names: conventional long form: Syrian Arab Republic (Al Jumhuriyah al-Arabiyah as-Suriyah) conventional short form: Syria (Suriyah) former: United Arab Republic (with Egypt)

Type: Republic under military regime since March 1963

Executive Branch: Chief of state: President Bashar al-ASAD (since July 2000); Vice Presidents Abd al-Halim ibn Said KHADDAM (since March 1984) and Muhammad Zuhayr MASHARIQA (since March 1984)

Note: Hafiz al-ASAD died on June 10, 2000; on June 20, 2000, the Ba'th Party nominated Bashar al- ASAD for president and presented his name to the People's Council on June 25, 2000

Primer on 2014 presidential election in Syria June 3, 2014 --

Syria Review 2016 Page 283 of 540 pages Syria take place under such conditions.

On the domestic front, Monzer Akbik of the Western-backed National Coalition opposition group, criticized the notion of an election at this time, saying of Assad in an interview with Reuters, "This is a state of separation from reality, a state of denial. He didn't have any legitimacy before this theatrical election and he will not after...We do not know what actor he is putting up as an opponent but we are not taking this seriously." At the international level, governments in the West and in the Middle East pilloried the very notion of a Syrian presidential vote taking place during an active state of civil war, referring to it as a "parody of democracy." The European Union dispatched a statement asserting that a presidential vote "conducted in the midst of conflict, only in regime-controlled areas and with millions of Syrians displaced from their homes would be a parody of democracy, have no credibility whatsoever, and undermine efforts to reach a political solution."

Note that at the start of May 2014, the Syrian Supreme Constitutional Court announced that it had validated the candidacies for three candidates for the presidency, including President Bashar al- Assad, Hassan Abdallah al-Nouri, and Maher Abdel-Hafiz Hajjar. Neither Hassan Abdallah al- Nouri nor Maher Abdel-Hafiz Hajjar was expected to pose a serious threat to Bashar al-Assad, making the election something of a farce in the eyes of observers. There was no doubt about Assad's re-election irrespective of the growing outrage over the government's new "reconstruction" tax. The new charge, which appeared on utilities bills, was intended to be used for the rebuilding of the infrastructure the Assad government was systematically destroying in the war. The irony was not lost on many soldiers who could not comprehend being ordered to bomb a building and then be charged for its reconstruction.

The fairness of the election was also an issue with Syrians who took refuge from the civil war in Lebanon being told that they would lose their refugee status if they crossed the border back into Syria. With as many as a million Syrian refugees in Lebanon, the election in Syria would likely lack the participation of a key constituency with high stakes in the matter of who would rule Syria. In truth, however, the election was not a competitive contest and most of these refugees likely made the calculation that there was no good reason to risk losing their refugee status to re-enter a war zone and to vote in an election where the outcome was pre-determined.

On June 3, 2014, after the election transpired in Syria, Bashar al-Assad was declared to be the landslide winner of the presidential election with 89 percent of the vote share. Assad's

Syria Review 2016 Page 284 of 540 pages Syria challengers, al-Nouri and Hajjar, received 4.3 percent and 3.2 percent of the vote respectively. The Syrian capital Damascus -- an Assad stronghold -- erupted into celebration after the results were announced. However, the election was being regarded with cynicism from other quarters. A coalition of Islamist rebel fighters described the voting process as "Elections of Blood" and condemned it as having no legitimacy. At the international level, the European Union issued a statement criticizing the election and noting that it could not be considered "a genuinely democratic vote." United States Secretary of State John Kerry issued a more scathing rebuke as he declared: "They [the Syrian presidential elections] are meaningless, and they are meaningless because you can’t have an election where millions of your people don’t even have the ability to vote, where they don’t have the ability to contest the election, and they have no choice."

Note on Executive Government: The president appoints the vice presidents, prime minister, and deputy prime ministers

Head of Government: Prime Minister Wael al-HALQI (since August 2012)

Cabinet: Council of Ministers was appointed by then Prime Minister Utri in mid-September 2003

Legislative Branch: Unicameral System: People's Council ("Majlis al-Shaab"); 250 seats; members elected by popular vote to serve four- year terms

Brief note on Syria's parliamentary elections: May 7, 2012 --

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad issued a presidential decree announcing the holding of parliamentary elections on May 7, 2012. At stake would be the 250 seats in parliament, which actually expired in March 2011 but were extended in accordance with the country's new constitution. A referendum ratified the new constitution, which contained a general elections bill and was intended to tamp down the brewing unrest in Syria. Instead, Syria has devolved into a state of massive turmoil with pro-Assad security forces carrying out a brutal crackdown against opposition forces and activists in that country.

President Assad's announcement regarding these elections has done little to quell the outrage emanating from the international community over his treatment of the political opposition in Syria. The United States wasted little time in dismissing the news as pointless. State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland, said: "Parliamentary elections for a rubber-stamp Parliament in the

Syria Review 2016 Page 285 of 540 pages Syria middle of the kind of violence that we're seeing across the country is ridiculous."

Despite violent unrest and rebellion by anti-government protesters, a violent crackdown by the Assad regime, and the presence of international monitors in Syria, that country was headed for parliamentary elections on May 7, 2012. Syria's Interior Ministry said that the government had taken all necessary measured to ensure that the voting went off in a safe and secure manner.

Judicial Branch: Supreme Judicial Council (appoints and dismisses judges; headed by the president); national level - Supreme Constitutional Court (adjudicates electoral disputes and rules on constitutionality of laws and decrees; justices appointed for four-year terms by the President); Court of Cassation; Appeals Courts (Appeals Courts represent an intermediate level between the Court of Cassation and local level courts); local level - Magistrate Courts; Courts of First Instance; Juvenile Courts; Customs Courts; specialized courts - Economic Security Courts (hear cases related to economic crimes); Supreme State Security Court (hear cases related to national security); Personal Status Courts (religious; hear cases related to marriage and divorce)

Constitution: March 12, 1973; note that the Assad regime pushed through constitutional reforms in 2012 aimed to tamp down mass unrest in Syria; see "Political Conditions" for details.

Legal System: Based on Islamic (Sharia) law and civil law system. Special religious courts. Syria has not accepted compulsory ICJ jurisdiction

Administrative Divisions: 14 provinces (muhafazat, singular - muhafazah); al-Hasakah, al-Ladhiqiyah, al-Qunaytirah, ar- Raqqah, as-Suwayda, Dara, Dayr az-Zawr, Dimashq, Halab, Hamah, Hims, Idlib, Rif Dimashq, Tartus

Suffrage: 18 years of age; universal

Political Parties and Leaders: Legal parties:

Syria Review 2016 Page 286 of 540 pages Syria

National Progressive Front or NPF [President Bashar al-ASAD, Dr. Suleiman QADDAH] (includes Arab Socialist Renaissance Ba'th) Party [President Bashar al-ASAD] Socialist Unionist Democratic Party [Fadlallah Nasr al-DIN] Syrian Arab Socialist Union or ASU [Safwan al-QUDSI] Syrian Communist Party (two branches) [Wissal Farha BAKDASH, Yusuf Rashid FAYSAL] Syrian Social Nationalist Party [As'ad HARDAN] Unionist Socialist Party [Fayez ISMAIL])

Kurdish parties (considered illegal): Kurdish Azadi Party Kurdish Democratic Accord Party (al Wifaq) Kurdish Democratic Party (al Parti-Ibrahim wing) Kurdish Democratic Party (al Parti-Mustafa wing) Kurdish Democratic Party in Syria or KDP-S Kurdish Democratic Patriotic/National Party Kurdish Democratic Progressive Party or KDPP-Darwish Kurdish Democratic Progressive Party or KDPP-Muhammad Kurdish Democratic Union Party or PYD [Salih Muslim MOHAMMAD] Kurdish Democratic Unity Party Kurdish Democratic Yekiti Party Kurdish Future Party or KFP Kurdish Future Party [Rezan HASSAN] Kurdish Left Party Kurdish Yekiti (Union) Party Syrian Kurdish Democratic Party other parties: Syrian Democratic Party [Mustafa QALAAJI]

Political Pressure Groups: Free Syrian Army Al Nusra Front Syrian Muslim Brotherhood or SMB [Muhammad Riyad al-SHAQFAH] (operates in exile in London) Syrian Opposition Coalition or National Coalition of Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces [al-Asi- al-JARBAL]

Contact Information:

Syria Review 2016 Page 287 of 540 pages Syria

Permanent Representative of the Syrian Arab Republic to the United Nations 820 Second Avenue, 15th Floor New York, NY 10017 Phone: (212) 661-1313 / Fax: (212) 983-4439

Embassy of the Syrian Arab Republic 2215 Wyoming Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20008 Phone: (202) 232-6313 /Fax: (202) 234-9548

Principal Government Officials

Leadership and Cabinet

Pres. Bashar al-ASAD Vice Pres. Najah al-ATTAR Prime Min. Wael al-HALQI Dep. Prime Min. Walid al-MUALEM Dep. Prime Min. for Services Affairs Umar Ibrahim GHALAWANJI Min. of Admin. Development Hassan al-NURI Min. of Agriculture Ahmad al-QADRI Min. of Culture Issam KHALIL Min. of Defense Fahd Jasim al-FURAYJ, Lt. Gen. Min. of Domestic Trade & Consumer Protection Hassan SAFIYAH Min. of Economy & Foreign Trade Humam al-JAZIRI Min. of Education Hazwan al-WAZZ Min. of Electricity Imad Muhammad Deeb KHAMIS Min. of Finance Ismail ISMAIL Min. of Foreign & Expatriate Affairs Walid al-MUALEM Min. of Health Nizar Wehbe YAZIJI Min. of Higher Education Muhammad Amer MARDINI Min. of Housing & Urban Development Muhammad Walid GHAZAL Min. of Industry Kamal al-Din TUMAH Min. of Information Umran Ahid al-ZA'BI Min. of the Interior Muhammad Ibrahim al-SHA'AR, Maj. Gen. Min. of Justice Najim Hamad al-AHMAD Min. of Labor Khalaf Sleiman al-ABDULLAH

Syria Review 2016 Page 288 of 540 pages Syria

Min. of Local Admin. Umar Ibrahim GHALAWANJI Min. of Petroleum & Mineral Wealth Suleiman al-ABBAS Min. of Presidential Affairs Mansur Fadlallah AZZAM Min. of Public Works Hussein ARNUS Min. of Religious Endowments Muhammad Abd al-Sattar al-SAYYID Min. of Social Affairs Kinda al-SHAMMAT Min. of Telecommunication & Technology Muhammad Ghazi al-JALALI Min. of Tourism Bashar Riyad YAZIGI Min. of Transport Ghazqan KHAYRBIK Min. of Water Resources Kamal al-SHAYKHAH, Dr. Min. of State Abdallah Khalil HUSAYN Min. of State Muhammad Muti'a MUAYYAD, Dr. Min. of State Jamal Shaaban SHAHEEN Min. of State Hasib Elias SHAMMAS Min. of State for Environmental Affairs Nazira Farah SARKIS Min. of State for National Reconciliation Affairs Ali HAYDAR Governor, Central Bank Adib MAYALAH Ambassador to the US Permanent Representative to the UN, New York Bashar al-JAFARI

-- as of 2015

Leader Biography

Biographical Data

Name: Bashar al-Asad Date of Birth: September 11, 1965

Syria Review 2016 Page 289 of 540 pages Syria

Place of Birth: Damascus Civil Status: Married Children: None

Education

1982 Graduated from Secondary School 1982-88 Medical Studies, University of Damascus 1988-92 Specialization in ophthalmology at a military hospital 1992-1994 Further specialization in ophthalmology in London 1994-2000 Military training in Syria

Previous Positions

1997 Lt. Col. and Commander of Elite Republican Guards 1999 Promoted to Colonel 2000 General and Commander-in-Chief of Armed Forces 2000 Secretary-General of Syrian Baath Party

Present Positions

2000 President of Syria

NOTE: --

Syria Review 2016 Page 290 of 540 pages Syria overwhelmingly re-elected in that political event, as discussed in the "Political Conditions" and "Government Structure" sections of this Country Review.

Foreign Relations

General Relations

Syria was an active belligerent in the 1967 Arab-Israeli war which, for Syria's part, resulted in Israeli occupation of the Golan Heights and the city of Quneitra. Following the October 1973 Arab- Israeli war, which left Israel in occupation of additional Syrian territory, Syria accepted United Nations (U.N.) Security Council Resolution 338, which signaled an implicit acceptance of Resolution 242.

Resolution 242, which became the basis for the peace process negotiations begun in Madrid, calls for a just and lasting Middle East peace to include withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in 1967, termination of the state of belligerency and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and political independence of all regional states and of their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries. To date, the Middle East-including Syria- continues to grapple with this issue.

Syria was a non-permanent member in the United Nations Security Council in 2002.

See "Special Note" below on Syria's 2010 announcement that it intended to pursue a civilian nuclear program.

See "Special Note" below on the 2011-2014 unrest that has gripped Syria, with international implications.

See "Special Note" below on 2012 incident involving Syria shooting down a Turkish fighter jet.

Regional Relations

Israel

Syria Review 2016 Page 291 of 540 pages Syria

In December 1981, the Israeli Knesset voted to extend Israeli law to the part of the Golan Heights over which Israel retained control. The U.N. Security Council subsequently passed a resolution calling on Israel to rescind this measure.

In October 1991, Syria participated in the Middle East Peace Conference in Madrid. After Madrid, negotiations, based on 'land-for-peace,' between the Rabin government in Israel and Syria proceeded. The talks broke down due to a combination of factors. In particular, the election of a right-wing government in Israel in 1996, and the subsequent hard-line stance toward Israeli settlements in the occupied territories, together exacerbated relations between Israel and Syria. Relations deteriorated further due to Syria's refusal to condemn the suicide bomb attacks within Israel by Arab extremists. Despite increasing pressure from the international community to return the Golan Heights to Syria, the Netanyahu government's opposition to the 'land-for-peace' strategy left negotiations virtually at a standstill. With the election of Israel's new Barak-led government, it was hoped that the peace process might unfold more smoothly than in the past. In early 2000, Syrian-Israeli peace talks were held, but broke down due to Syria's insistence on full withdrawal from the Golan Heights, and Israel's unwillingness to comply with this demand.

The election of Ariel Sharon as Israel's new prime minister on Feb. 6, 2001, was described as a 'declaration of war' by official Syrian newspapers. Sharon's military record, and in particular his responsibility for the Sabra and Chatila massacres in Lebanon (when he was Israel's Minister of Defense) makes him a hated man in Arab countries, and in Lebanon and Syria in particular. Sharon is also blamed for provoking the latest surge in violence when he visited the Temple Mount ("Haram al-Sharif) on Sept. 28, 2000, sparking the second Palestinian Intifada. With Sharon on the other side of the negotiation table, the symbolical threshold for Syrian officials to approach the negotiation table has become significantly higher. The Syrians continue to insist on full Israeli withdrawal from all Arab occupied territories back to the June 4, 1967, borderline, and has expressed little hope for the prospect of peace under the new Israeli government.

Syria has strongly and continuously condemned Israeli actions against the Palestinians in the ongoing violence. In early December 2001, Syria called for a urgent meeting for Arab foreign ministers to deal with the escalated situation in the occupied Palestinian territories. Despite the hostile relationship with Israel, the aftermath of the terrorist attacks on the United States (U.S.) on Sept. 11, has created a climate where Israel and Syria might in the longer term resume negotiations.

In addition to a hostile relationship to Israel, Syria and the Palestinian Authorities have a strained relationship. Beginning with Syrian involvement in Lebanon, where Syrian forces engaged in fierce fighting with Arafat's PLO fighters, Syria furthermore rejected the 1993 Oslo Accords signed between Israel and the Palestinian. Damascus also hosts several Palestinian opposition groups. In addition, the Palestinian leader Yassir Arafat has shown a clear preference for ties with Egypt over

Syria Review 2016 Page 292 of 540 pages Syria ties to Syria. Arafat was scheduled to travel to Syria in mid-September 2001, but continued strained relations between the two parties, in addition to the terror attacks on the U.S., led to the cancellation of the visit.

Syria denounced the Israel offensive into the Palestinian territories in 2002. While Syria has publicly condemned terrorism, it also has described Israeli military actions as terrorism and concluded that the struggle against a foreign occupation does not consitute as terrorist activity.

In 2006, Syria was being implicated as a state-sponsor of Hezbollah's terrorist activities from Lebanon into Israel. The matter took on significant proportions after Hezbollah kidnapped two Israeli soldiers and carried out systematic rocket attacks on Israel, thus sparking a harsh retaliatory offensive by Israel.

In the third week of September 2007, Israeli opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu appeared to acknowledge Syrian claims that Israel carried out an air strike on its terrain two weeks prior. On Israel television, Netanyahu said he had expressed kudos to Prime Minister Ehud Olmert for taking that action. He said, "When a prime minister does something that is important in my view and necessary to Israel's security... I give my backing." Netanyahu's claim was met with criticism since the Israeli government had been exercising a policy of silence on the issue, which the opposition leader violated.

In June 2008, the United Nations nuclear watchdog agency, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) deployed a team of inspectors to investigate claims that Syria is building a nuclear reactor. The IAEA team was expected to investigate al-Kibar in the desert region of northern Syria where Israel carried out an air raid in 2007 and left in ruins. While Israel claimed that a nuclear plant was to be constructed at al-Kibar, Syria said the site was simply an unused military location. For its part, Syria has denied Israel claims that it is constructing nuclear facilities and has cooperated with the IAEA's investigation. IAEA head Mohammed ElBaradei urged Syria to be fully compliant with the demands of the IAEA inspectors. He also noted there was little evidence suggesting that Syria possessed the human resources to create a nuclear program.

Syria Review 2016 Page 293 of 540 pages Syria

June 2008 also saw Israel and Syria engage in indirect peace talks. Representatives of Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert met with a Syrian delegation in the Turkish capital city of Ankara.

Previous peace talks between the two sides have devolved, largely as a result of the thorny matter of the Golan Heights, which has been under Israeli military control at the end of the Arab-Israeli war in 1967. Israeli settlement into this previously-Syrian area then followed. Syria made an unsuccessful attempt to retake the Golan Heights during the 1973 Middle East war. A year later in 1974, an armistice was signed and a United Nations observer force was established at the ceasefire line. In this way, the 1967 borders have been an enduring issue as regards Middle Eastern peace. The Syrian government has said that no peace talks can be resumed in full without a discussion of the Golan Heights. Syria has demanded that the Golan Heights be returned to its fold.

On the other side of the equation, however, Israel has insisted that Syria halt its support for militants in Lebanon and in the Palestinian territories. To that end, Syria has been linked with Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Palestenian territories. Both groups have posed a grave threat to Israel's security, and have been blamed for terror attacks against Israelis.

In June 2011, Israeli soldiers opened fired on pro-Palestinian protesters in the Golan Heights, an area of Syria occupied by Israel. According to Syrian media sources, up to 20 people were killed and more than 300 were wounded as the pro-Palestinian protesters marked the anniversary of the 1967 war. For its part, Israel said that warnings were shouted in Arabic, as well as warning shots being fired in the air, before soldiers opened fire at the legs of the protesters and used tear gas to disperse the crowds. Israeli military said that there had been only 12 injuries as a result of confrontation. A similar incident occurred the month prior as Palestinians from Syria entered the Golan Heights, sparking violence and compelling Israeli forces to fire on the protesters, leaving at least a dozen people dead at that time. Israel said at the time that there would respond to future marches of this type, and since then Israeli Prime Minister BenjaminNetanyahu warned that "extremists" would not be allowed to breach Israel's borders.

The flare of violence in that strategic region came at a time when the Assad regime in Syria was experiencing mass anti-government protests. There have been suggestions that the scenario unfolding at the Golan Heights might be linked with the Assad regime's desire to deflect attention from the internal strife plaguing that country. See "Political Conditions" for details. As noted in

Syria Review 2016 Page 294 of 540 pages Syria

May 2011 by an Israeli official in an interview with Agence France Presse: "Syria is a police state. Demonstrators do not randomly approach the border without the prior approval of the central government." That being said, violence had already broken out at crossing points in other areas -- in the West Bank and at the border with Lebanon, in addition to the Golan Heights. In those cases, Palestinians hurled stones atIsraeli security forces, who responded with tear gas and rubber bullets. As protesters tried to cross a checkpoint at Gaza, sparking clashes, Israeli forces opened fire. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called for the quick return of "calm and quiet" but warned that Israel's borders and sovereignty would be protected.

Meanwhile, as discussed below, May 2011 saw the emergence of a report by the United Nations watchdog nuclear agency, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), in which it was reported that a Syrian facility allegedly bombed by Israel four years prior was probably a nuclear reactor that had been constructed in covert fashion.

Lebanon

In addition to playing a key role in the Arab-Israeli conflict, Syria has also been extensively involved in Lebanon, by virtue of its history, size, power and economy. Lebanon was part of post- Ottoman Syria until 1926, when the French established Lebanon as a separate nation. The presence of Syrian troops in Lebanon dates to 1976, when President Assad intervened in the Lebanese civil war on behalf of Maronite Christians.

Following the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon, Syrian and Israeli forces clashed in eastern Lebanon. The late U.S. Ambassador Philip Habib negotiated a cease-fire in Lebanon and the subsequent evacuation of PLO fighters from West Beirut.

Syrian opposition, however, blocked implementation of the May 17, 1983, Lebanese-Israeli accord on the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon. Following the February 1984 withdrawal of the U.N. Multinational Force from Beirut, as well as the departure of most of Israel's forces from southern Lebanon a year later, Syria launched an unsuccessful initiative to reconcile warring Lebanese factions and establish a permanent cease-fire.

Syria actively participated in the March-September 1989 fighting between the Christian Lebanese Forces and Muslim forces allied with Syria. In 1989, Syria endorsed the Charter of National Reconciliation, or "Taif Accord," a comprehensive plan for ending the Lebanese conflict negotiated under the auspices of Saudi Arabia, Algeria and Morocco.

At the request of Lebanese President Hrawi, the Syrian military took joint action with the Lebanese Armed Forces on Oct. 13, 1990, to oust rebel General Michel Aoun who had established a Christian-dominated government in East Beirut. General Aoun defied efforts at reconciliation

Syria Review 2016 Page 295 of 540 pages Syria with the government of Salim al-Hoss in West Beirut. The process of disarming and disbanding the many Lebanese militias began in earnest in early 1991.

In May 1991, Lebanon and Syria signed the treaty of brotherhood, cooperation and coordination called for in the Taif Accord which is intended to provide the basis for many aspects of Syrian- Lebanese relations. The treaty provides the most explicit recognition to date by the Syrian government of Lebanon's independence and sovereignty.

According to the U.S. interpretation of the Taif Accord, Syria and Lebanon were to have decided on the redeployment of Syrian forces from Beirut and other coastal areas of Lebanon by September 1992. However, Syrian troops continued to be stationed in Lebanon. The Lebanese elections in August and September 2000, produced yet another pro-Syrian parliament, but saw a campaign which for the first time included strong calls for the reassessment of Syria's role in Lebanon.

The failure of the Syrian-Israeli peace process, the Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon in May and the death of Hafez al-Assad in June 2000, intensified the public debate on Syrian patronage and forces in Lebanon. Disaffection with Syria's meddling in Lebanese politics was openly expressed in newspapers and became part of the public debate, culminating with a call by the Council of Maronite Archbishops for a Syrian withdrawal in September 2000. Long advocated by the Christian opposition in Lebanon, the questioning of the Syrian presence and influence in Lebanon, was also capitalized on by Druze leader Walid Jumblatt, who forged an unprecedented alliance with Christian politicians. However, the majority of the Syrian-backed political establishment, and in particular Lebanese President Emile Lahoud, remained firm in their support for Syria. In response to growing antipathy towards Syria in Lebanon, around 50 Lebanese prisoners were released from Syrian jails and sent to Lebanon in January 2001. However, several hundred Lebanese are still believed to be held in Syrian jails.

Public criticism of the Syrian military presence continued throughout the spring and early summer months of 2001. In mid-June a week-long withdrawal of around 7,000 Syrian soldiers from areas in and around the Lebanese capital began. The move was designed to strengthen the Lebanese president, appease the political establishment and improve Syria's image abroad. While the removal of Syrian troops from Beirut and around Lebanese governmental institutions was of significant symbolic importance, it has not reduced Syria's meddling in Lebanon's politics, economy and internal security apparatus. Most of the 7,000 troops were merely redeployed within Lebanon, the presence of Syrian plainclothes intelligence agents is as omnipotent as before, and Syrian political influence Lebanon is secured through the same channels as before. Nevertheless, this redeployment is a turning point in Lebanese-Syrian relations.

The foreign relations of Syria, Lebanon and Israel are closely connected. Syrian forces have been in Lebanon since 1976, and Syria continues to be the major power-broker in Lebanon. Israel

Syria Review 2016 Page 296 of 540 pages Syria invaded south Lebanon in 1978 and 1982, and did not end its occupation until May 2000. Israel's withdrawal stripped Syria of one its main bargain cards in the Middle East peace negotiations. Israel holds Syria accountable for what is going on in Lebanon. The role of the Lebanese resistance group Hezbollah and the disputed area of the Shebaa farms is a major source tensions between the three countries. Israel and the United Nations claim that Israel withdrew from all occupied territories in Lebanon in May 2000, and established a so-called 'blue-line' marking the new borders. However, Syria and Lebanon claim that the Shebaa farms are Lebanese, and that Israel therefore not has withdrawn from all Lebanese territories. Consequently, Hezbollah has vowed to continue its fight until this area too is freed from occupation. United Nations argue that the Shebaa farms are Syrian territory and that the area will be returned to Syria when an Israeli-Syrian peace agreement is signed.

The Shebaa farms has been the source of ongoing clashes and skirmished on the Israeli-Lebanese border. Following a series of Hezbollah operations in the Shebaa farms area, Israel bombed a Syrian radar station in Lebanon in April 2001. The attack sent a clear message to the Syrian government that Israel holds Syria accountable for what Hezbollah does to Israel and in the Shebaa farms. The Israeli attack also played on the increasing Lebanese opposition to the Syrian presence in Lebanon, as well as emphasizing the fact that Lebanese authorities do not control their own policy on Israel. There was no direct Syrian answer to the Israeli attack, and fears that the dispute over the area might trigger regional war between the two countries seem unfounded.

Since the Isreali offensive into the Palestinian territories in early 2002, Syria and Lebanon have stepped up diplomatic cooperation. President Assad made his first visit to Lebanon in March 2002 and both countries initially rejected the Saudi Land for Peace initiative.

In the fall of 2004, the United Nations Security Council narrowly passed a United States-proposed resolution demanding the withdrawal of all foreign forces from Lebanon, and full respect for Lebanese sovereignty. Presumably, the measure was directed at Syrian forces, which first entered Lebanon as peacekeepers in the 1970s. The impetus for the United States-proposed resolution may lie primarily in its shift in policy toward Syria. Whereas Syria was viewed favorably in the 1990s for its support of the Gulf War to liberate Kuwait, it is now viewed negatively due to its opposition to the invasion of Iraq, as well as its supposed ties to Palestinian terrorist groups such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Earlier in the year, the United States went so far as to place sanctions on Syria demanding cessation of support for these groups, who often claim responsibility for attacks on Israeli citizens.

In early 2005, relations between Lebanon and Syria plummeted in the aftermath of the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Hariri. Relations had already soured between the two countries in 2004 when Syrian-backed President Lahoud said he would continue his lock on power in Lebanon, to the dismay of Prime Minister Hariri who resigned in protest. Following the assassination of Hariri in February 2005, the late prime minister's funeral was itself transformed

Syria Review 2016 Page 297 of 540 pages Syria into a spontaneous rally of Lebanese nationalism mixed with protest against Syrian's military presence in Lebanon. Such protests have continued in Lebanon since the time of the funeral. For Syria, pressure was exerted by external factions calling for a withdrawal from Lebanon, which commenced later in 2005.

As noted above, in 2006, Syria was being implicated as a state-sponsor of Hezbollah's terrorist activities from Lebanon into Israel. The matter took on significant proportions after Hezbollah kidnapped two Israeli soldiers and carried out systematic rocket attacks on Israel, thus sparking a harsh retaliatory offensive by Israel. With Lebanese refugees pouring into Syria to escape Israel's bombing campaign, it was surmised that relations between Syria and Lebanon might be again be tightened .

Syria played host to the Arab League summit in March 2008. However, some pro-Western nation states registered their discontent with Syrian-Lebanese relations by sending lower-level delegations.

On July 30, 2010, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and Saudi King Abdullah were in Beirut for landmark talks with Lebanese President Michel Suleiman. The meeting was significant largely because of the complicated relationship between Lebanon and Syria through the years, which translated into a complex political terrain in Lebanon defined by pro-Syrian/Hezbollah-backed factions at odds with anti-Syrian/pro-reform factions, who have had tenuous control of the government. Those tensions reached a nadir years and have functioned as the main dynamics of the Lebanese political sphere. Now tensions were on the rise once again. At issue was the possible indictment of members of Hezbollah by a United Nations tribunal investigating the assassination of vocal anti-Syrian former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. As noted below in the "Editor's Note," Hariri's murder marked a turning point in Lebanon's modern history, functioning as a harbinger for the Cedar Revolution that forced the Syrian military from Lebanon after a 30-year long presence there. Despite its tragic roots, the Cedar Revolution was a political victory for pro-Western and reformist forces in Lebanon, and concomitantly enflamed the passions of pro-Syrian elements in the country, many of whom were allied with Hezbollah and sought to assert their authority in Lebanon. Now, in mid-2010, the possible indictment of members of

Syria Review 2016 Page 298 of 540 pages Syria

Hezbollah in Hariri's assassination, in many ways, re-opened the wounds of that period.

The Arab World

Syria's relations with the rest of the Arab world were strained by its support for Iran during the Iran-Iraq War, which began in 1980. With the end of the war in August 1988, Syria began a slow process of reintegration with the other Arab states. In 1989, it joined with the rest of the Arab world in readmitting Egypt to the 19th Arab League Summit at Casablanca. This decision, prompted in part by Syria's need for Arab League support of its own position in Lebanon, marked the end of the Syrian-led opposition to Egypt and the 1977-1979 Sadat initiatives toward Israel, as well as the Camp David accords. It coincided with the end of the 10-year Arab subsidy to Syria and other front-line Arab countries pledged at Baghdad in 1978. Syria reestablished full diplomatic relations with Egypt in 1989.

Syria's participation in the 1990-1991 American-led multinational coalition aligned against Saddam Hussein marked a dramatic watershed in Syria's relations both with other Arab states and with the West. Syria participated in the multilateral Middle East Peace Conference in Madrid in October 1991. Ensuring national security, increasing influence among its Arab neighbors, and achieving a comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace settlement, which includes the return of the Golan Heights, have been, and still remains, the primary goals of Syria's foreign policy.

Syria and Iraq have been ruled by rival branches of the Baath party and relations were severely strained when Syria supported Iran in the Iran-Iraq war. The relations between the two countries have thawed recently. Syrian-Iraqi economic trade cooperation has improved drastically over the several years, and diplomatic ties were resumed in 2000.

In September 2000, Iraqi Trade Minister Mohammad Mehdi Salah met with his Syrian counterpart in Damascus on bilateral relations and cooperation in the domain of maritime, road and railway transport. The implementation of the sanctions on Iraq has clearly weakened over the course of the

Syria Review 2016 Page 299 of 540 pages Syria year 2000, and Syria has repeatedly called for an end to the U.N. sanctions. Arab and other governments have increased their trade with Iraq, and smuggling is ripe. A clear violation of the U.N. 'oil-for-food' program is Iraq's oil-exports through a Syrian pipeline, estimated to bring in $2 million a day in unauthorized revenue.

Iraq signed a free trade agreement with Syria in January 2001, hoping to increase the trade volume from $500 million in 2000 to $1 billion in 2001. In May 2001, Syria opened an interest section in the Algerian embassy in Baghdad. Syria has lifted restrictions on travel to Baghdad, but commercial flights have yet to be resumed. Iraq and Syria also share concern for Turkey's increasing exploitation of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, which will reduce the water supply downstream to Iraq and Syria. It is feared that pressure on water resources in the area could lead to international conflict. The Syrian and Iraqi irrigation ministers met in Baghdad in January 2001 to discuss arrangements over the rivers. In August 2001, Syrian Prime Minister Miro visited Baghdad, the highest-ranking Syrian official to do so since ties were severed over Syria's support for Iran in the Iran-Iraq war. In November 2001, trade relations between Iraq and Syria were strained as a dispute over trade cooperation led the Syrian government to freeze the assets of Iraqi governmental bodies. However, diplomatic relations since warmed as indicated by a free trade accord signed by both countries. Also, in April 2002, Syria and Iraq signed an irrigation agreement and agreed to establish joint companies.

Of course, since Iraq's leadership was deposed in the United States-led invasion of Iraq, it is unknown as to whether or not any such agreements will prevail.

Meanwhile, Syrian-Jordanian relations have warmed since the coming to power of Bashar al-Assad and King Abdullah II. While their fathers were bitter enemies, their two sons share a western- educated background, as well as the wish modernize and reform their countries. Syria has on several occasions helped the water-scare Jordan in the summer months, and the two countries are expected to sign a free trade agreement in the near future. As well, Syria joined Jordan in calling for a withdrawal of "occupation forces" from Iraq in mid-2004.

In October 2007, Syria took the tough step of imposing stringent visa restrictions on Iraqis. The Syrian authorities said that it was taking drastic measures in response to the heavy influx of Iraqi refugees.

In late October 2008, Syria said that United States troops carried out a raid inside its territory along the border with Iraq. Syrian authorities said United States special forces stormed a building in the Abu Kamal border area in the eastern part of the country and killed eight people. The Syrian Foreign Ministry protested the violation of territorial integrity and summoned the United States envoy in Damascus for an explanation. The Syrian government also issued a statement, which read: "Syria condemns this aggressive act and holds American forces responsible for this aggression and all of its repercussions."

Syria Review 2016 Page 300 of 540 pages Syria

For its part, a spokesperson for the United States military said only, "It's a developing situation." Should this raid prove to be true, it would be the first incursion of United States forced inside Syria. The United States has repeatedly accused Syria of not doing enough to prevent militants from crossing the border into Iraq. As such, the rationale for this -- still unconfirmed -- action has been that the United States may have been chasing after a high-level militant target, as it sought to secure the border between Iraq and Syria.

Iran

Despite Syrian-Iraqi rapprochement, Syria continues to enjoy close relations with Iran. President Assad visited Tehran in late January 2001, and seeks to mediate in the ongoing dispute between Iran and the United Arab Emirates. President Bashar also visited the United Arab Emirates in January 2001. Both countries adamantly supported each other in the rejection of the Saudi-led Israeli Land for Peace initiative.

Turkey

Special Note:

Starting in 2011, the Arab countries of the Middle East and North Africa have seen the effects of the so-called "Arab Spring." By 2012, regime change had ensued in Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya. As well, certain countries, such as Jordan, Bahrain, and Morocco, were pushing through certain reforms with an eye on avoiding massive upheaval by being pro-active in their aims to address the

Syria Review 2016 Page 301 of 540 pages Syria public's demands for accountability. In 2012, though, all attention was on Syria where the Assad regime was carrying out a brutal crackdown against anti-government protesters. The Assad regime's hardline moves so outraged the global community that even fellow Arab nation stated were turning away. Hostility by Arab countries to the Assad regime in Syria was on an upward swing in the spring of 2012 as Oman, Kuwait, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates joined Saudi Arabia and Bahrain in closing their embassies in the Syrian capital of Damascus.

Other Significant Relations

The West

While Syria's involvement with the multinational coalition during the Gulf War, as well as participation in the peace process, have together helped to improve Syria's relations with the West, concerns remain. These concerns focus on the continuing presence of terrorist groups in Syria and Syrian-controlled areas of Lebanon, Syria's human rights record, and Syrian involvement in narcotics activity in Lebanon.

Syria's relations with Western nations were particularly strained in the past decade because of Syrian support for groups involved in international terrorism, including the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command, the Palestine Islamic Jihad, the Abu Nidal Organization, Hezbollah, the Turkish Revolutionary Left, the Kurdish Workers Party, and the Japanese Red Army.

Recently, however, Syria has established a closer relationship with France. President Hafez al- Assad's visit to France in July 1998, the first such visit to the West in 22 years. President Bashar al-Assad is visited France in June of 2001. However, in March 2001, a French court found Alois Brunner, a senior Nazi SS officer believed to be hiding in Syria, guilty of arresting and deporting Jewish children from France to death camps in Germany. Syria denies any role in Brunner's refuge, but the issue has strained French-Syrian relations.

The United States

American-Syrian relations, severed in 1967, were resumed in June 1974, following the achievement of the Syrian-Israeli disengagement agreement. In recent years, Syria and the United States (U.S.) have worked together in areas of mutual interest. In 1990-1991, Syria cooperated with the U.S. as a member of the multinational coalition of forces in the Gulf war. The U.S. and Syria also consulted closely on the Taif Accord ending the civil war in Lebanon.

In 1991, President Assad made a historic decision to accept the former President Bush's invitation

Syria Review 2016 Page 302 of 540 pages Syria to attend a Middle East peace conference and to engage in subsequent bilateral negotiations with Israel. Syria's efforts to secure the release of Western hostages held in Lebanon and its lifting of restrictions on travel by Syrian Jews helped further to improve relations between Syria and the United States.

President Clinton met President Assad in Geneva in January 1994 and again in October, when he traveled to Damascus. At that time, the U.S.' attempts to rejuvenate the Syrian-Israeli peace talks were unsuccessful, and Syria criticized the U.S. for its unwillingness to pressure Israel on matters of contested occupied territory. This dissonance may no longer be a factor, however, as currently, all the aforementioned parties appear to be willing and ready to re-open the negotiation process. The two Presidents met again in Geneva on March 26, 2000, in order to try to save the ongoing Syrian-Israeli peace talks, but the meeting was unsuccessful.

U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell visited Syria on Feb. 26, 2001, as a part of six-country trip to the Middle East. Powell's discussion was mainly concerned with Iraq, and disappointed the Syrians who had hoped Powell would focus more on the situation in the occupied areas and the new American administration's policy in the region.

American administrations have had and continues to have an ambivalent relationship with Syria. While designating Syria as a 'rogue state' and repeatedly including it on the 'state sponsor of terror' list, little action has been taken against Syria, and its presence in Lebanon. The U.S. continues to block Syria's entry into the WTO due to Syria's alleged connection with terrorists as well as its strict economic embargo on Israel. The U.S. considers Syria as a key actor in a final Middle East settlement, and regards the country, despite its obvious flaws, as a rational actor that holds the promises it makes.

Syria is not an official partner in the campaign on terrorism launched by the United States after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States. Syria has called for a United Nations-led campaign on terrorism. The international climate after the 2001 attacks seems to have been of benefit to Syria, despite its label as 'sponsor of terrorism.' Syria was viewed as being part of a loose security alliance that cooperated with American authorities. Syria was particularly important as a source for intelligence information as well as for its policy of cracking down on Syrian Islamists both at home and abroad.

However, Syria's hosting of Palestinian opposition groups, including the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command that claimed responsibility for killing the Israeli minister of tourism on Oct. 17, 2001, has been a source of concern to the United States. Among some experts, it is believed that as long as Syria is able to relatively contain these groups and the Lebanese Hezbollah, and as long as no direct links to bin Laden's network can be traced to Syria, the United States would not wish to meddle.

Syria Review 2016 Page 303 of 540 pages Syria

An indication of indirect United States support for Syria was its tactic approval of Syria's membership as a non-permanent member of the United Nations security council in October 2001. These gestures, it was hoped, might create the ground for renewed Israeli-Syrian negotiations. In return for its cooperation with the security alliance with Washington, Syria hoped to reactivate the Syrian-Israeli peace negotiations. While in early 2002, Syria and Israel discussed a willingness to resume peace talks, none were scheduled in the near future and talks were expected to stall as the crisis in the Middle East continued.

In the last years, since the United States-led war in Iraq, relations between Syria and the United States have not travelled down the most productive path. Quite contrary to the earlier view that Syria might be instrumental in fighting the war on terrorism, the United States began to view Syria as an impediment to its objectives and policies.

Relations between the two countries devolved following Syria's adamant outcry against the United States-led invasion of Iraq in 2003. In May 2004, steadily-deteriorating relations between Syria and the United States met a new low when the United States decided to impose economic sanctions on Syria because of its alleged support for terrorism.

Since that time, well into 2007, the United States has repeatedly accused Syria of secretly supporting terrorism and allowing radicals and militants to cross the border from Syria into Iraq. The failure to control the border with Iraq has thus, according to the United States, contributed to the ongoing violence in that country, since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. For its part, however, Syrian officials have accused the United States of destabilizing the entire Middle East region by its actions in Iraq. In this regard, Syria joined Jordan in calling for a withdrawal of "occupation forces" from Iraq in mid-2004. The two situations contributed to deteriorating relations between the two countries, made worse by the United States' decision to close off high- level talks with Syria.

Meanwhile, Syrian authorities thwarted an attempted terrorist attack against the United States embassy in Damascus on September 12, 2006. While a Syrian security guard was shot by the attackers, there were no other casualties. Syrian authorities then shot those responsible for the attempted terrorist attack. The scenario could easily have ended tragically since it was revealed that a car packed with explosives was found in close proximity to the embassy but was never detonated. United States Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice thanked Syrian authorities for their efforts in handling the situation. Whether or not this scenario would advance poor bilateral relations was unknown.

In May 2007, the United States Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, held landmark talks with her Syrian counterpart, Foreign Minister Walid Muallem, at a summit in Egypt. It was the first high level meeting between Washington D.C. and Damascus in several years, and came at a time when bilateral relations between the two countries had badly-devolved. The United States has accused

Syria Review 2016 Page 304 of 540 pages Syria

Syria of trying to influence the political scene in both Iraq and Lebanon. It was difficult to determine whether the talks, which were held during a summit aimed at advancing stability and economic relief in Iraq, would yield positive long-term benefits. Until this point, the Bush administration in the United States had eschewed such high-level contact with Syria, and even railed against Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for meeting with the Syrians only weeks earlier.

As noted above, in late October 2008, Syria said that United States troops carried out a raid inside its territory along the border with Iraq. Syrian authorities said United States special forces stormed a building in the Abu Kamal border area in the eastern part of the country and killed eight people. The Syrian Foreign Ministry protested the violation of territorial integrity and summoned the United States envoy in Damascus for an explanation. The Syrian government also issued a statement, which read: "Syria condemns this aggressive act and holds American forces responsible for this aggression and all of its repercussions."

European Union

The European Union (EU) and Syria signed a Cooperation Agreement in 1977, and the EU is today Syria's main trading partner. Negotiations for a Partnership Agreement with the EU started in 1997, but have not reached conclusion. European countries have traditionally led a more Arab- friendly policy that the United States. European Commission President Romano Prodi visited Syria on Feb. 9, 2001, and President Bashar called for greater European involvement in the Middle East peace process. The European Investment Bank (EIB) granted Syria a $100 million loan in February to help finance an electricity project. Since 1998, Syria and the EIB have worked to conclude a partnership accord that would establish free trade-zones in Syria.

Special Note: A Syrian nuclear program?

On March 10, 2010, Syria declared that it had the right to participate in the global nuclear club and that it intended to pursue a civilian nuclear energy program. There has been global speculation about Syria's nuclear ambitions since 2007 when Israeli jets reportedly bombed the Dair Alzour facility -- an alleged site of a North Korean-designed nuclear reactor that has been under

Syria Review 2016 Page 305 of 540 pages Syria construction since 2001.

Special Note: Unrest in Syria

Syria Review 2016 Page 306 of 540 pages Syria

Since early 2011, anti-government protests have spread and escalated across the Arab world; Syria emerged as an addition to the list of countries experiencing unrest in March 2011. At first, protesters stopped short of demanding the resignation of President Bashar al-Assad, instead demanding greater political freedom and efforts to end corruption. For his part, President Assad announced he would advance a reform agenda, which would include lifting the emergency laws that had been in place for decades, and increased rights to the country's disenfranchised Kurdish population. These moves were aimed at quelling the rising climate of unrest gripping the country. But over time, as protests continued, and as the Assad regime carried out a hard line crackdown on dissent, tensions escalated between the government and the protesters.

Syria has meanwhile been subject to sanctions by various countries and was sliding into pariah status in the international community. Assassinations, alleged massacres, geopolitical tensions with Turkey and Israel, and most recently, suspicions about the use of chemical weapons, have since mired the Syrian landscape. Indeed, it was increasingly clear that Syria had slipped into a state of civil war and was facing a devastating humanitarian crisis. That crisis reached new heights in August 2013 with claims that Syrian forces launched a chemical attack on the outskirts of Damascus. Was this the clear sign that United States President Barack Obama's "red line" had definitively been crossed? And would the international community become more involved in the Syrian crisis? Would the September 2013 chemical weapons deal with Syria between the United States and Russia quiet the war drums? Would Syria actually abide by its international obligations set forth in that agreement? The answers to those questions were yet to be determined. In the meanwhile, the highly anticipated peace summit in Geneva ended without yielding any productive results and the civil war in Syria raged on and on.

See "Political Conditions" for full report.

Syria Review 2016 Page 307 of 540 pages Syria

Special Note: Syria shoots down Turkish fighter jet

Syria shoots down Turkish fighter jet

Turkish President Gul was, at first, tempered and restrained in his reaction to the scenario. He appeared to acknowledge there was a possibility the Turkish jet, which was reportedly on a reconnaissance mission, may have strayed into Syrian air space. He said, "It is routine for jet fighters to sometimes fly in and out over [national] borders... when you consider their speed over the sea." At the same time, the Turkish leader said that his country could not ignore the fact that Syria had shot down a Turkish aircraft. In an interview with the Turkish state news agency, Anatolia, President Gul said: "It is not possible to cover over a thing like this, whatever is necessary will be done." Turkey did, in fact, recall its envoy from Syria over the incident, but was careful to characterize that decision as being for "security reasons." Turkey also indicated it would make soon make a decision on how to deal with the incident.

Clearly, the two contrary accounts could potentially spur an international crisis, perhaps explaining Turkey's decision to move forward more assertively in response to the situation. To that end,

Syria Review 2016 Page 308 of 540 pages Syria

Turkey issued a diplomatic protest against Syria. As well, Turkish authorities in Ankara called a meeting of NATO member states under the aegis of Article Four of NATO's charter. Charter Four provides for consultations when a NATO member state believes its security is threatened. It was apparent that Turkey was now attempting to secure assurances from NATO that the transnational body would support its official response to the downing of its fighter jet by Syria.

That response was unlikely to be of a military nature, as Deputy Prime Minister Arinc said his country was instead considering whether or not to cut electricity exports to Syria. To date, Turkey has eschewed such action on the basis of "humanitarian reasons." Moreover, General Knud Bartels, the chairman of NATO's military committee, madeclear that no military actions by the North Atlantic security body would be taken "until all political means to achieve a political solution are used."

As June 2012 came to a close, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan announced that his country would reinforce its border with Syria. In a speech to parliament, the Turkish head of

Syria Review 2016 Page 309 of 540 pages Syria government characterized Syria as a "clear and present threat" and warned that any "military element" that approached the Turkish border from Syria would be treated as a military target. Accordingly, Turkey soon deployed columns of military vehicles, rocket launchers, and anti- aircraft guns along its border with Syria. The state of heightened tensions was illustrated on June 30, 2012, when Turkey scrambled six F-16 fighter jets near its border with Syria. The action was taken soon after Syrian helicopters approached the border with Turkey.

Special Note: Hezbollah-related violence in Lebanon raises questions about spillover violence from Syria

On July 9, 2013, a car bomb exploded in the Lebanese capital city of Beirut, resulting in injuries to scores of people. The bombing occurred the Beir el-Abed area of Beirut, which was known to be a stronghold of the Shi'a Islamic extremist militant entity, Hezbollah. Although there was no claim of responsibility for the attack, Hezbollah's role in the Syrian civil war next door raised questions about spillover violence into Lebanon from Syria. To be clear, Lebanon-based Hezbollah has increasingly taken a high profile role on the side of the Assad regime as it has fought a relentless battle to hold onto power in Syria against a rebel movement supported by other Arab countries and the West. For their part, rebels have railed against Hezbollah for siding with the Assad regime and involving itself in the Syrian conflict. They have accordingly threatened to target Hezbollah in Lebanon for its intervention into the Syrian civil war.

Syria Review 2016 Page 310 of 540 pages Syria behind President Michel Suleiman in this regard and to step back from any involvement in the Syrian crisis."

On July 16, 2013, a roadside bomb in Lebanon, close to the Syrian border, appeared to target a convoy carrying members of Hezbollah. The explosion killed one Hezbollah official and wounded two others. Because Syrian opposition rebels have warned they would strike against Hezbollah, in retaliation for the militant Shi'a Islamic entity's involvement in the Syrian civil war, all suspicion rested on the rebels for this attack. It was vividly clear that the Syrian civil war, and specifically, Hezbollah's involvement in that conflict, was having an effect on the other side of the border in Lebanon.

Meanwhile, the 15-member United Nations body conveyed its anxieties about the rising death toll in Syria -- now estimated to be approaching 100,000 since the start of the conflict in 2011 -- as well as the increasing number of internally displaced persons -- now estimated to be as many as four million with two million fleeing to neighboring countries. Lebanon, especially, was bearing the brunt of the exodus of from Syria, as refugees sought to escape the cross-fire of bloodshed and violence. To this end, the United Nations Security Council noted in its statement: "The Security Council underlines the need for assistance on an unprecedented scale, both to meet the needs of the refugees and of host communities, and to assist the Lebanese authorities who face extraordinary financial and structural challenges as a result of the refugee influx."

Nawaf Salam - Lebanon's ambassador to the United Nations - addressed the matter of Syrian refugees in his country saying, "Lebanon will not close its borders. Lebanon will not turn back any refugees. Lebanon will continue to provide assistance to all Syrian refugees. But let's be clear, Lebanon cannot cope with the burden of the refugee crisis. Lebanon needs international support."

On Nov. 19, 2013, a double suicide bombing outside the Iranian embassy in the Lebanese capital of Beirut left more than 20 people dead and more than 140 others injured. The first bombing was carried out by a suicide attacker on a motorcycle, while the second was executed by a suicide bomber in a a four-wheel drive vehicle. Among the dead was the Iranian cultural attache, Sheikh Ibrahim Ansari, who had just assumed his diplomatic post a month prior.

Syria Review 2016 Page 311 of 540 pages Syria

Because Iran has been a well-known supporter of the Lebanese Shi'a Islamic extremist group, Hezbollah, which deployed fighters to Syria to help the government of Bashar al-Assad hang onto power against rebel forces, there were suggestions that this attack was a manifestation of spillover violence from the Syrian civil war.

Special Report: Terror group Islamic State extends its rampage of horror from Syria to Iraq

Summary --

Syria Review 2016 Page 312 of 540 pages Syria calling for President Assad to step down from power, given the brutality of the Syrian regime's crackdown on protesters. In 2012, the bloody crackdown by the Assad regime on anti-government protesters was ongoing. In fact, the crackdown appeared to become more relentless in places such as Homs and Aleppo. Despite widespread condemnation from the West, a United Nations Security Resolution on the situation in Syria was subject to veto by Russia and China. A subsequent vote in the United Nations General Assembly overwhelmingly condemned Syria for its brutal crackdown. A prevailing truce, brokered by the joint United Nations/Arab League envoy, Kofi Annan, was established in the interests of preventing further bloodshed; however, it was revealed to be an exercise in theory rather than practice and eventually the United Nations monitoring mission ended in failure.

At the same time, Syria was facing a devastating humanitarian crisis. That crisis reached new heights in August 2013 with claims that Syrian forces launched a chemical attack on the outskirts of Damascus. Although this was the clear sign that United States President Barack Obama's "red line" had definitively been crossed, the international community remained reticent about becoming more involved in the Syrian crisis. Ultimately, an ensuing chemical weapons deal with Syria between the United States and Russia quieted the war drums. In the meantime, though, a highly anticipated peace summit in Geneva ended without yielding any productive results and the civil war in Syria raged on and on.

Syria Review 2016 Page 313 of 540 pages Syria

Syrian-Iraqi landscape of Islamic State. As such, a Western coalition, led by the United States, was soon carrying out air strikes on Islamic State targets in Syria and Iraq. Of note was the fact that the United States-led coalition expanded to include Japan and Jordan when citizens of their countries that were being held by Islamic State were also brutally killed.

In the first few months of 2016, all eyes were on the peace process for Syria, as well as a fragile cessation of hostilities aimed at facilitating a settlement. Meanwhile, Russia announced that it would be withdrawing from Syria although it continued to carry out air strikes supportive to the Assad regime. For its part, pro-Assad forces were making gains against all groups opposed to Assad rule, including Islamic State. Of note was the recapture of the heritage city Palmyra; Also of note in this period was the United States' announcement that its effort against Islamic State was going well, as marked by the elimination of the terror group's second in command.

Syria Review 2016 Page 314 of 540 pages Syria

Note: Please see "Political Conditions" for a full treatment of the threat posed by Islamic State in Syria as well as coverage of the international effort to defeat the terror group.

Foreign relations note related to Lebanon:

In the spring of 2015, the pro-Assad Syrian military, backed by the Lebanon-based militant based entity, Hezbollah, appeared to be preparing for a major offensive in the border area between the two countries. For some time, Hezbollah -- an ally of the Alawite Assad regime -- has been backing President Assad in Syria, and bolstering the fight against Sunni rebel groups (many of them of the extremist Islamist type, such as al-Nusra Front) with whom the regime has been ensconced in a civil war since the start of the Arab Spring in 2011. Now, however, with the Sunni Islamist rebel groups gaining strength in the region, and with the Qalamoun mountains becoming a stronghold for Sunni militants and terrorists, joint Syrian military and Lebanese-based Hezbollah forces were advancing on the area. Their aims were to regain control in strategic areas, such as Assal al-Ward and Qarna Heights, and to cut off a major supply route for weapons and militants. It should be noted that some anti-Hezbollah political factions in Lebanon have decried the operation, warning that it will stimulate violence within Lebanese borders.

***

On Nov. 12, 2015, two suicide bombings rocked the Lebanese capital city of Beirut killing at least 40 people and injuring up to 200 more victims. The body of a third suicide bomber who had not yet detonated the explosives strapped to his body was also reported at the site of the carnage. It was the worst episode of terrorist violence in Lebanon since the time of that country's civil war.

The attacks occurred in a southern suburb of Beirut known to be a stronghold of Lebanon's Shi'a Islamic militant group, Hezbollah. According to reports from the ground, the attacks were carried out in succession by suicide bombers at the Mansur shopping plaza and at a storefront in Burj al- Barajneh.

Because the bombings occurred in an area known to be controlled by Hezbollah, and because that Shi'a Islamic militant group has been heavily involved in supporting Bashar al-Assad's regime in Syria, all expectations were that these attacks were carried out by Sunni Islamists opposed to Assad. In recent times, there have been several terror attacks in Lebanon, most of which have been linked with Hezbollah's active military engagement in Syria on behalf of Syrian President Assad. While there was no shortage of extremist Islamist groups opposed to Assad operating in Syria, and they have certainly spread over the border into Lebanon, suspicions in this case quickly rested on actors aligned with the notorious terror group, Islamic State. The Islamist terror group itself soon confirmed these suspicions by disseminating a claim of responsibility.

Syria Review 2016 Page 315 of 540 pages Syria

Editor's Note:

Collectively, the recent violence in Lebanon has highlighted the increased Sunni-Shi'a tensions plaguing the entire region of the Middle East, with particular attention to Syria, which was in the throes of its ongoing civil war, and with spillover violence in neighboring countries like Lebanon.

The civil war raging in neighboring Syria has increasingly included the involvement of Hezbollah, exacerbating the Sunni-Shi'a sectarian conflict plaguing the Middle East, with Syria and -- increasingly -- neighboring Lebanon at the center of that conflict. To that latter end, thanks to the active involvement of Lebanon-based Hezbollah in the Syrian crisis, there has been a countervailing plague of sectarian violence in the streets of Lebanon. Sunnis aligned with the opposition in Syria have railed against Hezbollah's alignment with the Assad regime in Syria.

In the Syrian civil war, the rebel groups have not been united. Some groups have been aimed at overthrowing the Assad regime from office for political reasons, while other Sunni extremist groups have also sought to oust the Assad regime but for more ideological (read: sectarian) reasons as they oppose the Shi'a elite that has long ruled Syria. In Lebanon, those dynamics were playing out in similar form. Some Sunni enclaves were simply sympathetic to the rebel movement in Syria and opposed to Hezbollah. Meanwhile, some Sunni factions were being motivated by religious extremist ideology to use tactics of terrorism. Of particular note was the November 2015 bombings in a southern suburb of Beirut for which the notorious terror enclave, Islamic State, claimed responsibility.

*** See "Political Conditions" for a full report on developments in Syria related to the season of unrest gripping the Middle East since 2011 and continuing in 2016, as well as the global implications.***

Written by Dr. Denise Youngblood Coleman, Editor in Chief, www.countrywatch.com. See Bibliography for list of general research sources.

National Security

Syria Review 2016 Page 316 of 540 pages Syria

External Threats

A multitude of factors have contributed to ongoing tension between Syria and Israel. The Syrian government's support for various militant organizations has also earned it the enmity of the United States. Tumultuous relations between Syria and Israelare partially rooted in the Arab-Israeli wars of 1967 and 1973, during which the two countries fought on opposite sides. During the first conflict, Israel wrested control of the area known as the Golan Heights from Syriaand during the second, acquired additional land previously under Syrian dominion. Israel subsequently returned some of its territorial acquisition to Syria. Its continued occupation of the rest has served as one basis for ongoing tension between the two countries. Golan Heights has been under constant occupation by UN Disengagement Observer Forces since 1964. This 1,000 man strong unit patrols a buffer zone between the two parties.

Differences over Lebanonhave also been a contributing factor. In 1976, Syrian forces intervened in the Lebanese civil war on behalf of the Maronite Christian faction. In 1982, Israel invaded Lebanon. Soon after, Syrian and Israeli forces began to clash in Eastern Lebanon. In 1984, the bulk of Israeli troops departed Lebanon. Syriaremained active in the region. Initially, the Syrian government attempted to reconcile differences amongst warring factions in Lebanon. During a March - September 1989 outbreak of hostilities between Christian and Muslim elements in Lebanon, Syriaactively supported the latter. The 1989 Taif Accord effectively brought an end to factional fighting in Lebanon. Contrary to one of its principle objectives, however, Syria has maintained a substantial armed presence in Lebanon. As of 2004, there were approximately 17,000 Syrian troops still there. The Syrian government continues to take issue with Israeli occupation of a section of the Golan Heights known as Sheba Farms, which it contends belongs to Lebanon.

Finally, the Syrian government has traditionally supported elements hostile to Israel, a significant impediment to harmonious relations between the two countries. Historically, it has maintained that anti-Israeli elements in Lebanon, namely Hezbollah, and various militant Palestinian organizations - including HAMAS, Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PLFP-GC), and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PLFP) - are legitimate insurgent movements, rather than terrorist organizations. Over the years, it has provided varying degrees of support to such organizations, which have in turn attacked Israeli interests, including non-combatants. In October 2003, following a suicide bombing in Haifa, allegedly orchestrated by Palestinian Islamic Jihad, that claimed the lives of 20 Israeli citizens, Israeli Defense Forces launched a retaliatory strike against a suspected Palestinian terrorist training camp inside Syria, near the capital of Damascus. This incident marked the first Israeli attack inside Syriasince the 1973 war.

Syrian support for extremist organizations has also contributed to tension with the United States. The U.S. government has labeled Syria a state-sponsor of terrorism (for more information on the specific implications of that label, see the section pertaining to state-sponsors of terrorism in the

Syria Review 2016 Page 317 of 540 pages Syria

U.S. Department of State report entitled Patterns of Global Terrorism 2003. The U.S. Department of State does indicate that Syriahas not been "directly implicated" in a terrorist attack since 1986, however. Other potential signs of improved relations include: the Syrian government's discouragement of public displays of pro-al-Qaida sentiments, its support for certain U.S. initiatives to combat global terrorism, and its assurances that it will protect U.S.interests there. Despite the latter, however, the U.S. government continues to warn its citizens of the potential for anti- American violence in Syria(see also below section on terrorism).

Crime

The overall rate of crime in Syria is low.

Insurgencies

There are no insurgent organizations inside Syriathat directly threaten its government or general population. Two successive generations of the Asad family have ruled Syriasince November 1970, when Hafiz al-Asad came to power in the aftermath of a bloodless coup. The despotic regime has generally kept dissension to a minimum. In the early years of the elder Asad's reign, however, militant elements of Syria's Sunni community mounted a significant challenge to its authority. The extremists took issue with two aspects the government: the secular orientation of the Ba'athist party with which it was affiliated and the religious views espoused privately by many of its members. Though officially unaffiliated with any religion, Asad and most of his administration were Alawis, practitioners of an offshoot of Shi'a Islam that also incorporates elements of other faiths and that orthodox Sunnis in particular view as heretical. Under the auspices of the ultraconservative Muslim Brotherhood, Sunni militants initiated an armed insurgency in 1976. In 1982, government forces leveled the city of Hama, a Brotherhood stronghold, killing thousands in the process and effectively destroying the rebellion.

Since the Hama incident, the overt display of anti-government sentiment has been extremely limited in Syria. Hafiz al-Asad suffered a heart attack and died in June 2000. Soon after, his son Bashar al-Asad assumed the leadership of the country. Under his rule, the Syrian government has retained its tight grip on authority.

*** See "Political Conditions" for a full report on developments in Syria related to the season of unrest and anti-government protests gripping the Middle East in 2011, as well as the global implications.***

Terrorism

Syria Review 2016 Page 318 of 540 pages Syria

The U.S. Department of State continues to warn of the credible threat of terrorist attacks in Syria, particularly those targeting American interests there. Domestic groups opposed to the Syria's government remain a potential source of terrorist violence. The Syrian government has taken a generally aggressive stance against insurgent organizations that oppose its rule (see section above on insurgencies). Its efforts to suppress insurrection have generally been successful. Militants did manage to bomb a bus in Damascusin 1997, killing 20.

There is perhaps a greater risk that extremists in Syria will strike U.S.interests there. As mentioned in the above "External Threats" section, the Syrian government has historically supported a number of regionally based militant organizations, including Lebanese Hezbollah, HAMAS, Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PLFP- GC), and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PLFP). Such groups have in turn used terrorism as a means to further their political agendas, which tend to reflect both an anti-Israel and anti-American bent. The Syrian government maintains that these groups are legitimate insurgent movements, rather than terrorist organizations. The U.S. Department of State reports that Syriahas not been "directly implicated" in a terrorist attack since 1986. Its ongoing affiliation with organizations that have engaged in terrorism, however, has earned it a place on the U.S.government's State-Sponsor of Terrorism list. For more information on the specific ramifications of being placed on that list, see the section pertaining to state-sponsors of terrorism in the U.S. Department of State report entitled Patterns of Global Terrorism.

In addition to the Syrian government's links to extremist movements, the generally high degree of anti-American sentiment there also underscores the risk of terrorist attacks against U.S. interests in Syria. In 1998 and 2000 mobs attacked the U.S. embassy in Damascus. In the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, the Syrian government began to discourage public display of pro-al-Qaida sentiment. It has also generally supported U.S. initiatives to combat global terrorism and has offered assurances that it will protect U.S. interests in Syria. Syriais party to seven of the twelve international conventions and protocols pertaining to terrorism.

NOTE:

Special Note: Unrest in Syria

Syria Review 2016 Page 319 of 540 pages Syria

But over time, as protests continued, and as the Assad regime carried out a hard line crackdown on dissent, tensions escalated between the government and the protesters.

In August 2011, the United Nations Security Council and the Arab League respectively issued condemnations of the violence in Syria. As well, the United Nations Human Rights Council called for an independent inquiry into the violent crackdown on dissent. Meanwhile, global leaders were calling for President Assad to step down from power, given the brutality of the Syrian regime's crackdown on protesters. As of 2012, the bloody crackdown by the Assad regime on anti- government protesters continued, despite the presence of Arab League monitors "in country." In fact, the crackdown appeared to become more relentless in February 2012 in places such as Homs. Despite widespread condemnation from the West, a United Nations Security Resolution on the situation in Syria was subject to veto by Russia and China. A subsequent vote in the United Nations General Assembly overwhelmingly condemned Syria for its brutal crackdown. A prevailing truce, brokered by the joint United Nations/Arab League envoy, Kofi Annan, was established in the interests of preventing further bloodshed; however, it was not being properly observed as the Syrian crackdown continued through May 2012. Syria has meanwhile been subject to sanctions by various countries and was sliding into pariah status in the international community.

The scene in Syria turned particularly disturbing in late May 2012 when a massacre, apparently at the hands of Assad forces, ensued in Houla. The United Nations Security Council quickly passed a non-binding condemnation of Syria in response to the massacre. That being said, it was clear that the Annan-brokered ceasefire was an exercise in theory rather than practice. It was also clear that pressure was building for the international community to act more decisively against the Syrian regime. That pressure was expected to rise after another massacre in the village of Qubair and the downing of a Turkish jet.

Special Note: Syria shoots down Turkish fighter jet

Syria Review 2016 Page 320 of 540 pages Syria

Syria had shot down a Turkish aircraft. In an interview with the Turkish state news agency, Anatolia, President Gul said: "It is not possible to cover over a thing like this, whatever is necessary will be done." Turkey did, in fact, recall its envoy from Syria over the incident, but was careful to characterize that decision as being for "security reasons." Turkey also indicated it would make soon make a decision on how to deal with the incident.

By June 24, 2012, the geopolitical climate shifted dramatically as Turkish authorities in Ankara were now issuing an ostensible challenge to Syria's account of what transpired on June 22, 2012. Even though Turkish President Gul had entertained the possibility that the F-4 Phantom jet had strayed into Syrian air space, now the Turkish authorities in Ankara were asserting that the jet was actually in international airspace when it was shot down. Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said in an interview with Turkish state television, TRT, "According to our conclusions, our plane was shot down in international airspace, 13 nautical miles (24km) from Syria." Since international law specifies that a country's air space extends 12 nautical miles from its coastline, corresponding with its territorial waters, the position of the Turkish fighter jet was in a neutral territory when it was shot down by Syrian forces. The Turkish foreign minister went further in noting that the jet had not "shown any hostility," and was clearly marked as Turkish -- effectively contradicting the statement by the Syrian military that the jet's identity was unknown. Of course, this view was at odds with the Syrian account that the jet was an "unidentified aircraft" that penetrated Syrian air space and was engaged appropriately, before being shot down.

Syria Review 2016 Page 321 of 540 pages Syria the circumstances and ownership of the reconnaissance aircraft when it shot down the Turkish jet. “Radio communication among Syrian authorities clearly demonstrates that the Syrian units were fully aware of the circumstances and the fact that the aircraft belonged to Turkey,” wrote Ertugrul Apakan, Turkey’s representative to the United Nations in the letter to United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon. Accordingly, Turkey asserted that Syria posed "a serious threat to peace and security in the region."

As of June 205, 2012, Turkey was invoking Article Five of the NATO charter. In an interview with the media, Bulent Arinc, Turkey’s deputy prime minister, made it clear that his country was invoking Article Five because: "To target an aircraft in this fashion without any warning is a hostile act of the highest order." It should be noted that Article five is the provision that states an attack on one NATO state is an attack on all member states. As with the invocation of Article Four, it was apparent that Turkey was shoring up NATO support and solidarity in its response to Syria.

These develpments occurred even as a slate of Syrian military officers defected from that country and reports emerged of a second Turkish jet being shot at by Syria.

On the latter matter, Turkey said that Syria fired on one of its planes participating in the rescue operation for a reconnaissance jet shot down by Syria days prior. Deputy Prime Minister Arinc said that the rescue aircraft was not brought down, and that Syrians had stopped firing following a warning from Turkish forces; however, Arinc promised that Syria's "hostile action" would "not go unpunished."

On the matter of the defections, the last week of June 2012 saw several high-ranking Syrian military figures defecting to Turkey. One general, two colonels, two majors, and dozens of other soldiers were reported to have crossed the Syrian-Turkish border into Hatay province on the night of June 24, 2012. Days earlier, the pilot of a fighter jet on a training mission flew his MiG-21 warplane to Jordan; he requested political asylum and landed his plane at King Hussein Air Base in that country. Jordan granted him asylum on on "humanitarian grounds" since he would likely be tortured or killed if he returned home.

Syria Review 2016 Page 322 of 540 pages Syria

Special Report: Terror group Islamic State extends its rampage of horror from Syria to Iraq

Introduction --

Summary --

Syria Review 2016 Page 323 of 540 pages Syria crackdown on protesters. In 2012, the bloody crackdown by the Assad regime on anti-government protesters was ongoing. In fact, the crackdown appeared to become more relentless in places such as Homs and Aleppo. Despite widespread condemnation from the West, a United Nations Security Resolution on the situation in Syria was subject to veto by Russia and China. A subsequent vote in the United Nations General Assembly overwhelmingly condemned Syria for its brutal crackdown. A prevailing truce, brokered by the joint United Nations/Arab League envoy, Kofi Annan, was established in the interests of preventing further bloodshed; however, it was revealed to be an exercise in theory rather than practice and eventually the United Nations monitoring mission ended in failure.

Syria Review 2016 Page 324 of 540 pages Syria was soon carrying out air strikes on Islamic State targets in Syria and Iraq. Of note was the fact that the United States-led coalition expanded to include Japan and Jordan when citizens of their countries that were being held by Islamic State were also brutally killed.

In the first few months of 2016, all eyes were on the peace process for Syria, as well as a fragile cessation of hostilities aimed at facilitating a settlement. Meanwhile, Russia announced that it would be withdrawing from Syria although it continued to carry out air strikes supportive to the Assad regime. For its part, pro-Assad forces were making gains against all groups opposed to Assad rule, including Islamic State. Of note was the recapture of the heritage city Palmyra; Also of note in this period was the United States' announcement that its effort against Islamic State was going well, as marked by the elimination of the terror group's second in command.

-- Please see "Political Conditions" for a full treatment of the threat posed by Islamic State in Syria

Syria Review 2016 Page 325 of 540 pages Syria as well as coverage of the international effort to defeat the terror group. --

*** See "Political Conditions" for a full report on developments in Syria related to the season of unrest gripping the Middle East in 2011, as well as the global implications.***

Defense Forces

Military Data

Military Branches:

Syrian Armed Forces: Land Forces, Naval Forces, Air Forces (includes Air Defense Forces)

Eligible age to enter service: 18 years of age for compulsory and voluntary military service

Mandatory Service Terms: Conscript service obligation is 18 months; women are not conscripted but may volunteer to serve; re-enlistment obligation 5 years, with retirement after 15 years or age 40 (enlisted) or 20 years or age 45 (NCOs)

Manpower in general population-fit for military service:

N/A

Manpower reaching eligible age annually: N/A

Military Expenditures-Percent of GDP:

N/A

Syria Review 2016 Page 326 of 540 pages Syria

Syria Review 2016 Page 327 of 540 pages Syria

Chapter 3

Economic Overview

Syria Review 2016 Page 328 of 540 pages Syria

Economic Overview

Overview

Like many of its neighbors in the Middle East, Syria’s economy depends heavily on oil production and export. Syria enjoyed high economic growth in the 1990s on the back of rising oil production and an upsurge in private sector investment prompted by reforms to start the transition to a market economy. But the leveling off and subsequent decline of oil production and a sharp contraction of private investment led to a significant slowdown in real GDP growth from 1999 to 2003. Supported by the steady progress in implementing reforms and higher regional demand for Syria’s non-oil exports, macroeconomic performance was strong between 2004 and 2010.

The impact of the global economic crisis on Syria’s economy was relatively moderate, mostly through linkages to trading partners in the GCC and Europe. As a result, growth decelerated moderately in 2009, with lower growth in manufacturing, construction, and services being partially offset by a recovery in agriculture and a small increase in oil production. At the same time, fiscal consolidation efforts provided room for the government to implement countercyclical measures to mitigate the effects of the global economic crisis. However, this resulted in a widening of the fiscal deficit. The ongoing recovery of Syria's trading partners was expected to contribute to a gradual increase in the country's exports, remittances and FDI in 2010, leading to higher growth. In general, the political unrest that overcame the region in early 2011 had a significant impact on the country. Between March and June 2011, the United Nations estimated that at least 1,000 people had died at the hands of a government reacting to citizens’ demonstrations against the autocratic rule of President Bashar Assad. The European Union was pressing for a new round of sanctions against Syria as a result of its actions. And the country was experiencing a slump in capital inflows and tourism. In May 2011, a Qatar real estate firm halted a large project in Damascus – one of three major Gulf investment projects stymied in Syria. The International Institute of Finance estimated that Syria's economy would shrink by 3 percent in 2011, a large drop from approximate 4 to 5 percent growth in 2010, in the wake of the unrest. Overall, economic growth slowed because of international sanctions and reduced domestic consumption and production. The economy remains highly regulated by the government, which has increased subsidies and tightened trade controls to assuage protesters and protect foreign currency reserves.

In May 2012, the IMF predicted Syria's economy would contract significantly in 2012 due to the 14 months of violence and sanctions. “We do expect contraction in GDP (Gross Domestic Product) this year," the head of the IMF's Middle East, North Africa, Gulf and Central Asia Department, Masood Ahmed, told Agence France Presse. For now, the IMF is not providing

Syria Review 2016 Page 329 of 540 pages Syria figures on the Syrian economy due to lack of data amid the political uncertainty. By mid-2012, the number of people who have perished in Syria due to the unrest topped 15,000, according to the United Nations. The International Committee of the Red Cross suggested that the death toll may be even higher. As well, as many as one million Syrians have been displaced as they were forced to flee their homes in the cross-fire of violence. Syria’s banking industry was severely damaged and some parts of it had almost stopped functioning.

In July 2012, the European Union tightened an arms embargo on Syria and expanded other sanctions in an attempt to accelerate the end of the conflict between President Bashar al-Assad and rebels. By mid-2012, it was apparent that the conflict was escalating towards civil war. The new embargo rules required EU countries to search planes and ships, if they suspect they are carrying arms, dual-use goods or equipment used for repression to Syria. But Syria was not without its allies. Also in July, Iranian and Syrian officials entered into agreements on energy and water supply. As one example, Syria signed deals with Iran on electricity exports from Iran to Syria. Then, in August 2012, Syrian officials said they expected Russia to help Syria – which was now officially in a state of civil war --overcome its economic crisis. “We are currently interested in oil, oil products, fuel oil and natural gas. We have reached mutual understanding on the need to look for ways to resolve the problem,” said Syrian Deputy Prime Minister for Economic Affairs Qadri Jamil at a press conference in Moscow. By early August, the spread of major fighting to Damascus and then to Aleppo, Syria's biggest city and top commercial center, marked a new, more destructive period for the country’s economy and put banks under fresh pressure. “Aleppo will hurt the real economy - the disruption of production, inputs reaching plants. How long it will last - a few days, a week, two weeks - no one knows,” said Nabil Sukr, a Damascus economi and former World Bank employee, in a Reuters article.

The economy further contracted in 2012 due to the international sanctions and reduced domestic consumption and production. Meanwhile, inflation climbed sharply. In July 2013, the executive board of the International Monetary Fund was informed that there could not be a briefing with an assessment of economic developments and policies in Syria. The country’s Article IV consultation was delayed by 26 months, due to a lack of adequate information that would allow staff to make such an assessment.

Then, in early November 2013, the Syrian pound climbed to a seven-month high against the dollar, supported by a security crackdown on speculators and exchange dealers whom authorities blamed for wild currency fluctuations in prior months. The benchmark central bank rate for the pound against the dollar stood at 138.8 pounds in early November, meaning that for the first time, the Syrian currency was stronger on what remained of the black market than at the banks. Still, the pound remained significantly weaker by the 2-1/2 years of conflict that had inflicted tens of billions of dollars’ worth of damage, disrupted agriculture, devastated industry and wiped out foreign currency flows from tourism and oil exports. The central bank was continuing to pump modest amounts of dollars into the banking system and

Syria Review 2016 Page 330 of 540 pages Syria licensed exchange firms, but with the black marketeers cowed and the shrunken economy crippled by the conflict, demand was not great.

“If you now go to Damascus, you will ask yourself where are the people,” a senior banker in a subsidiary of a foreign based bank in Damascus was quoted as saying in a Reuters article.

Meanwhile, food prices that had soared earlier in the year were starting to decline some.

Syria’s economy further contracted in 2013 due to international sanctions, widespread infrastructure damage, reduced domestic consumption and production and sharply rising inflation. The government has struggled to address the effects of economic decline, which include dwindling foreign exchange reserves, rising budget and trade deficits, and the decreasing value of the Syrian pound. The ongoing conflict and economic decline have created a humanitarian crisis, prompting widespread need for international aid. Prior to the unrest, Damascus began liberalizing economic policies, including cutting lending interest rates, opening private banks, consolidating multiple exchange rates, raising prices on some subsidized items, and establishing the Damascus Stock Exchange. The economy remains highly regulated by the government.

A U.N.-sponsored report released in May 2014 revealed that Syria's economy was shrinking fast as industrial and agricultural output declined, leaving a large part of its population in extreme poverty. The Damascus based-Syrian Centre for Policy Research conducted the report, which cites International Monetary Fund (IMF) estimates of a 40 percent contraction in GDP since the start the conflict in 2011. Nearly half of Syria's labor force of five million was unemployed.

Losses – based on estimated damage to residential and state buildings - were estimated at $143.8 billion. Losing most of Syria’s oil production, with eastern regions mainly under rebel control, has significantly added to Assad's financial woes. The report said Syria, which was previously considered a lower middle-income country with a $67 billion GDP before the crisis, was turning into a country “of poor people.”

Three in every four Syrians lived in poverty at the end of 2013, according to the report. Meanwhile, public debt reached 126 percent of GDP in 2013 as the country continued to import mainly oil and basic commodities to alleviate shortages. Syria has been limping along with the extension of a $3 billion credit line from Iran, its main regional ally.

The economy further contracted in 2014 because of international sanctions, widespread infrastructure damage, diminished domestic consumption and production, reduced subsidies and high inflation. The government has struggled to address the effects of economic decline, which include dwindling foreign exchange reserves, rising budget and trade deficits and the decreasing value of the Syrian pound and household purchasing power. During 2014, the ongoing conflict and continued unrest and economic decline worsened the humanitarian crisis and elicited a greater need for international assistance, as the number of people in need inside Syria increased from 9.3 million

Syria Review 2016 Page 331 of 540 pages Syria to 12.2 million, and the number of Syrian refugees increased from 2.2 million to more than 3.3 million.

In May 2015, Syria and Iran signed several agreements in the oil, electricity and industrial sectors and regarding investments, according to Syrian state television. Then in June 2015, BBC reported that Syria's economic output had shrunk by as much as 60 percent since the conflict began in 2011, according to estimates in a report released by British think-tank Chatham House. Syria's mining and construction workers have been hit hardest - with exports dropping to about $2 billion from $12 billion. Also, the Syrian pound has lost 80 percent of its value since the conflict began.

Economist and report author David Butter said the greatest cost of four years of deadly conflict was the quarter of a million people who had lost their lives.

There had been an estimated 23 percent population decrease, with four million registered refugees in neighboring countries.

Economic Performance

Following strong growth in 2008, real GDP slowed in 2009 as a result of the global economic crisis before rebounding in 2010. The conflict - and resulting sanctions - devastated the economy from 2011 to 2013.

According to CountryWatch estimated calculations for 2014:

Real GDP growth rate was: -8.6 percent The fiscal deficit/surplus as percent of GDP (%) was: -2.8 percent Inflation was measured at: 24.7 percent

Updated in 2015

*Please note that the figures in our Economic Performance section are estimates or forecasts based on IMF-based data that are formulated using CountryWatch models of analysis.

Supplementary Sources: BBC, Reuters, Interfax, United Nations and Roubini Global Economics

Nominal GDP and Components

Syria Review 2016 Page 332 of 540 pages Syria

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Nominal GDP (LCU 2,886.48 3,021.82 3,169.12 3,400.18 3,657.25 billions)

Nominal GDP Growth Rate -8.3634 4.689 4.874 7.291 7.561 (%)

Consumption (LCU billions) 1,705.48 1,785.45 1,872.48 2,009.00 2,330.79

Government Expenditure 355.191 371.845 389.970 418.403 485.421 (LCU billions)

Gross Capital Formation 802.418 840.041 880.987 945.220 811.043 (LCU billions)

Exports of Goods & 1,115.44 1,167.74 1,224.66 1,313.95 1,430.29 Services (LCU billions)

Imports of Goods & 1,092.04 1,143.25 1,198.97 1,286.39 1,400.30 Services (LCU billions)

Syria Review 2016 Page 333 of 540 pages Syria

Population and GDP Per Capita

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Population, 21.046 21.027 20.289 19.158 18.200 total (million)

Population -1.6224 -0.0891 -3.5085 -5.5774 -5.0000 growth (%)

Nominal GDP per Capita 137,151.76 143,710.55 156,195.63 177,482.65 200,948.87 (LCU 1000s)

Syria Review 2016 Page 334 of 540 pages Syria

Real GDP and Inflation

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Real Gross Domestic Product (LCU billions 2005 1,305.93 1,066.35 875.007 771.319 711.310 base)

Real GDP Growth Rate (%) -21.2462 -18.3458 -17.9437 -11.8500 -7.7800

GDP Deflator (2005=100.0) 221.028 283.380 362.182 440.827 514.157

Inflation, GDP Deflator (%) 16.358 28.210 27.808 21.714 16.635

Syria Review 2016 Page 335 of 540 pages Syria

Government Spending and Taxation

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Government Fiscal 732.638 766.990 804.375 863.022 928.272 Budget (billions)

Fiscal Budget Growth -8.3634 4.689 4.874 7.291 7.561 Rate (percentage)

National Tax Rate 18.477 18.477 18.477 18.477 18.477 Net of Transfers (%)

Government Revenues Net of 533.347 558.354 585.570 628.264 675.764 Transfers (LCU billions)

Government Surplus(-) Deficit(+) -199.2912 -208.6355 -218.8051 -234.7581 -252.5072 (LCU billions)

Government Surplus(+) Deficit(-) -6.9043 -6.9043 -6.9043 -6.9043 -6.9043 (%GDP)

Syria Review 2016 Page 336 of 540 pages Syria

Money Supply, Interest Rates and Unemployment

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Money and Quasi-Money 1,881.64 2,067.24 2,271.16 2,495.19 2,683.84 (M2) (LCU billions)

Money Supply Growth Rate -7.8099 9.864 9.864 9.864 7.561 (%)

Lending Interest Rate (%) 13.149 12.929 12.833 13.117 20.724

Unemployment Rate (%) 8.552 9.160 9.129 9.082 8.289

Syria Review 2016 Page 337 of 540 pages Syria

Foreign Trade and the Exchange Rate

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Official Exchange Rate 48.371 64.390 108.426 152.900 176.930 (LCU/$US)

Trade Balance NIPA ($US 0.4836 0.3803 0.2369 0.1802 0.1695 billions)

Trade Balance % of GDP 0.8104 0.8104 0.8104 0.8104 0.8202

Total Foreign Exchange Reserves 23.261 26.224 29.565 33.332 12.858 ($US billions)

Syria Review 2016 Page 338 of 540 pages Syria

Data in US Dollars

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Nominal GDP ($US billions) 59.674 46.930 29.228 22.238 20.671

Exports ($US billions) 23.060 18.135 11.295 8.593 8.084

Imports ($US billions) 22.576 17.755 11.058 8.413 7.914

Syria Review 2016 Page 339 of 540 pages Syria

Energy Consumption and Production Standard Units

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Petroleum Consumption 293.894 221.201 224.000 221.516 226.760 (TBPD)

Petroleum Production 369.019 165.979 71.470 28.632 28.220 (TBPD)

Petroleum Net Exports 75.125 -55.2219 -152.5298 -192.8839 -198.5395 (TBPD)

Natural Gas 286.758 217.187 199.530 199.004 214.371 Consumption (bcf)

Natural Gas Production 278.200 205.494 187.554 151.582 156.844 (bcf)

Natural Gas Net Exports -8.5577 -11.6932 -11.9757 -47.4221 -57.5270 (bcf)

Coal Consumption 4.409 4.409 3.527 3.273 3.358 (1000s st)

Coal Production (1000s 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 st)

Coal Net Exports (1000s -4.4092 -4.4092 -3.5273 -3.2733 -3.3581 st)

Nuclear Production (bil 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 kwh)

Syria Review 2016 Page 340 of 540 pages Syria

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Hydroelectric Production 3.250 3.205 2.829 2.467 2.344 (bil kwh)

Renewables Production 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 (bil kwh)

Syria Review 2016 Page 341 of 540 pages Syria

Energy Consumption and Production QUADS

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Petroleum Consumption (Quads) 0.6275 0.4723 0.4783 0.4730 0.4842

Petroleum Production (Quads) 0.7879 0.3568 0.1531 0.0625 0.0482

Petroleum Net Exports (Quads) 0.1603 -0.1155 -0.3252 -0.4105 -0.4360

Natural Gas Consumption 0.2925 0.2215 0.2035 0.2030 0.2187 (Quads)

Natural Gas Production (Quads) 0.2835 0.2089 0.1909 0.1568 0.1369

Natural Gas Net Exports (Quads) -0.0090 -0.0126 -0.0126 -0.0462 -0.0817

Coal Consumption (Quads) 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001

Coal Production (Quads) 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Coal Net Exports (Quads) -0.0001 -0.0001 -0.0001 -0.0001 -0.0001

Nuclear Production (Quads) 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Hydroelectric Production (Quads) 0.0325 0.0320 0.0283 0.0247 0.0234

Renewables Production (Quads) 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Syria Review 2016 Page 342 of 540 pages Syria

World Energy Price Summary

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Petroleum-WTI ($/bbl) 95.054 94.159 97.943 93.112 48.709

Natural Gas-Henry Hub ($/mmbtu) 3.999 2.752 3.729 4.369 2.614

Coal Thermal-Australian ($/mt) 121.448 96.364 84.562 70.130 57.511

Syria Review 2016 Page 343 of 540 pages Syria

CO2 Emissions

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Petroleum Based (mm mt C) 11.564 11.727 11.968 10.863 11.170

Natural Gas Based (mm mt C) 4.652 3.524 3.237 3.229 3.478

Coal Based (mm mt C) 0.0025 0.0025 0.0020 0.0019 0.0019

Total CO2 Emissions (mm mt C) 16.218 15.253 15.207 14.093 14.650

Syria Review 2016 Page 344 of 540 pages Syria

Agriculture Consumption and Production

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Corn Total Consumption 1,793.36 963.204 615.337 391.747 365.911 (1000 metric tons)

Corn Production 297.815 256.900 108.700 68.106 63.475 (1000 metric tons)

Corn Net Exports -1495.5410 -706.3037 -506.6367 -323.6403 -302.4356 (1000 metric tons)

Soybeans Total Consumption 343.825 84.820 53.945 24.987 22.714 (1000 metric tons)

Soybeans Production 2.228 0.8185 0.5417 0.2981 0.2654 (1000 metric tons)

Soybeans Net Exports -341.5971 -84.0015 -53.4033 -24.6886 -22.4484 (1000 metric tons)

Syria Review 2016 Page 345 of 540 pages Syria

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Rice Total Consumption 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 (1000 metric tons)

Rice Production 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 (1000 metric tons)

Rice Net Exports 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 (1000 metric tons)

Coffee Total Consumption 27,313.00 19,833.00 21,763.00 21,621.47 20,684.10 (metric tons)

Coffee Production 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 (metric tons)

Coffee Net Exports -27313.0000 -19833.0000 -21763.0000 -21621.4744 -20684.0971 (metric tons)

Cocoa Beans Total 31.425 39.500 49.651 62.411 55.182 Consumption (metric tons)

Cocoa Beans Production 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 (metric tons)

Cocoa Beans Net Exports -31.4246 -39.5002 -49.6512 -62.4107 -55.1817

Syria Review 2016 Page 346 of 540 pages Syria

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

(metric tons)

Wheat Total Consumption 4,398.82 3,949.48 4,711.67 3,769.57 3,224.00 (1000 metric tons)

Wheat Production 3,849.76 3,628.20 3,177.13 2,031.01 1,690.35 (1000 metric tons)

Wheat Net Exports -549.0621 -321.2827 -1534.5451 -1738.5615 -1533.6422 (1000 metric tons)

Syria Review 2016 Page 347 of 540 pages Syria

World Agriculture Pricing Summary

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Corn Pricing Summary 291.684 298.417 259.389 192.881 169.750 ($/metric ton)

Soybeans Pricing Summary 540.667 591.417 538.417 491.771 390.417 ($/metric ton)

Rice Pricing Summary ($/metric 458.558 525.071 473.989 425.148 386.033 ton)

Coffee Pricing Summary 5.976 4.111 3.076 4.424 3.526 ($/kilogram)

Cocoa Beans Pricing Summary 2.980 2.392 2.439 3.062 3.135 ($/kilogram)

Wheat Pricing Summary 316.264 313.242 312.248 284.895 203.177 ($/metric ton)

Syria Review 2016 Page 348 of 540 pages Syria

Metals Consumption and Production

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Copper Consumption 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 (1000 mt)

Copper Production (1000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 mt)

Copper Net Exports (1000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 mt)

Zinc Consumption (1000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 mt)

Zinc Production (1000 mt) 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Zinc Exports (1000 mt) 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Lead Consumption (1000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 mt)

Lead Production (1000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 mt)

Lead Exports (1000 mt) 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Tin Consumption (1000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 mt)

Tin Production (1000 mt) 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Syria Review 2016 Page 349 of 540 pages Syria

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Tin Exports (1000 mt) 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Nickel Consumption 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 (1000 mt)

Nickel Production (1000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 mt)

Nickel Exports (1000 mt) 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Gold Consumption (kg) 215.684 222.388 229.696 245.103 220.167

Gold Production (kg) 122.264 126.064 130.207 138.941 134.090

Gold Exports (kg) -93.4199 -96.3237 -99.4891 -106.1625 -86.0771

Silver Consumption (mt) 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Silver Production (mt) 592.757 621.959 632.015 654.054 601.093

Silver Exports (mt) 592.757 621.959 632.015 654.054 601.093

Syria Review 2016 Page 350 of 540 pages Syria

World Metals Pricing Summary

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Copper ($/mt) 8,828.19 7,962.35 7,332.10 6,863.40 5,510.46

Zinc ($/mt) 2,193.90 1,950.41 1,910.26 2,160.97 1,931.68

Tin ($/mt) 26,053.68 21,125.99 22,282.80 21,898.87 16,066.63

Lead ($/mt) 2,400.81 2,064.64 2,139.79 2,095.46 1,787.82

Nickel ($/mt) 22,910.36 17,547.55 15,031.80 16,893.38 11,862.64

Gold ($/oz) 1,569.21 1,669.52 1,411.46 1,265.58 1,160.66

Silver ($/oz) 35.224 31.137 23.850 19.071 15.721

Syria Review 2016 Page 351 of 540 pages Syria

Economic Performance Index

The Economic Performance rankings are calculated by CountryWatch's editorial team, and are based on criteria including sustained economic growth, monetary stability, current account deficits, budget surplus, unemployment and structural imbalances. Scores are assessed from 0 to 100 using this aforementioned criteria as well as CountryWatch's proprietary economic research data and models.

Econ.GNP Bank Monetary/ growth or stability Currency Government Empl./ decline/ risk stability Finances Unempl. forecast

0 - 100 0 - 100 0 - 100 0 - 100 %

North Americas

Canada 92 69 35 38 3.14%

United States 94 76 4 29 3.01%

Western Europe

Austria 90 27 30 63 1.33%

Belgium 88 27 19 23 1.15%

Cyprus 81 91 16 80 -0.69%

Denmark 97 70 45 78 1.20%

Finland 89 27 41 33 1.25%

Syria Review 2016 Page 352 of 540 pages Syria

France 87 27 18 27 1.52%

Germany 86 27 22 21 1.25%

Greece 79 27 5 24 -2.00%

Iceland 90 17 2 34 -3.04%

Italy 85 27 37 24 0.84%

Ireland 92 27 11 10 -1.55%

Luxembourg 99 27 28 66 2.08%

Malta 77 27 41 51 0.54%

Netherlands 91 27 26 74 1.30%

Norway 98 44 10 76 1.08%

Portugal 77 27 13 20 0.29%

Spain 83 27 9 3 -0.41%

Sweden 94 72 54 32 1.23%

Switzerland 97 86 55 77 1.53%

United Kingdom 85 12 9 37 1.34%

Central and Eastern Europe

Albania 44 60 33 6 2.30%

Armenia 45 59 49 30 1.80%

Syria Review 2016 Page 353 of 540 pages Syria

Azerbaijan 56 4 84 99 2.68%

Belarus 59 21 83 98 2.41%

Bosnia and Herzegovina 34 68 69 N/A 0.50%

Bulgaria 58 75 88 49 0.20%

Croatia 69 68 94 9 0.18%

Czech Republic 80 89 29 70 1.67%

Estonia 72 90 66 92 0.80%

Georgia 36 60 53 56 2.00%

Hungary 70 66 26 54 -0.16%

Latvia 67 100 65 44 -3.97%

Lithuania 65 91 87 79 -1.65%

Macedonia (FYR) 53 69 56 2 2.03%

Moldova 23 36 81 67 2.50%

Poland 74 74 38 12 2.72%

Romania 62 56 70 62 0.75%

Russia 73 18 90 8 4.00%

Serbia 48 49 52 5 1.97%

Syria Review 2016 Page 354 of 540 pages Syria

Montenegro 39 27 73 1 -1.70%

Slovak Republic 80 62 30 14 4.06%

Slovenia 81 27 36 65 1.12%

Ukraine 41 11 57 N/A 3.68%

Africa

Algeria 57 18 96 7 4.55%

Angola 49 1 97 N/A 7.05%

Benin 19 91 20 N/A 3.22%

Botswana 68 58 76 N/A 6.33%

Burkina Faso 16 91 13 N/A 4.41%

Burundi 2 91 6 N/A 3.85%

Cameroon 26 91 91 N/A 2.58%

Cape Verde 52 87 4 N/A 4.96%

Central African Republic 9 91 32 N/A 3.18%

Chad 22 91 89 N/A 4.42%

Congo 52 87 87 N/A 12.13%

Côte d’Ivoire 25 91 82 28 2.98%

Dem. Republic

Syria Review 2016 Page 355 of 540 pages Syria

Congo 4 91 47 N/A 5.44%

Djibouti 31 76 50 N/A 4.47%

Egypt 37 20 24 69 5.01%

Equatorial Guinea 82 91 85 N/A 0.94%

Eritrea 1 3 1 18 1.81%

Ethiopia 6 45 8 N/A 6.96%

Gabon 64 91 96 N/A 5.36%

Gambia 8 48 86 N/A 4.82%

Ghana 9 11 69 N/A 4.50%

Guinea 10 7 91 N/A 3.03%

Guinea-Bissau 5 91 46 N/A 3.47%

Kenya 20 41 59 N/A 4.11%

Lesotho 13 40 12 N/A 2.98%

Liberia 12 73 74 N/A 5.92%

Libya 73 2 94 N/A 5.22%

Madagascar 4 22 24 N/A -1.02%

Malawi 7 25 55 N/A 5.96%

Mali 20 91 82 N/A 5.12%

Syria Review 2016 Page 356 of 540 pages Syria

Mauritania 15 13 93 N/A 4.58%

Mauritius 65 52 56 55 4.10%

Morocco 37 72 48 26 3.23%

Mozambique 12 23 71 N/A 6.45%

Namibia 40 39 62 N/A 1.70%

Niger 10 91 21 N/A 4.41%

Nigeria 30 6 61 N/A 6.98%

Rwanda 21 40 68 N/A 5.39%

Sao Tome & Principe 1 61 100 N/A 3.40%

Senegal 24 91 63 N/A 3.44%

Seychelles 60 67 97 N/A 4.01%

Sierra Leone 5 10 39 N/A 4.77%

Somalia 2 38 59 N/A 3.19%

South Africa 61 37 70 N/A 2.59%

Sudan 16 5 73 N/A 5.52%

Swaziland 32 44 79 N/A 1.09%

Tanzania 15 45 32 N/A 6.17%

Togo 8 91 92 N/A 2.56%

Syria Review 2016 Page 357 of 540 pages Syria

Tunisia 50 61 44 39 4.00%

Uganda 11 17 54 N/A 5.59%

Zambia 29 20 49 N/A 5.84%

Zimbabwe 0 8 16 N/A 2.24%

South and Central America

Argentina 66 3 80 36 3.50%

Belize 47 76 80 N/A 1.00%

Bolivia 32 51 61 81 3.99%

Brazil 71 47 78 11 5.50%

Chile 78 25 92 73 4.72%

Columbia 47 52 34 47 2.25%

Costa Rica 60 42 39 57 3.45%

Ecuador 43 76 75 64 2.51%

El Salvador 35 76 67 N/A 1.04%

Guatemala 46 59 58 N/A 2.52%

Honduras 27 47 58 N/A 2.00%

Mexico 69 42 52 61 4.07%

Nicaragua 23 49 42 N/A 1.75%

Syria Review 2016 Page 358 of 540 pages Syria

Panama 66 76 72 45 5.00%

Paraguay 35 46 66 16 5.27%

Peru 59 66 75 22 6.33%

Suriname 58 26 81 59 4.02%

Uruguay 70 26 27 N/A 5.71%

Venezuela 55 1 28 13 -2.63%

Caribbean

Antigua & Barbuda 72 76 15 N/A -2.01%

Bahamas 74 76 45 87 -0.50%

Barbados 67 76 33 15 -0.50%

Bermuda N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Cuba 45 76 18 95 0.25%

Dominica 53 76 65 N/A 1.40%

Dominican Republic 54 39 43 4 3.50%

Grenada 63 76 48 N/A 0.80%

Guyana 28 56 17 N/A 4.36%

Haiti 11 27 89 N/A -8.50%

Jamaica 42 9 85 19 -0.28%

Syria Review 2016 Page 359 of 540 pages Syria

St Lucia 55 76 67 N/A 1.14%

St Vincent & Grenadines 49 76 95 N/A 0.50%

Trinidad & Tobago 82 37 77 72 2.13%

Middle East

Bahrain 84 76 62 91 3.48%

Iran 51 19 40 58 3.01%

Iraq 48 9 8 N/A 7.27%

Israel 87 62 12 48 3.20%

Jordan 41 51 3 N/A 4.10%

Kuwait 96 4 99 N/A 3.10%

Lebanon 63 54 2 N/A 6.00%

Oman 76 16 88 N/A 4.71%

Qatar 99 16 83 N/A 18.54%

Saudi Arabia 76 8 98 N/A 3.70%

Syria 61 24 40 N/A 5.00%

Turkey 75 23 27 60 5.20%

United Arab Emirates 96 24 98 94 1.29%

Syria Review 2016 Page 360 of 540 pages Syria

Yemen 28 2 78 N/A 7.78%

Asia

Afghanistan 17 70 74 N/A 8.64%

Bangladesh 13 43 25 N/A 5.38%

Bhutan 24 55 5 N/A 6.85%

Brunei 78 19 99 75 0.48%

Cambodia 18 67 42 N/A 4.77%

China 54 90 19 68 11.03%

Hong Kong 89 76 14 82 5.02%

India 31 38 34 35 8.78%

Indonesia 42 46 37 31 6.00%

Japan 88 89 6 71 1.90%

Kazakhstan 62 13 76 42 2.40%

Korea North 18 65 23 N/A 1.50%

Korea South 83 63 22 85 4.44%

Kyrgyz Republic 24 15 84 88 4.61%

Laos 17 54 7 N/A 7.22%

Macao 91 76 14 82 3.00%

Syria Review 2016 Page 361 of 540 pages Syria

Malaysia 68 65 44 90 4.72%

Maldives 44 55 17 N/A 3.45%

Mongolia 33 5 77 93 7.22%

Myanmar 3 41 72 N/A 5.26%

Nepal 3 14 25 N/A 2.97%

Pakistan 19 15 31 41 3.00%

Papua New Guinea 75 50 11 N/A 7.96%

Philippines 30 48 53 43 3.63%

Singapore 93 75 63 40 5.68%

Sri Lanka 38 22 10 N/A 5.50%

Taiwan 84 88 35 89 6.50%

Tajikistan 6 6 60 97 4.00%

Thailand 56 64 90 96 5.46%

Turkmenistan 51 53 68 N/A 12.00%

Uzbekistan 40 10 60 100 8.00%

Vietnam 25 12 20 N/A 6.04%

Pacific

Australia 96 63 31 46 2.96%

Syria Review 2016 Page 362 of 540 pages Syria

Fiji 46 53 3 N/A 2.06%

Marshall Islands 27 76 46 N/A 1.08%

Micronesia (Fed. States) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

New Caledonia 96 73 51 52 2.00%

New Zealand 98 73 51 52 2.00%

Samoa 34 88 64 N/A -2.77%

Solomon Islands 14 71 1 N/A 3.36%

Tonga 26 57 38 N/A 0.60%

Vanuatu 33 58 47 N/A 3.80%

Source:

CountryWatch Inc. www.countrywatch.com

Updated:

This material was produced in 2010; it is subject to updating in 2012.

Syria Review 2016 Page 363 of 540 pages Syria div style='margin-top:40%;padding-top:40%'>

Chapter 4

Investment Overview

Syria Review 2016 Page 364 of 540 pages Syria

Foreign Investment Climate

Background

Damascus has implemented modest economic reforms in the past few years, including cutting lending interest rates, opening private banks, consolidating all of the multiple exchange rates, raising prices on some subsidized items, most notably gasoline and cement, and establishing the Damascus Stock Exchange - which was set to begin operations in 2009. In addition, President ASAD signed legislative decrees to encourage corporate ownership reform, and to allow the Central Bank to issue Treasury bills and bonds for government debt. Nevertheless, the economy remains highly controlled by the government. Long-run economic constraints include declining oil production, high unemployment, rising budget deficits, and increasing pressure on water supplies caused by heavy use in agriculture, rapid population growth, industrial expansion, and water pollution.

Foreign Investment Assessment

The Syrian government has welcomed foreign investors for over and decade. Foreign investment is particularly attractive to Syrian authorities because of the potential technology transfer benefits and help with economic development. However, the country has not fully adopted the strong legal framework needed by both foreign investors and Syrian expatriates. Most representatives of foreign firms find Syria's business environment a difficult one, although recent Syrian government measures to improve the investment climate may change this perception over the course of time.

Labor Force

Labor force: 4.97 million Labor force - by occupation: agriculture, industry, services N/A

Agriculture and Industry

Agriculture - products: wheat, barley, cotton, lentils, chickpeas, olives, sugar beets; beef, mutton,

Syria Review 2016 Page 365 of 540 pages Syria eggs, poultry, milk Industries: petroleum, textiles, food processing, beverages, tobacco, phosphate rock mining

Import Commodities and Import Partners

Imports - commodities: machinery and transport equipment, electric power machinery, food and livestock, metal and metal products, chemicals and chemical products, plastics, yarn, paper Imports - partners: Germany 7.2%, Italy 7.1%, China 6.3%, France 5.9%, Turkey 5.4%

Export Commodities and Export Partners

Exports - commodities: crude oil, petroleum products, fruits and vegetables, cotton fiber, clothing, meat and live animals, wheat Exports - partners: Germany 20.9%, Italy 12.6%, UAE 7.6%, Lebanon 6.2%, Turkey 6%, France 5.4%, Croatia 4.8%, US 4.1%

Telephone System

Telephones - main lines in use: 2,099,300 Telephones - mobile cellular: 400,000 general assessment: fair system currently undergoing significant improvement and digital upgrades, including fiber-optic technology domestic: coaxial cable and microwave radio relay network international: country code - 963 satellite earth stations - 1 Intelsat (Indian Ocean) and 1 Intersputnik (Atlantic Ocean region); 1 submarine cable; coaxial cable and microwave radio relay to Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey; participant in Medarabtel

Internet Users

Internet hosts: 11 Internet users: 220,000 and on the rise

Syria Review 2016 Page 366 of 540 pages Syria

Roads, Airports, Ports and Harbors

Railways: total: 2,711 km Highways: total: 43,381 km Ports and harbors: Baniyas, Jablah, Latakia, Tartus Airports: 93; with paved runways: 26

Legal System and Considerations

Based on Islamic (Sharia) law and civil law system with special religious courts. In cases of disputes, it should be noted that Syria is a party to The New York Convention on arbitration. The government accepts binding international arbitration of investment disputes between foreign investors and the state in cases where the investment agreement or contract includes such a clause. Otherwise, local courts have jurisdiction.

Corruption Perception Ranking

See full list, as reported by Transparency International, from least to most corrupt, provided elsewhere in this Country Review for Syria's current rank.

Cultural Considerations

Syria is a predominantly Muslim culture and although it is not considered to be a fundamentalist Islamic country, behavior and self-presentation should be appropriate to this environment.

Country Website

N/A

Foreign Investment Index

The Foreign Investment Index is a proprietary index measuring attractiveness to international

Syria Review 2016 Page 367 of 540 pages Syria investment flows. The Foreign Investment Index is calculated using an established methodology by CountryWatch's Editor-in-Chief and is based on a given country's economic stability (sustained economic growth, monetary stability, current account deficits, budget surplus), economic risk (risk of non-servicing of payments for goods or services, loans and trade-related finance, risk of sovereign default), business and investment climate (property rights, labor force and laws, regulatory transparency, openness to foreign investment, market conditions, and stability of government). Scores are assigned from 0-10 using the aforementioned criteria. A score of 0 marks the lowest level of foreign investment viability, while a score of 10 marks the highest level of foreign investment viability, according to this proprietary index.

Country Assessment

Afghanistan 2

Albania 4.5

Algeria 6

Andorra 9

Angola 4.5-5

Antigua 8.5

Argentina 5

Armenia 5

Australia 9.5

Austria 9-9.5

Azerbaijan 5

Syria Review 2016 Page 368 of 540 pages Syria

Bahamas 9

Bahrain 7.5

Bangladesh 4.5

Barbados 9

Belarus 4

Belgium 9

Belize 7.5

Benin 5.5

Bhutan 4.5

Bolivia 4.5

Bosnia-Herzegovina 5

Botswana 7.5-8

Brazil 8

Brunei 7

Bulgaria 5.5

Burkina Faso 4

Burma (Myanmar) 4.5

Burundi 4

Syria Review 2016 Page 369 of 540 pages Syria

Cambodia 4.5

Cameroon 5

Canada 9.5

Cape Verde 6

Central African Republic 3

Chad 4

Chile 9

China 7.5

China: Hong Kong 8.5

China: Taiwan 8.5

Colombia 7

Comoros 4

Congo DRC 4

Congo RC 5

Costa Rica 8

Cote d'Ivoire 4.5

Croatia 7

Cuba 4.5

Syria Review 2016 Page 370 of 540 pages Syria

Cyprus 7

Czech Republic 8.5

Denmark 9.5

Djibouti 4.5

Dominica 6

Dominican Republic 6.5

East Timor 4.5

Ecuador 5.5

Egypt 4.5-5

El Salvador 6

Equatorial Guinea 4.5

Eritrea 3.5

Estonia 8

Ethiopia 4.5

Fiji 5

Finland 9

Former Yugoslav Rep. of Macedonia 5

France 9-9.5

Syria Review 2016 Page 371 of 540 pages Syria

Gabon 5.5

Gambia 5

Georgia 5

Germany 9-9.5

Ghana 5.5

Greece 5

Grenada 7.5

Guatemala 5.5

Guinea 3.5

Guinea-Bissau 3.5

Guyana 4.5

Haiti 4

Holy See (Vatican) n/a

Hong Kong (China) 8.5

Honduras 5.5

Hungary 8

Iceland 8-8.5

India 8

Syria Review 2016 Page 372 of 540 pages Syria

Indonesia 5.5

Iran 4

Iraq 3

Ireland 8

Israel 8.5

Italy 8

Jamaica 5.5

Japan 9.5

Jordan 6

Kazakhstan 6

Kenya 5

Kiribati 5.5

Korea, North 1

Korea, South 9

Kosovo 4.5

Kuwait 8.5

Kyrgyzstan 4.5

Laos 4

Syria Review 2016 Page 373 of 540 pages Syria

Latvia 7

Lebanon 5

Lesotho 5.5

Liberia 3.5

Libya 3

Liechtenstein 9

Lithuania 7.5

Luxembourg 9-9.5

Madagascar 4.5

Malawi 4.5

Malaysia 8.5

Maldives 6.5

Mali 5

Malta 9

Marshall Islands 5

Mauritania 4.5

Mauritius 7.5-8

Mexico 6.5-7

Syria Review 2016 Page 374 of 540 pages Syria

Micronesia 5

Moldova 4.5-5

Monaco 9

Mongolia 5

Montenegro 5.5

Morocco 7.5

Mozambique 5

Namibia 7.5

Nauru 4.5

Nepal 4

Netherlands 9-9.5

New Zealand 9.5

Nicaragua 5

Niger 4.5

Nigeria 4.5

Norway 9-9.5

Oman 8

Pakistan 4

Syria Review 2016 Page 375 of 540 pages Syria

Palau 4.5-5

Panama 7

Papua New Guinea 5

Paraguay 6

Peru 6

Philippines 6

Poland 8

Portugal 7.5-8

Qatar 9

Romania 6-6.5

Russia 6

Rwanda 4

Saint Kitts and Nevis 8

Saint Lucia 8

Saint Vincent and Grenadines 7

Samoa 7

San Marino 8.5

Sao Tome and Principe 4.5-5

Syria Review 2016 Page 376 of 540 pages Syria

Saudi Arabia 7

Senegal 6

Serbia 6

Seychelles 5

Sierra Leone 4

Singapore 9.5

Slovak Republic (Slovakia) 8.5

Slovenia 8.5-9

Solomon Islands 5

Somalia 2

South Africa 8

Spain 7.5-8

Sri Lanka 5.5

Sudan 4

Suriname 5

Swaziland 4.5

Sweden 9.5

Switzerland 9.5

Syria Review 2016 Page 377 of 540 pages Syria

Syria 2.5

Tajikistan 4

Taiwan (China) 8.5

Tanzania 5

Thailand 7.5-8

Togo 4.5-5

Tonga 5.5-6

Trinidad and Tobago 8-8.5

Tunisia 6

Turkey 6.5-7

Turkmenistan 4

Tuvalu 7

Uganda 5

Ukraine 4.5-5

United Arab Emirates 8.5

United Kingdom 9

United States 9

Uruguay 6.5-7

Syria Review 2016 Page 378 of 540 pages Syria

Uzbekistan 4

Vanuatu 6

Venezuela 5

Vietnam 5.5

Yemen 3

Zambia 4.5-5

Zimbabwe 3.5

Editor's Note:

As of 2015, the global economic crisis (emerging in 2008) had affected many countries across the world, resulting in changes to their rankings. Among those countries affected were top tier economies, such as the United Kingdom, Iceland, Switzerland and Austria. However, in all these cases, their rankings have moved back upward in the last couple of years as anxieties have eased. Other top tier countries, such as Spain, Portugal, Ireland, and Italy, suffered some effects due to debt woes and the concomitant effect on the euro zone. Greece, another euro zone nation, was also downgraded due to its sovereign debt crisis; however, Greece's position on the precipice of default incurred a sharper downgrade than the other four euro zone countries mentioned above. Cyprus' exposure to Greek bank yielded a downgrade in its case. Slovenia and Latvia have been slightly downgraded due to a mix of economic and political concerns but could easily be upgraded in a future assessment, should these concerns abate. Meanwhile, the crisis in eastern Ukraine fueled downgrades in that country and neighboring Russia.

Despite the "trifecta of tragedy" in Japan in 2011 -- the earthquake, the ensuing tsunami, and the resulting nuclear crisis -- and the appreciable destabilization of the economic and political terrain therein, this country has only slightly been downgraded. Japan's challenges have been assessed to be transient, the government remains accountable, and there is little risk of default. Both India and China retain their rankings; India holds a slightly higher ranking than China due to its record of democratic representation and accountability.

There were shifts in opposite directions for Mali and Nigeria versus the Central African Republic,

Syria Review 2016 Page 379 of 540 pages Syria

Burkina Faso, and Burundi. Mali was slightly upgraded due to its efforts to return to constitutional order following the 2012 coup and to neutralize the threat of separatists and Islamists. Likewise, a new government in Nigeria generated a slight upgrade as the country attempts to confront corruption, crime, and terrorism. But the Central African Republic was downgraded due to the takeover of the government by Seleka rebels and the continued decline into lawlessness in that country. Likewise, the attempts by the leaders of Burundi and Burkina Faso to hold onto power by by-passing the constitution raised eybrows and resulted in downgrades.

Political unrest in Libya and Algeria have contributed to a decision to marginally downgrade these countries as well. Syria incurred a sharper downgrade due to the devolution into de facto civil war and the dire security threat posed by Islamist terrorists. Iraq saw a similar downgrade as a result of the takeover of wide swaths of territory and the threat of genocide at the hands of Islamist terrorists. Yemen, likewise, has been downgraded due to political instability at the hands of secessionists, terrorists, Houthi rebels, and the intervention of external parties. Conversely, Egypt and Tunisia saw slight upgrades as their political environments stabilize.

At the low end of the spectrum, devolving security conditions and/or economic crisis have resulted in countries like Pakistan, Afghanistan, Somalia, and Zimbabwe maintaining their low ratings.

The United States continues to retain its previous slight downgrade due to the enduring threat of default surrounding the debt ceiling in that country, matched by a conflict-ridden political climate. In the case of Mexico, there is limited concern about default, but increasing alarm over the security situation in that country and the government’s ability to contain it. In Argentina, a default to bond holders resulted in a downgrade to that country. Finally, a small but significant upgrade was attributed to Cuba due to its recent pro-business reforms and its normalization of ties with the Unitd States.

Source:

CountryWatch Inc. www.countrywatch.com

Updated:

2015

Corruption Perceptions Index

Syria Review 2016 Page 380 of 540 pages Syria

Corruption Perceptions Index

Transparency International: Corruption Perceptions Index

Editor's Note:

Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index is a composite index which ranks countries in terms of the degree to which corruption is perceived to exist among public officials. This index indicates the views of national and international business people and analysts about the levels of corruption in each country. The highest (and best) level of transparency is indicated by the number, 10. The lower (and worse) levels of transparency are indicated by lower numbers.

Rank Country/Territory CPI 2009 Surveys Confidence Score Used Range

1 New Zealand 9.4 6 9.1 - 9.5

2 Denmark 9.3 6 9.1 - 9.5

3 Singapore 9.2 9 9.0 - 9.4

3 Sweden 9.2 6 9.0 - 9.3

5 Switzerland 9.0 6 8.9 - 9.1

6 Finland 8.9 6 8.4 - 9.4

6 Netherlands 8.9 6 8.7 - 9.0

8 Australia 8.7 8 8.3 - 9.0

8 Canada 8.7 6 8.5 - 9.0

8 Iceland 8.7 4 7.5 - 9.4

11 Norway 8.6 6 8.2 - 9.1

Syria Review 2016 Page 381 of 540 pages Syria

12 Hong Kong 8.2 8 7.9 - 8.5

12 Luxembourg 8.2 6 7.6 - 8.8

14 Germany 8.0 6 7.7 - 8.3

14 Ireland 8.0 6 7.8 - 8.4

16 Austria 7.9 6 7.4 - 8.3

17 Japan 7.7 8 7.4 - 8.0

17 United Kingdom 7.7 6 7.3 - 8.2

19 United States 7.5 8 6.9 - 8.0

20 Barbados 7.4 4 6.6 - 8.2

21 Belgium 7.1 6 6.9 - 7.3

22 Qatar 7.0 6 5.8 - 8.1

22 Saint Lucia 7.0 3 6.7 - 7.5

24 France 6.9 6 6.5 - 7.3

25 Chile 6.7 7 6.5 - 6.9

25 Uruguay 6.7 5 6.4 - 7.1

27 Cyprus 6.6 4 6.1 - 7.1

27 Estonia 6.6 8 6.1 - 6.9

27 Slovenia 6.6 8 6.3 - 6.9

Syria Review 2016 Page 382 of 540 pages Syria

30 United Arab Emirates 6.5 5 5.5 - 7.5

31 Saint Vincent and the 6.4 3 4.9 - 7.5 Grenadines

32 Israel 6.1 6 5.4 - 6.7

32 Spain 6.1 6 5.5 - 6.6

34 Dominica 5.9 3 4.9 - 6.7

35 Portugal 5.8 6 5.5 - 6.2

35 Puerto Rico 5.8 4 5.2 - 6.3

37 Botswana 5.6 6 5.1 - 6.3

37 Taiwan 5.6 9 5.4 - 5.9

39 Brunei Darussalam 5.5 4 4.7 - 6.4

39 Oman 5.5 5 4.4 - 6.5

39 Korea (South) 5.5 9 5.3 - 5.7

42 Mauritius 5.4 6 5.0 - 5.9

43 Costa Rica 5.3 5 4.7 - 5.9

43 Macau 5.3 3 3.3 - 6.9

45 Malta 5.2 4 4.0 - 6.2

46 Bahrain 5.1 5 4.2 - 5.8

46 Cape Verde 5.1 3 3.3 - 7.0

Syria Review 2016 Page 383 of 540 pages Syria

46 Hungary 5.1 8 4.6 - 5.7

49 Bhutan 5.0 4 4.3 - 5.6

49 Jordan 5.0 7 3.9 - 6.1

49 Poland 5.0 8 4.5 - 5.5

52 Czech Republic 4.9 8 4.3 - 5.6

52 Lithuania 4.9 8 4.4 - 5.4

54 Seychelles 4.8 3 3.0 - 6.7

55 South Africa 4.7 8 4.3 - 4.9

56 Latvia 4.5 6 4.1 - 4.9

56 Malaysia 4.5 9 4.0 - 5.1

56 Namibia 4.5 6 3.9 - 5.1

56 Samoa 4.5 3 3.3 - 5.3

56 Slovakia 4.5 8 4.1 - 4.9

61 Cuba 4.4 3 3.5 - 5.1

61 Turkey 4.4 7 3.9 - 4.9

63 Italy 4.3 6 3.8 - 4.9

63 Saudi Arabia 4.3 5 3.1 - 5.3

65 Tunisia 4.2 6 3.0 - 5.5

Syria Review 2016 Page 384 of 540 pages Syria

66 Croatia 4.1 8 3.7 - 4.5

66 Georgia 4.1 7 3.4 - 4.7

66 Kuwait 4.1 5 3.2 - 5.1

69 Ghana 3.9 7 3.2 - 4.6

69 Montenegro 3.9 5 3.5 - 4.4

71 Bulgaria 3.8 8 3.2 - 4.5

71 FYR Macedonia 3.8 6 3.4 - 4.2

71 Greece 3.8 6 3.2 - 4.3

71 Romania 3.8 8 3.2 - 4.3

75 Brazil 3.7 7 3.3 - 4.3

75 Colombia 3.7 7 3.1 - 4.3

75 Peru 3.7 7 3.4 - 4.1

75 Suriname 3.7 3 3.0 - 4.7

79 Burkina Faso 3.6 7 2.8 - 4.4

79 China 3.6 9 3.0 - 4.2

79 Swaziland 3.6 3 3.0 - 4.7

79 Trinidad and Tobago 3.6 4 3.0 - 4.3

83 Serbia 3.5 6 3.3 - 3.9

Syria Review 2016 Page 385 of 540 pages Syria

84 El Salvador 3.4 5 3.0 - 3.8

84 Guatemala 3.4 5 3.0 - 3.9

84 India 3.4 10 3.2 - 3.6

84 Panama 3.4 5 3.1 - 3.7

84 Thailand 3.4 9 3.0 - 3.8

89 Lesotho 3.3 6 2.8 - 3.8

89 Malawi 3.3 7 2.7 - 3.9

89 Mexico 3.3 7 3.2 - 3.5

89 Moldova 3.3 6 2.7 - 4.0

89 Morocco 3.3 6 2.8 - 3.9

89 Rwanda 3.3 4 2.9 - 3.7

95 Albania 3.2 6 3.0 - 3.3

95 Vanuatu 3.2 3 2.3 - 4.7

97 Liberia 3.1 3 1.9 - 3.8

97 Sri Lanka 3.1 7 2.8 - 3.4

99 Bosnia and Herzegovina 3.0 7 2.6 - 3.4

99 Dominican Republic 3.0 5 2.9 - 3.2

99 Jamaica 3.0 5 2.8 - 3.3

Syria Review 2016 Page 386 of 540 pages Syria

99 Madagascar 3.0 7 2.8 - 3.2

99 Senegal 3.0 7 2.5 - 3.6

99 Tonga 3.0 3 2.6 - 3.3

99 Zambia 3.0 7 2.8 - 3.2

106 Argentina 2.9 7 2.6 - 3.1

106 Benin 2.9 6 2.3 - 3.4

106 Gabon 2.9 3 2.6 - 3.1

106 Gambia 2.9 5 1.6 - 4.0

106 Niger 2.9 5 2.7 - 3.0

111 Algeria 2.8 6 2.5 - 3.1

111 Djibouti 2.8 4 2.3 - 3.2

111 Egypt 2.8 6 2.6 - 3.1

111 Indonesia 2.8 9 2.4 - 3.2

111 Kiribati 2.8 3 2.3 - 3.3

111 Mali 2.8 6 2.4 - 3.2

111 Sao Tome and Principe 2.8 3 2.4 - 3.3

111 Solomon Islands 2.8 3 2.3 - 3.3

111 Togo 2.8 5 1.9 - 3.9

Syria Review 2016 Page 387 of 540 pages Syria

120 Armenia 2.7 7 2.6 - 2.8

120 Bolivia 2.7 6 2.4 - 3.1

120 Ethiopia 2.7 7 2.4 - 2.9

120 Kazakhstan 2.7 7 2.1 - 3.3

120 Mongolia 2.7 7 2.4 - 3.0

120 Vietnam 2.7 9 2.4 - 3.1

126 Eritrea 2.6 4 1.6 - 3.8

126 Guyana 2.6 4 2.5 - 2.7

126 Syria 2.6 5 2.2 - 2.9

126 Tanzania 2.6 7 2.4 - 2.9

130 Honduras 2.5 6 2.2 - 2.8

130 Lebanon 2.5 3 1.9 - 3.1

130 Libya 2.5 6 2.2 - 2.8

130 Maldives 2.5 4 1.8 - 3.2

130 Mauritania 2.5 7 2.0 - 3.3

130 Mozambique 2.5 7 2.3 - 2.8

130 Nicaragua 2.5 6 2.3 - 2.7

130 Nigeria 2.5 7 2.2 - 2.7

Syria Review 2016 Page 388 of 540 pages Syria

130 Uganda 2.5 7 2.1 - 2.8

139 Bangladesh 2.4 7 2.0 - 2.8

139 Belarus 2.4 4 2.0 - 2.8

139 Pakistan 2.4 7 2.1 - 2.7

139 Philippines 2.4 9 2.1 - 2.7

143 Azerbaijan 2.3 7 2.0 - 2.6

143 Comoros 2.3 3 1.6 - 3.3

143 Nepal 2.3 6 2.0 - 2.6

146 Cameroon 2.2 7 1.9 - 2.6

146 Ecuador 2.2 5 2.0 - 2.5

146 Kenya 2.2 7 1.9 - 2.5

146 Russia 2.2 8 1.9 - 2.4

146 Sierra Leone 2.2 5 1.9 - 2.4

146 Timor-Leste 2.2 5 1.8 - 2.6

146 Ukraine 2.2 8 2.0 - 2.6

146 Zimbabwe 2.2 7 1.7 - 2.8

154 Côte d´Ivoire 2.1 7 1.8 - 2.4

154 Papua New Guinea 2.1 5 1.7 - 2.5

Syria Review 2016 Page 389 of 540 pages Syria

154 Paraguay 2.1 5 1.7 - 2.5

154 Yemen 2.1 4 1.6 - 2.5

158 Cambodia 2.0 8 1.8 - 2.2

158 Central African Republic 2.0 4 1.9 - 2.2

158 Laos 2.0 4 1.6 - 2.6

158 Tajikistan 2.0 8 1.6 - 2.5

162 Angola 1.9 5 1.8 - 1.9

162 Congo Brazzaville 1.9 5 1.6 - 2.1

162 Democratic Republic of 1.9 5 1.7 - 2.1 Congo

162 Guinea-Bissau 1.9 3 1.8 - 2.0

162 Kyrgyzstan 1.9 7 1.8 - 2.1

162 Venezuela 1.9 7 1.8 - 2.0

168 Burundi 1.8 6 1.6 - 2.0

168 Equatorial Guinea 1.8 3 1.6 - 1.9

168 Guinea 1.8 5 1.7 - 1.8

168 Haiti 1.8 3 1.4 - 2.3

168 Iran 1.8 3 1.7 - 1.9

168 Turkmenistan 1.8 4 1.7 - 1.9

Syria Review 2016 Page 390 of 540 pages Syria

174 Uzbekistan 1.7 6 1.5 - 1.8

175 Chad 1.6 6 1.5 - 1.7

176 Iraq 1.5 3 1.2 - 1.8

176 Sudan 1.5 5 1.4 - 1.7

178 Myanmar 1.4 3 0.9 - 1.8

179 Afghanistan 1.3 4 1.0 - 1.5

180 Somalia 1.1 3 0.9 - 1.4

Methodology:

As noted above, the highest (and best) level of transparency with the least perceived corruption is indicated by the number, 10. The lower (and worse) levels of transparency are indicated by lower numbers.

According to Transparency International, the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) table shows a country's ranking and score, the number of surveys used to determine the score, and the confidence range of the scoring.

The rank shows how one country compares to others included in the index. The CPI score indicates the perceived level of public-sector corruption in a country/territory.

The CPI is based on 13 independent surveys. However, not all surveys include all countries. The surveys used column indicates how many surveys were relied upon to determine the score for that country.

The confidence range indicates the reliability of the CPI scores and tells us that allowing for a margin of error, we can be 90% confident that the true score for this country lies within this range.

Note:

Kosovo, which separated from the Yugoslav successor state of Serbia, is not listed above. No

Syria Review 2016 Page 391 of 540 pages Syria calculation is available for Kosovo at this time, however, a future corruption index by Transparency International may include the world's newest country in its tally. Taiwan has been listed above despite its contested status; while Taiwan claims sovereign status, China claims ultimate jurisdiction over Taiwan. Hong Kong, which is also under the rubric of Chinese sovereignty, is listed above. Note as well that Puerto Rico, which is a United States domain, is also included in the list above. These inclusions likely have to do with the size and fairly autonomous status of their economies.

Source:

Transparency International's Corruption Perception Index; available at URL: http://www.transparency.org

Updated:

Uploaded in 2011 using most recent ranking available; reviewed in 2015.

Competitiveness Ranking

Editor's Note:

The Global Competitiveness Report’s competitiveness ranking is based on the Global Competitiveness Index (GCI), which was developed for the World Economic Forum. The GCI is based on a number of competitiveness considerations, and provides a comprehensive picture of the competitiveness landscape in countries around the world. The competitiveness considerations are: institutions, infrastructure, macroeconomic environment, health and primary education, higher education and training, goods market efficiency, labour market efficiency, financial market development, technological readiness, market size, business sophistication, and innovation. The rankings are calculated from both publicly available data and the Executive Opinion Survey.

GCI 2010 GCI 2010 GCI 2009 Change Country/Economy Rank Score Rank 2009-2010

Switzerland 1 5.63 1 0

Syria Review 2016 Page 392 of 540 pages Syria

Sweden 2 5.56 4 2

Singapore 3 5.48 3 0

United States 4 5.43 2 -2

Germany 5 5.39 7 2

Japan 6 5.37 8 2

Finland 7 5.37 6 -1

Netherlands 8 5.33 10 2

Denmark 9 5.32 5 -4

Canada 10 5.30 9 -1

Hong Kong SAR 11 5.30 11 0

United Kingdom 12 5.25 13 1

Taiwan, China 13 5.21 12 -1

Norway 14 5.14 14 0

France 15 5.13 16 1

Australia 16 5.11 15 -1

Qatar 17 5.10 22 5

Austria 18 5.09 17 -1

Belgium 19 5.07 18 -1

Syria Review 2016 Page 393 of 540 pages Syria

Luxembourg 20 5.05 21 1

Saudi Arabia 21 4.95 28 7

Korea, Rep. 22 4.93 19 -3

New Zealand 23 4.92 20 -3

Israel 24 4.91 27 3

United Arab Emirates 25 4.89 23 -2

Malaysia 26 4.88 24 -2

China 27 4.84 29 2

Brunei Darussalam 28 4.75 32 4

Ireland 29 4.74 25 -4

Chile 30 4.69 30 0

Iceland 31 4.68 26 -5

Tunisia 32 4.65 40 8

Estonia 33 4.61 35 2

Oman 34 4.61 41 7

Kuwait 35 4.59 39 4

Czech Republic 36 4.57 31 -5

Bahrain 37 4.54 38 1

Syria Review 2016 Page 394 of 540 pages Syria

Thailand 38 4.51 36 -2

Poland 39 4.51 46 7

Cyprus 40 4.50 34 -6

Puerto Rico 41 4.49 42 1

Spain 42 4.49 33 -9

Barbados 43 4.45 44 1

Indonesia 44 4.43 54 10

Slovenia 45 4.42 37 -8

Portugal 46 4.38 43 -3

Lithuania 47 4.38 53 6

Italy 48 4.37 48 0

Montenegro 49 4.36 62 13

Malta 50 4.34 52 2

India 51 4.33 49 -2

Hungary 52 4.33 58 6

Panama 53 4.33 59 6

South Africa 54 4.32 45 -9

Mauritius 55 4.32 57 2

Syria Review 2016 Page 395 of 540 pages Syria

Costa Rica 56 4.31 55 -1

Azerbaijan 57 4.29 51 -6

Brazil 58 4.28 56 -2

Vietnam 59 4.27 75 16

Slovak Republic 60 4.25 47 -13

Turkey 61 4.25 61 0

Sri Lanka 62 4.25 79 17

Russian Federation 63 4.24 63 0

Uruguay 64 4.23 65 1

Jordan 65 4.21 50 -15

Mexico 66 4.19 60 -6

Romania 67 4.16 64 -3

Colombia 68 4.14 69 1

Iran 69 4.14 n/a n/a

Latvia 70 4.14 68 -2

Bulgaria 71 4.13 76 5

Kazakhstan 72 4.12 67 -5

Peru 73 4.11 78 5

Syria Review 2016 Page 396 of 540 pages Syria

Namibia 74 4.09 74 0

Morocco 75 4.08 73 -2

Botswana 76 4.05 66 -10

Croatia 77 4.04 72 -5

Guatemala 78 4.04 80 2

Macedonia, FYR 79 4.02 84 5

Rwanda 80 4.00 n/a n/a

Egypt 81 4.00 70 -11

El Salvador 82 3.99 77 -5

Greece 83 3.99 71 -12

Trinidad and Tobago 84 3.97 86 2

Philippines 85 3.96 87 2

Algeria 86 3.96 83 -3

Argentina 87 3.95 85 -2

Albania 88 3.94 96 8

Ukraine 89 3.90 82 -7

Gambia, The 90 3.90 81 -9

Honduras 91 3.89 89 -2

Syria Review 2016 Page 397 of 540 pages Syria

Lebanon 92 3.89 n/a n/a

Georgia 93 3.86 90 -3

Moldova 94 3.86 n/a n/a

Jamaica 95 3.85 91 -4

Serbia 96 3.84 93 -3

Syria 97 3.79 94 -3

Armenia 98 3.76 97 -1

Mongolia 99 3.75 117 18

Libya 100 3.74 88 -12

Dominican Republic 101 3.72 95 -6

Bosnia and Herzegovina 102 3.70 109 7

Benin 103 3.69 103 0

Senegal 104 3.67 92 -12

Ecuador 105 3.65 105 0

Kenya 106 3.65 98 -8

Bangladesh 107 3.64 106 -1

Bolivia 108 3.64 120 12

Cambodia 109 3.63 110 1

Syria Review 2016 Page 398 of 540 pages Syria

Guyana 110 3.62 104 -6

Cameroon 111 3.58 111 0

Nicaragua 112 3.57 115 3

Tanzania 113 3.56 100 -13

Ghana 114 3.56 114 0

Zambia 115 3.55 112 -3

Tajikistan 116 3.53 122 6

Cape Verde 117 3.51 n/a n/a

Uganda 118 3.51 108 -10

Ethiopia 119 3.51 118 -1

Paraguay 120 3.49 124 4

Kyrgyz Republic 121 3.49 123 2

Venezuela 122 3.48 113 -9

Pakistan 123 3.48 101 -22

Madagascar 124 3.46 121 -3

Malawi 125 3.45 119 -6

Swaziland 126 3.40 n/a n/a

Nigeria 127 3.38 99 -28

Syria Review 2016 Page 399 of 540 pages Syria

Lesotho 128 3.36 107 -21

Côte d'Ivoire 129 3.35 116 -13

Nepal 130 3.34 125 -5

Mozambique 131 3.32 129 -2

Mali 132 3.28 130 -2

Timor-Leste 133 3.23 126 -7

Burkina Faso 134 3.20 128 -6

Mauritania 135 3.14 127 -8

Zimbabwe 136 3.03 132 -4

Burundi 137 2.96 133 -4

Angola 138 2.93 n/a n/a

Chad 139 2.73 131 -8

Methodology:

The competitiveness rankings are calculated from both publicly available data and the Executive Opinion Survey, a comprehensive annual survey conducted by the World Economic Forum together with its network of Partner Institutes (leading research institutes and business organizations) in the countries covered by the Report.

Highlights according to WEF --

- The United States falls two places to fourth position, overtaken by Sweden and Singapore in the rankings of the World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Report 2010-2011

Syria Review 2016 Page 400 of 540 pages Syria

- The People’s Republic of China continues to move up the rankings, with marked improvements in several other Asian countries - Germany moves up two places to fifth place, leading the Eurozone countries - Switzerland tops the rankings

Source:

World Economic Forum; available at URL: http://www.weforum.org

Updated:

2011 using most recent ranking available; reviewed in 2015.

Taxation

Unified tax rates in Syria range progressively from 6 percent to 35 percent. Customs duties are progressively taxed from 1 percent to 100 percent. Companies that receive special licenses are afforded a five year tax holiday, and those who net export over 50 percent of their products enjoy a seven year tax holiday.

Stock Market

There is no stock market information for Syria.

Partner Links

Syria Review 2016 Page 401 of 540 pages Syria

Syria Review 2016 Page 402 of 540 pages Syria

Chapter 5

Social Overview

Syria Review 2016 Page 403 of 540 pages Syria

People

Cultural Demography

Most Syrians are of Semitic ethnic ancestry. Arabs make up around 90 percent of the population, and Arabic is the official and predominant language. Kurds, Armenians and Turkomans, among others, comprise the rest of the Syrian population.

English and French are frequently spoken by the educated segments of the citizenry.

Islam is the chief religion among the Arab population in Syria. Although Sunni Muslims are prevalent, Shiites, Alawis and Druze are also represented. The majority of the non-Arabic population, including Kurds, Armenians and Turkomans, belongs to various Christian churches. The once thriving Jewish community in Damascus is today reduced to about 1,000 people.

Human Development In terms of health and welfare, Syria's infant mortality rate is 26.78 deaths per 1,000 live births. Life expectancy at birth for the total population is 70.9 years of age -- 69.53 years of age for males, and 72.35 years of age for females. The estimated population growth in recent years is 2.45 percent and the total fertility rate is 3.78 children per woman.

The rate of literacy for the total population is 79.6 percent, but this average is not gender balanced. The literacy rate for men is 86 percent - a significantly higher rate than the 73.6 percent rate for women.

Access to water and sanitation is generally good in Syria.

A notable measure of human development is the Human Development Index (HDI), which is formulated by the United Nations Development Program. The HDI is a composite of several indicators, which measure a country's achievements in three main arenas of human development: longevity, knowledge and education, as well as economic standard of living. The HDI places Syria in the medium human development category, at 111th place in a recent ranking of 169 countries. Although the concept of human development is complicated and cannot be properly captured by

Syria Review 2016 Page 404 of 540 pages Syria values and indices, the HDI, which is calculated and updated annually, offers a wide-ranging assessment of human development in certain countries, not based solely upon traditional economic and financial indicators.

Editor's Note on Humanitarian Crisis:

Since early 2011, anti-government protests have spread and escalated across the Arab world; Syria emerged as an addition to the list of countries experiencing unrest in March 2011. At first, protesters stopped short of demanding the resignation of President Bashar al-Assad, instead demanding greater political freedom and efforts to end corruption. For his part, President Assad announced he would advance a reform agenda, which would include lifting the emergency laws that had been in place for decades, and increased rights to the country's disenfranchised Kurdish population. These moves were aimed at quelling the rising climate of unrest gripping the country. But over time, as protests continued, and as the Assad regime carried out a hard line crackdown on dissent, tensions escalated between the government and the protesters.

Syria has, meanwhile, been subject to sanctions by various countries and was sliding into pariah status in the international community. Assassinations, alleged massacres, geopolitical tensions with Turkey and Israel, and most recently, suspicions about the use of chemical weapons, have since mired the Syrian landscape. Indeed, it was increasingly clear that Syria had slipped into a state of civil war and was facing a devastating humanitarian crisis. That crisis reached new heights in August 2013 with claims that Syrian forces launched a chemical attack on the outskirts of Damascus. Was this the clear sign that United States President Barack Obama's "red line" had definitively been crossed? And would the international community become more involved in the Syrian crisis? Would the September 2013 chemical weapons deal with Syria between the United States and Russia quiet the war drums? Would Syria actually abide by its international obligations

Syria Review 2016 Page 405 of 540 pages Syria set forth in that agreement? The answers to those questions were yet to be determined. In the meanwhile, the highly anticipated peace summit in Geneva ended without yielding any productive results.

Even as the global community remained ensconced in the ongoing debate on how to end the violence and bloodshed in Syria (occuring since 2011), human rights groups were accumulating the evidence against the Assad regime on the matter of human rights violations and abuses. To this end, a report issued by Amnesty International included the accusation that the Syrian regime was using torture and other forms of ill-treatment against detainees in that country at unprecedented levels. The report, which was titled, "I Wanted to Die: Syria's Torture Victims Speak Out," documented 31 methods of torture and other abusive tactics -- including gender-based torture, sexual violence, and electric shock -- which Amnesty International said were used by Syrian security forces against detainees. Amnesty International's Ann Harrison said, "Testimonies we have heard give disturbing insights into a system of detention and interrogation which appears intended primarily to humiliate and terrify its victims into silence." Harrison went on to note that the scale of torture and abuse was at a level not seen since the 1970s and 1980s, when Hafez Assad ruled Syria.

Since the conflict between anti-government protesters and the Assad regime broke out at the start of 2011, the number of people who have perished in Syria was reported to be a shocking 60,000, according to a study released by the United Nations at the start of 2013. Note that the death toll was later increased to 70,000, and again revised to 93,000 in June 2013. Note that at the close of July 2013, the death toll since the start of the war in Syria stood at 100,000.

Syria Review 2016 Page 406 of 540 pages Syria

Written by Dr. Denise Youngblood Coleman, Editor in Chief, www.countrywatch.com . See Bibliography for list of general research sources.

Human Development Index

Human Development Index (Ranked Numerically)

Syria Review 2016 Page 407 of 540 pages Syria

The Human Development Index (HDI) is used to measure quality of life in countries across the world. The HDI has been compiled since 1990 by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) on a regular basis. The HDI is a composite of several indicators, which measure a country's achievements in three main arenas of human development: longevity, education, and economic standard of living. Although the concept of human development is complicated and cannot be properly captured by values and indices, the HDI offers a wide-ranging assessment of human development in certain countries, not based solely upon traditional economic and financial indicators. For more information about the methodology used to calculate the HDI, please see the "Source Materials" in the appendices of this review.

Very High Human High Human Medium Human Low Human Development Development Development Development

1. Norway 43. Bahamas 86. Fiji 128. Kenya

2. Australia 44. Lithuania 87. Turkmenistan 129. Bangladesh

88. Dominican 3. New Zealand 45. Chile Republic 130. Ghana

4. United States 46. Argentina 89. China 131. Cameroon

132. Myanmar 5. Ireland 47. Kuwait 90. El Salvador (Burma)

6. Liechtenstein 48. Latvia 91. Sri Lanka 133. Yemen

7. Netherlands 49. Montenegro 92. Thailand 134. Benin

135. 8. Canada 50. Romania 93. Gabon Madagascar

9. Sweden 51. Croatia 94. Surname 136. Mauritania

137. Papua 10. Germany 52. Uruguay 95. Bolivia New Guinea

Syria Review 2016 Page 408 of 540 pages Syria

11. Japan 53. Libya 96. Paraguay 138. Nepal

12. South Korea 54. Panama 97. Philippines 139. Togo

13. Switzerland 55. Saudi Arabia 98. Botswana 140. Comoros

14. France 56. Mexico 99. Moldova 141. Lesotho

15. Israel 57. Malaysia 100. Mongolia 142. Nigeria

16. Finland 58. Bulgaria 101. Egypt 143. Uganda

17. Iceland 59. Trinidad and Tobago 102. Uzbekistan 144. Senegal

18. Belgium 60. Serbia 103. Micronesia 145. Haiti

19. Denmark 61. Belarus 104. Guyana 146. Angola

20. Spain 62. Costa Rica 105. Namibia 147. Djibouti

21. Hong King 63. Peru 106. Honduras 148. Tanzania

149. Cote 22. Greece 64. Albania 107. Maldives d'Ivoire

23. Italy 65. Russian Federation 108. Indonesia 150. Zambia

24. Luxembourg 66. Kazakhstan 109. Kyrgyzstan 151. Gambia

25. Austria 67. Azerbaijan 110. South Africa 152. Rwanda

26. United 68. Bosnia and Kingdom Herzegovina 111. Syria 153. Malawi

27. Singapore 69. Ukraine 112. Tajikistan 154. Sudan

Syria Review 2016 Page 409 of 540 pages Syria

28. Czech 155. Republic 70. Iran 113. Vietnam Afghanistan

71. The former Yugoslav 29. Slovenia Republic of Macedonia 114. Morocco 156. Guinea

30. Andorra 72. Mauritius 115. Nicaragua 157. Ethiopia

158. Sierra 31. Slovakia 73. Brazil 116. Guatemala Leone

159. Central 32. United Arab 117. Equatorial African Emirates 74. Georgia Guinea Republic

33. Malta 75. Venezuela 118. Cape Verde 160. Mali

161. Burkina 34. Estonia 76. Armenia 119. India Faso

35. Cyprus 77. Ecuador 120. East Timor 162. Liberia

36. Hungary 78. Belize 121. Swaziland 163. Chad

164. Guinea- 37. Brunei 79. Colombia 122. Laos Bissau

123. Solomon 165. 38. Qatar 80. Jamaica Islands Mozambique

39. Bahrain 81. Tunisia 124. Cambodia 166. Burundi

40. Portugal 82. Jordan 125. Pakistan 167. Niger

168. Congo 41. Poland 83. Turkey 126. Congo RC DRC

127. Sao Tome

Syria Review 2016 Page 410 of 540 pages Syria

42. Barbados 84. Algeria and Principe 169. Zimbabwe

85. Tonga

Methodology:

For more information about the methodology used to calculate the HDI, please see the "Source Materials" in the appendices of this Country Review.

Reference:

As published in United Nations Development Programme's Human Development Report 2010.

Source:

United Nations Development Programme's Human Development Index available at URL: http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/

Updated:

Uploaded in 2011 using ranking available; reviewed in 2015

Life Satisfaction Index

Created by Adrian G. White, an Analytic Social Psychologist at the University of Leicester, the "Satisfaction with Life Index" measures subjective life satisfaction across various countries. The data was taken from a metastudy (see below for source) and associates the notion of subjective happiness or life satisfaction with qualitative parameters such as health, wealth, and access to basic education. This assessment serves as an alternative to other measures of happiness that tend to rely on traditional and quantitative measures of policy on quality of life, such as GNP and GDP. The methodology involved the responses of 80,000 people across the globe.

Syria Review 2016 Page 411 of 540 pages Syria

Rank Country Score

1 Denmark 273.4

2 Switzerland 273.33

3 Austria 260

4 Iceland 260

5 The Bahamas 256.67

6 Finland 256.67

7 Sweden 256.67

8 Iran 253.33

9 Brunei 253.33

10 Canada 253.33

11 Ireland 253.33

12 Luxembourg 253.33

13 Costa Rica 250

14 Malta 250

15 Netherlands 250

16 Antiguaand Barbuda 246.67

Syria Review 2016 Page 412 of 540 pages Syria

17 Malaysia 246.67

18 New Zealand 246.67

19 Norway 246.67

20 Seychelles 246.67

21 Saint Kitts and Nevis 246.67

22 United Arab Emirates 246.67

23 United States 246.67

24 Vanuatu 246.67

25 Venezuela 246.67

26 Australia 243.33

27 Barbados 243.33

28 Belgium 243.33

29 Dominica 243.33

30 Oman 243.33

31 Saudi Arabia 243.33

32 Suriname 243.33

33 Bahrain 240

34 Colombia 240

Syria Review 2016 Page 413 of 540 pages Syria

35 Germany 240

36 Guyana 240

37 Honduras 240

38 Kuwait 240

39 Panama 240

40 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 240

41 United Kingdom 236.67

42 Dominican Republic 233.33

43 Guatemala 233.33

44 Jamaica 233.33

45 Qatar 233.33

46 Spain 233.33

47 Saint Lucia 233.33

48 Belize 230

49 Cyprus 230

50 Italy 230

51 Mexico 230

52 Samoa 230

Syria Review 2016 Page 414 of 540 pages Syria

53 Singapore 230

54 Solomon Islands 230

55 Trinidad and Tobago 230

56 Argentina 226.67

57 Fiji 223.33

58 Israel 223.33

59 Mongolia 223.33

60 São Tomé and Príncipe 223.33

61 El Salvador 220

62 France 220

63 Hong Kong 220

64 Indonesia 220

65 Kyrgyzstan 220

66 Maldives 220

67 Slovenia 220

68 Taiwan 220

69 East Timor 220

70 Tonga 220

Syria Review 2016 Page 415 of 540 pages Syria

71 Chile 216.67

72 Grenada 216.67

73 Mauritius 216.67

74 Namibia 216.67

75 Paraguay 216.67

76 Thailand 216.67

77 Czech Republic 213.33

78 Philippines 213.33

79 Tunisia 213.33

80 Uzbekistan 213.33

81 Brazil 210

82 China 210

83 Cuba 210

84 Greece 210

85 Nicaragua 210

86 Papua New Guinea 210

87 Uruguay 210

88 Gabon 206.67

Syria Review 2016 Page 416 of 540 pages Syria

89 Ghana 206.67

90 Japan 206.67

91 Yemen 206.67

92 Portugal 203.33

93 Sri Lanka 203.33

94 Tajikistan 203.33

95 Vietnam 203.33

96 Bhutan 200

97 Comoros 196.67

98 Croatia 196.67

99 Poland 196.67

100 Cape Verde 193.33

101 Kazakhstan 193.33

102 South Korea 193.33

103 Madagascar 193.33

104 Bangladesh 190

105 Republic of the Congo 190

106 The Gambia 190

Syria Review 2016 Page 417 of 540 pages Syria

107 Hungary 190

108 Libya 190

109 South Africa 190

110 Cambodia 186.67

111 Ecuador 186.67

112 Kenya 186.67

113 Lebanon 186.67

114 Morocco 186.67

115 Peru 186.67

116 Senegal 186.67

117 Bolivia 183.33

118 Haiti 183.33

119 Nepal 183.33

120 Nigeria 183.33

121 Tanzania 183.33

122 Benin 180

123 Botswana 180

124 Guinea-Bissau 180

Syria Review 2016 Page 418 of 540 pages Syria

125 India 180

126 Laos 180

127 Mozambique 180

128 Palestinian Authority 180

129 Slovakia 180

130 Myanmar 176.67

131 Mali 176.67

132 Mauritania 176.67

133 Turkey 176.67

134 Algeria 173.33

135 Equatorial Guinea 173.33

136 Romania 173.33

137 Bosnia and Herzegovina 170

138 Cameroon 170

139 Estonia 170

140 Guinea 170

141 Jordan 170

142 Syria 170

Syria Review 2016 Page 419 of 540 pages Syria

143 Sierra Leone 166.67

144 Azerbaijan 163.33

145 Central African Republic 163.33

146 Republic of Macedonia 163.33

147 Togo 163.33

148 Zambia 163.33

149 Angola 160

150 Djibouti 160

151 Egypt 160

152 Burkina Faso 156.67

153 Ethiopia 156.67

154 Latvia 156.67

155 Lithuania 156.67

156 Uganda 156.67

157 Albania 153.33

158 Malawi 153.33

159 Chad 150

160 Côte d'Ivoire 150

Syria Review 2016 Page 420 of 540 pages Syria

161 Niger 150

162 Eritrea 146.67

163 Rwanda 146.67

164 Bulgaria 143.33

165 Lesotho 143.33

166 Pakistan 143.33

167 Russia 143.33

168 Swaziland 140

169 Georgia 136.67

170 Belarus 133.33

171 Turkmenistan 133.33

172 Armenia 123.33

173 Sudan 120

174 Ukraine 120

175 Moldova 116.67

176 Democratic Republic of the Congo 110

177 Zimbabwe 110

178 Burundi 100

Syria Review 2016 Page 421 of 540 pages Syria

Commentary:

European countries, such as Denmark, Iceland, Finland, Sweden, Switzerland, Austria resided at the top of the ranking with highest levels of self-reported life satisfaction. Conversely, European countries such as Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Belarus and Ukraine ranked low on the index. African countries such as Democratic Republic of Congo, Zimbabwe and Burundi found themselves at the very bottom of the ranking, and indeed, very few African countries could be found in the top 100. Japan was at the mid-way point in the ranking, however, other Asian countries such as Brunei and Malaysia were in the top tier, while Pakistan was close to the bottom with a low level of self-identified life satisfaction. As a region, the Middle East presented a mixed bad with Saudi Arabians reporing healthy levels of life satisfaction and Egyptians near the bottom of the ranking. As a region, Caribbean countries were ranked highly, consistently demonstrating high levels of life satisfaction. The findings showed that health was the most crucial determining factor in life satisfaction, followed by prosperity and education.

Source:

White, A. (2007). A Global Projection of Subjective Well-being: A Challenge To Positive Psychology? Psychtalk 56, 17-20. The data was extracted from a meta-analysis by Marks, Abdallah, Simms & Thompson (2006).

Uploaded:

Based on study noted above in "Source" ; reviewed in 2015

Happy Planet Index

The Happy Planet Index (HPI) is used to measure human well-being in conjunction with environmental impact. The HPI has been compiled since 2006 by the New Economics Foundation. The index is a composite of several indicators including subjective life satisfaction, life expectancy at birth, and ecological footprint per capita.

Syria Review 2016 Page 422 of 540 pages Syria

As noted by NEFA, the HPI "reveals the ecological efficiency with which human well-being is delivered." Indeed, the index combines environmental impact with human well-being to measure the environmental efficiency with which, country by country, people live long and happy lives. The countries ranked highest by the HPI are not necessarily the ones with the happiest people overall, but the ones that allow their citizens to live long and fulfilling lives, without negatively impacting this opportunity for either future generations or citizens of other countries. Accordingly, a country like the United States will rank low on this list due to its large per capital ecological footprint, which uses more than its fair share of resources, and will likely cause planetary damage.

It should be noted that the HPI was designed to be a counterpoint to other well-established indices of countries' development, such as Gross Domestic Product (GDP), which measures overall national wealth and economic development, but often obfuscates the realities of countries with stark variances between the rich and the poor. Moreover, the objective of most of the world's people is not to be wealthy but to be happy. The HPI also differs from the Human Development Index (HDI), which measures quality of life but not ecology, since it [HPI] also includes sustainability as a key indicator.

Rank Country HPI

1 Costa Rica 76.1

2 Dominican Republic 71.8

3 Jamaica 70.1

4 Guatemala 68.4

5 Vietnam 66.5

6 Colombia 66.1

7 Cuba 65.7

8 El Salvador 61.5

Syria Review 2016 Page 423 of 540 pages Syria

9 Brazil 61.0

10 Honduras 61.0

11 Nicaragua 60.5

12 Egypt 60.3

13 Saudi Arabia 59.7

14 Philippines 59.0

15 Argentina 59.0

16 Indonesia 58.9

17 Bhutan 58.5

18 Panama 57.4

19 Laos 57.3

20 China 57.1

21 Morocco 56.8

22 Sri Lanka 56.5

23 Mexico 55.6

24 Pakistan 55.6

25 Ecuador 55.5

26 Jordan 54.6

Syria Review 2016 Page 424 of 540 pages Syria

27 Belize 54.5

28 Peru 54.4

29 Tunisia 54.3

30 Trinidad and Tobago 54.2

31 Bangladesh 54.1

32 Moldova 54.1

33 Malaysia 54.0

34 Tajikistan 53.5

35 India 53.0

36 Venezuela 52.5

37 Nepal 51.9

38 Syria 51.3

39 Burma 51.2

40 Algeria 51.2

41 Thailand 50.9

42 Haiti 50.8

43 Netherlands 50.6

44 Malta 50.4

Syria Review 2016 Page 425 of 540 pages Syria

45 Uzbekistan 50.1

46 Chile 49.7

47 Bolivia 49.3

48 Armenia 48.3

49 Singapore 48.2

50 Yemen 48.1

51 Germany 48.1

52 Switzerland 48.1

53 Sweden 48.0

54 Albania 47.9

55 Paraguay 47.8

56 Palestinian Authority 47.7

57 Austria 47.7

58 Serbia 47.6

59 Finland 47.2

60 Croatia 47.2

61 Kyrgyzstan 47.1

62 Cyprus 46.2

Syria Review 2016 Page 426 of 540 pages Syria

63 Guyana 45.6

64 Belgium 45.4

65 Bosnia and Herzegovina 45.0

66 Slovenia 44.5

67 Israel 44.5

68 South Korea 44.4

69 Italy 44.0

70 Romania 43.9

71 France 43.9

72 Georgia 43.6

73 Slovakia 43.5

74 United Kingdom 43.3

75 Japan 43.3

76 Spain 43.2

77 Poland 42.8

78 Ireland 42.6

79 Iraq 42.6

80 Cambodia 42.3

Syria Review 2016 Page 427 of 540 pages Syria

81 Iran 42.1

82 Bulgaria 42.0

83 Turkey 41.7

84 Hong Kong 41.6

85 Azerbaijan 41.2

86 Lithuania 40.9

87 Djibouti 40.4

88 Norway 40.4

89 Canada 39.4

90 Hungary 38.9

91 Kazakhstan 38.5

92 Czech Republic 38.3

93 Mauritania 38.2

94 Iceland 38.1

95 Ukraine 38.1

96 Senegal 38.0

97 Greece 37.6

98 Portugal 37.5

Syria Review 2016 Page 428 of 540 pages Syria

99 Uruguay 37.2

100 Ghana 37.1

101 Latvia 36.7

102 Australia 36.6

103 New Zealand 36.2

104 Belarus 35.7

105 Denmark 35.5

106 Mongolia 35.0

107 Malawi 34.5

108 Russia 34.5

109 Chad 34.3

110 Lebanon 33.6

111 Macedonia 32.7

112 Republic of the Congo 32.4

113 Madagascar 31.5

114 United States 30.7

115 Nigeria 30.3

116 Guinea 30.3

Syria Review 2016 Page 429 of 540 pages Syria

117 Uganda 30.2

118 South Africa 29.7

119 Rwanda 29.6

120 Democratic Republic of the Congo 29.0

121 Sudan 28.5

122 Luxembourg 28.5

123 United Arab Emirates 28.2

124 Ethiopia 28.1

125 Kenya 27.8

126 Cameroon 27.2

127 Zambia 27.2

128 Kuwait 27.0

129 Niger 26.9

130 Angola 26.8

131 Estonia 26.4

132 Mali 25.8

133 Mozambique 24.6

134 Benin 24.6

Syria Review 2016 Page 430 of 540 pages Syria

135 Togo 23.3

136 Sierra Leone 23.1

137 Central African Republic 22.9

138 Burkina Faso 22.4

139 Burundi 21.8

140 Namibia 21.1

141 Botswana 20.9

142 Tanzania 17.8

143 Zimbabwe 16.6

Source: This material is derived from the Happy Planet Index issued by the New Economics Foundation (NEF).

Methodology: The methodology for the calculations can be found at URL: http://www.happyplanetindex.org/

Status of Women

Gender Related Development Index (GDI) Rank: 84th out of 140

Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM) Rank:

Syria Review 2016 Page 431 of 540 pages Syria

Not Ranked

Female Population: 9.2 million

Female Life Expectancy at birth: 72.35 years

Total Fertility Rate: 3.8

Maternal Mortality Ratio (2000): 160

Total Number of Women Living with HIV/AIDS: N/A

Ever Married Women, Ages 15-19 (%): N/A

Mean Age at Time of Marriage: N/A

Contraceptive Use Among Married Women, Any Method (%): 49%

Female Adult Literacy Rate: 73.6%

Combined Female Gross enrollment ratio for Primary, Secondary and Tertiary schools: 60%

Female-Headed Households (%): N/A

Economically Active Females (%): 29.5%

Female Contributing Family Workers (%): N/A

Female Estimated Earned Income: $1,584

Syria Review 2016 Page 432 of 540 pages Syria

Seats in Parliament held by women (%): Lower or Single House: 12.0% Upper House or Senate: N/A

Year Women Received the Right to Vote: 1949 (partial recognition) 1953 (full recognition)

Year Women Received the Right to Stand for Election: 1949 (partial recognition) 1953 (full recognition)

*The Gender Development Index (GDI) is a composite index which measures the average achievement in a country. While very similar to the Human Development Index in its use of the same variables, the GDI adjusts the average achievement of each country in terms of life expectancy, enrollment in schools, income, and literacy in accordance to the disparities between males and females.

*The Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM) is a composite index measuring gender inequality in three of the basic dimensions of empowerment; economic participation and decision-making, political participation and decision-making, and power over economic resources.

*Total Fertility Rate (TFR) is defined as the average number of babies born to women during their reproductive years. A TFR of 2.1 is considered the replacement rate; once a TFR of a population reaches 2.1 the population will remain stable assuming no immigration or emigration takes place. When the TFR is greater than 2.1 a population will increase and when it is less than 2.1 a population will eventually decrease, although due to the age structure of a population it will take years before a low TFR is translated into lower population.

*Maternal Mortality Rate is the number of deaths to women per 100,000 live births that resulted from conditions related to pregnancy and or delivery related complications.

*Economically Active Females are the share of the female population, ages 15 and above, whom supply, or are able to supply, labor for the production of goods and services.

*Female Contributing Family Workers are those females who work without pay in an economic enterprise operated by a relative living in the same household.

*Estimated Earned Income is measured according to Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) in US dollars.

Syria Review 2016 Page 433 of 540 pages Syria

Global Gender Gap Index

Editor's Note:

The Global Gender Gap Index by the World Economic Forum ranks most of the world’s countries in terms of the division of resources and opportunities among males and females. Specifically, the ranking assesses the gender inequality gap in these four arenas:

1. Economic participation and opportunity (salaries and high skilled employment participation levels) 2. Educational attainment (access to basic and higher level education) 3. Political empowerment (representation in decision-making structures) 4. Health and survival (life expectancy and sex ratio)

2010 rank 2010 2010 2009 2009 2008 2008 2007 among rank score rank score rank score rank 2009 countries

Country

Iceland 1 0.8496 1 1 0.8276 4 0.7999 4

Norway 2 0.8404 2 3 0.8227 1 0.8239 2

Finland 3 0.8260 3 2 0.8252 2 0.8195 3

Sweden 4 0.8024 4 4 0.8139 3 0.8139 1

Syria Review 2016 Page 434 of 540 pages Syria

New 5 0.7808 5 5 0.7880 5 0.7859 5 Zealand

Ireland 6 0.7773 6 8 0.7597 8 0.7518 9

Denmark 7 0.7719 7 7 0.7628 7 0.7538 8

Lesotho 8 0.7678 8 10 0.7495 16 0.7320 26

Philippines 9 0.7654 9 9 0.7579 6 0.7568 6

Switzerland 10 0.7562 10 13 0.7426 14 0.7360 40

Spain 11 0.7554 11 17 0.7345 17 0.7281 10

South Africa 12 0.7535 12 6 0.7709 22 0.7232 20

Germany 13 0.7530 13 12 0.7449 11 0.7394 7

Belgium 14 0.7509 14 33 0.7165 28 0.7163 19

United 15 0.7460 15 15 0.7402 13 0.7366 11 Kingdom

Sri Lanka 16 0.7458 16 16 0.7402 12 0.7371 15

Netherlands 17 0.7444 17 11 0.7490 9 0.7399 12

Latvia 18 0.7429 18 14 0.7416 10 0.7397 13

United 19 0.7411 19 31 0.7173 27 0.7179 31 States

Canada 20 0.7372 20 25 0.7196 31 0.7136 18

Trinidad and 21 0.7353 21 19 0.7298 19 0.7245 46 Tobago

Syria Review 2016 Page 435 of 540 pages Syria

Mozambique 22 0.7329 22 26 0.7195 18 0.7266 43

Australia 23 0.7271 23 20 0.7282 21 0.7241 17

Cuba 24 0.7253 24 29 0.7176 25 0.7195 22

Namibia 25 0.7238 25 32 0.7167 30 0.7141 29

Luxembourg 26 0.7231 26 63 0.6889 66 0.6802 58

Mongolia 27 0.7194 27 22 0.7221 40 0.7049 62

Costa Rica 28 0.7194 28 27 0.7180 32 0.7111 28

Argentina 29 0.7187 29 24 0.7211 24 0.7209 33

Nicaragua 30 0.7176 30 49 0.7002 71 0.6747 90

Barbados 31 0.7176 31 21 0.7236 26 0.7188 n/a

Portugal 32 0.7171 32 46 0.7013 39 0.7051 37

Uganda 33 0.7169 33 40 0.7067 43 0.6981 50

Moldova 34 0.7160 34 36 0.7104 20 0.7244 21

Lithuania 35 0.7132 35 30 0.7175 23 0.7222 14

Bahamas 36 0.7128 36 28 0.7179 n/a n/a n/a

Austria 37 0.7091 37 42 0.7031 29 0.7153 27

Guyana 38 0.7090 38 35 0.7108 n/a n/a n/a

Panama 39 0.7072 39 43 0.7024 34 0.7095 38

Syria Review 2016 Page 436 of 540 pages Syria

Ecuador 40 0.7072 40 23 0.7220 35 0.7091 44

Kazakhstan 41 0.7055 41 47 0.7013 45 0.6976 32

Slovenia 42 0.7047 42 52 0.6982 51 0.6937 49

Poland 43 0.7037 43 50 0.6998 49 0.6951 60

Jamaica 44 0.7037 44 48 0.7013 44 0.6980 39

Russian 45 0.7036 45 51 0.6987 42 0.6994 45 Federation

France 46 0.7025 46 18 0.7331 15 0.7341 51

Estonia 47 0.7018 47 37 0.7094 37 0.7076 30

Chile 48 0.7013 48 64 0.6884 65 0.6818 86

Macedonia, 49 0.6996 49 53 0.6950 53 0.6914 35 FYR

Bulgaria 50 0.6983 50 38 0.7072 36 0.7077 25

Kyrgyz 51 0.6973 51 41 0.7058 41 0.7045 70 Republic

Israel 52 0.6957 52 45 0.7019 56 0.6900 36

Croatia 53 0.6939 53 54 0.6944 46 0.6967 16

Honduras 54 0.6927 54 62 0.6893 47 0.6960 68

Colombia 55 0.6927 55 56 0.6939 50 0.6944 24

Singapore 56 0.6914 56 84 0.6664 84 0.6625 77

Syria Review 2016 Page 437 of 540 pages Syria

Thailand 57 0.6910 57 59 0.6907 52 0.6917 52

Greece 58 0.6908 58 85 0.6662 75 0.6727 72

Uruguay 59 0.6897 59 57 0.6936 54 0.6907 78

Peru 60 0.6895 60 44 0.7024 48 0.6959 75

China 61 0.6881 61 60 0.6907 57 0.6878 73

Botswana 62 0.6876 62 39 0.7071 63 0.6839 53

Ukraine 63 0.6869 63 61 0.6896 62 0.6856 57

Venezuela 64 0.6863 64 69 0.6839 59 0.6875 55

Czech 65 0.6850 65 74 0.6789 69 0.6770 64 Republic

Tanzania 66 0.6829 66 73 0.6797 38 0.7068 34

Romania 67 0.6826 67 70 0.6805 70 0.6763 47

Malawi 68 0.6824 68 76 0.6738 81 0.6664 87

Paraguay 69 0.6804 69 66 0.6868 100 0.6379 69

Ghana 70 0.6782 70 80 0.6704 77 0.6679 63

Slovak 71 0.6778 71 68 0.6845 64 0.6824 54 Republic

Vietnam 72 0.6776 72 71 0.6802 68 0.6778 42

Dominican 73 0.6774 73 67 0.6859 72 0.6744 65 Republic

Syria Review 2016 Page 438 of 540 pages Syria

Italy 74 0.6765 74 72 0.6798 67 0.6788 84

Gambia, 75 0.6762 75 75 0.6752 85 0.6622 95 The

Bolivia 76 0.6751 76 82 0.6693 80 0.6667 80

Brueni 77 0.6748 77 94 0.6524 99 0.6392 n/a Darussalem

Albania 78 0.6726 78 91 0.6601 87 0.6591 66

Hungary 79 0.6720 79 65 0.6879 60 0.6867 61

Madagascar 80 0.6713 80 77 0.6732 74 0.6736 89

Angola 81 0.6712 81 106 0.6353 114 0.6032 110

Bangladesh 82 0.6702 82 93 0.6526 90 0.6531 100

Malta 83 0.6695 83 88 0.6635 83 0.6634 76

Armenia 84 0.6669 84 90 0.6619 78 0.6677 71

Brazil 85 0.6655 85 81 0.6695 73 0.6737 74

Cyprus 86 0.6642 86 79 0.6706 76 0.6694 82

Indonesia 87 0.6615 87 92 0.6580 93 0.6473 81

Georgia 88 0.6598 88 83 0.6680 82 0.6654 67

Tajikistan 89 0.6598 89 86 0.6661 89 0.6541 79

El Salvador 90 0.6596 90 55 0.6939 58 0.6875 48

Syria Review 2016 Page 439 of 540 pages Syria

Mexico 91 0.6577 91 98 0.6503 97 0.6441 93

Zimbabwe 92 0.6574 92 95 0.6518 92 0.6485 88

Belize 93 0.6536 93 87 0.6636 86 0.6610 94

Japan 94 0.6524 94 101 0.6447 98 0.6434 91

Mauritius 95 0.6520 95 96 0.6513 95 0.6466 85

Kenya 96 0.6499 96 97 0.6512 88 0.6547 83

Cambodia 97 0.6482 97 104 0.6410 94 0.6469 98

Malaysia 98 0.6479 98 100 0.6467 96 0.6442 92

Maldives 99 0.6452 99 99 0.6482 91 0.6501 99

Azerbaijan 100 0.6446 100 89 0.6626 61 0.6856 59

Senegal 101 0.6414 101 102 0.6427 n/a n/a n/a

Suriname 102 0.6407 102 78 0.6726 79 0.6674 56

United Arab 103 0.6397 103 112 0.6198 105 0.6220 105 Emirates

Korea, Rep. 104 0.6342 104 115 0.6146 108 0.6154 97

Kuwait 105 0.6318 105 105 0.6356 101 0.6358 96

Zambia 106 0.6293 106 107 0.6310 106 0.6205 101

Tunisia 107 0.6266 107 109 0.6233 103 0.6295 102

Fiji 108 0.6256 108 103 0.6414 n/a n/a n/a

Syria Review 2016 Page 440 of 540 pages Syria

Guatemala 109 0.6238 109 111 0.6209 112 0.6072 106

Bahrain 110 0.6217 110 116 0.6136 121 0.5927 115

Burkina 111 0.6162 111 120 0.6081 115 0.6029 117 Faso

India 112 0.6155 112 114 0.6151 113 0.6060 114

Mauritania 113 0.6152 113 119 0.6103 110 0.6117 111

Cameroon 114 0.6110 114 118 0.6108 117 0.6017 116

Nepal 115 0.6084 115 110 0.6213 120 0.5942 125

Lebanon* 116 0.6084 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Qatar 117 0.6059 116 125 0.5907 119 0.5948 109

Nigeria 118 0.6055 117 108 0.6280 102 0.6339 107

Algeria 119 0.6052 118 117 0.6119 111 0.6111 108

Jordan 120 0.6048 119 113 0.6182 104 0.6275 104

Ethiopia 121 0.6019 120 122 0.5948 122 0.5867 113

Oman 122 0.5950 121 123 0.5938 118 0.5960 119

Iran 123 0.5933 122 128 0.5839 116 0.6021 118

Syria 124 0.5926 123 121 0.6072 107 0.6181 103

Egypt 125 0.5899 124 126 0.5862 124 0.5832 120

Turkey 126 0.5876 125 129 0.5828 123 0.5853 121

Syria Review 2016 Page 441 of 540 pages Syria

Morocco 127 0.5767 126 124 0.5926 125 0.5757 122

Benin 128 0.5719 127 131 0.5643 126 0.5582 123

Saudi Arabia 129 0.5713 128 130 0.5651 128 0.5537 124

Côte 130 0.5691 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a d'Ivoire*

Mali 131 0.5680 129 127 0.5860 109 0.6117 112

Pakistan 132 0.5465 130 132 0.5458 127 0.5549 126

Chad 133 0.5330 131 133 0.5417 129 0.5290 127

Yemen 134 0.4603 132 134 0.4609 130 0.4664 128

Belarus n/a n/a n/a 34 0.7141 33 0.7099 23

Uzbekistan n/a n/a n/a 58 0.6913 55 0.6906 41

*new country 2010

Commentary:

According to the report’s index, Nordic countries, such as Iceland, Norway, Finland, and Sweden have continued to dominate at the top of the ranking for gender equality. Meanwhile, France has seen a notable decline in the ranking, largely as a result of decreased number of women holding ministerial portfolios in that country. In the Americas, the United States has risen in the ranking to top the region, predominantly as a result of a decreasing wage gap, as well as higher number of women holding key positions in the current Obama administration. Canada has continued to remain as one of the top ranking countries of the Americas, followed by the small Caribbean island

Syria Review 2016 Page 442 of 540 pages Syria nation of Trinidad and Tobago, which has the distinction of being among the top three countries of the Americans in the realm of gender equality. Lesotho and South African ranked highly in the index, leading not only among African countries but also in global context. Despite Lesotho still lagging in the area of life expectancy, its high ranking was attributed to high levels of female participation in the labor force and female literacy. The Philippines and Sri Lanka were the top ranking countries for gender equality for Asia, ranking highly also in global context. The Philippines has continued to show strong performance in all strong performance on all four dimensions (detailed above) of the index. Finally, in the Arab world, the United Arab Emirates held the highest-rank within that region of the world; however, its placement near the bottom of the global list highlights the fact that Arab countries are generally poor performers when it comes to the matter of gender equality in global scope.

Source:

This data is derived from the latest edition of The Global Gender Gap Report by the World Economic Forum.

Available at URL: http://www.weforum.org/en/Communities/Women%20Leaders%20and%20Gender%20Parity/GenderGapNetwork/index.htm

Updated:

Based on latest available data as set forth in chart; reviewed in 2014

Culture and Arts

Cultural Considerations

As in many Middle Eastern and North African countries, Islam is the official religion of Syria and Islamic behaviors and practices should be respected. For example, one should always be aware of how Islamic law, which is delineated in the Shari'a, is used as the basis for the legal and juridical structure in Islamic countries. While the violation of traditions may simply be rationalized as ignorance in other countries, they take on far greater meaning in countries where the Islamic religion textures all aspects of society and culture. About 87 percent of the Syrian population is

Syria Review 2016 Page 443 of 540 pages Syria

Muslim with about 74 percent being Sunni. Christians make up about 10 percent of the population.

Arabic is the official language, and 90 percent of the population speaks it. The Syrian dialect is very similar to Jordanian and Egyptian. Kurdish, Armenian, and Circassian also are spoken. Because of colonial influence, French and English (French in particular) are understood and used in interactions with tourists and other foreigners.

Syria is known for its ancient history. The country’s scholars and art both had an impact on foreign cultures such as the Romans. It is now believed that a culture on par with Mesopotamia and Egypt was once seated in Syria. The country’s Ministry of Culture and National Guidance promotes the national culture.

Most publishing houses are owned by the state, and writers tend to be government employees. Censorship is strictly enforced, and foreign books about politics and contemporary Syrian or Middle Eastern history are banned. Still, writers from Syria have long taken their art seriously and had influence in the 19th century cultural and literary revival called the al-Nahda. Although Syrians have faced harsh censorship over time, many writers have reacted by moving out of the country and creating new genres that subtly attacked the country’s ruling class and its laws. Within the country, fiction is not as closely watched as nonfiction writing, where penalties for breaking laws in that segment usually involve prison.

As such, poetry and short stories seem to be widely read and appreciated – popular writers includes Nizar Qabbani, Shawqi Baghdadi, and 'Ali Ahmad Sa'id. Ghada al-Samman is one of the most famous women Syrian writers, and writes about topics such as cultural identity and the clash between tradition and progress as well as what it’s like to be a woman and a writer in a male- dominated society.

Damascus is a center of glassblowing and fabric production, including the silk brocade called damask, which was named for the city. The Bedouins are known for their weaving of fabrics, including carpets and prayer rugs made on hand-built looms, and traditional clothing that is painstakingly embroidered.

Films have been produced in Syria since the 1920s. Musicals and light comedies were popular in the late 1940s. During the 1970s, film clubs were important in the resistance to the government and were ultimately shut down in 1980. Syria has spawned several internationally regarded filmmakers, including Omar Amirallay and Usama Muhammed, but their films, which deal with social issues, have been banned in the country, or ignored by distribution companies.

Resource sources include: http://www.made-in-syria.com/culture-and-religion-in-syria.html

Syria Review 2016 Page 444 of 540 pages Syria http://www.everyculture.com/Sa-Th/Syria.html

Etiquette

Cultural Dos and Taboos

1. The traditional Muslim greeting is "A-salaam a-laykum" ("Peace be upon you"), to which the reply is "w-laykum o a-salaam" ("And upon you be peace"). handshakes, however, are the customary greeting among men.

2. Titles are preferable to first names, especially in the case of elders or superiors. The word "haji" can be used for a Muslim who has been on pilgrimage to Mecca. Always remove shoes before entering a house or mosque.

3. Normally, one should be prepared to remove one's shoes before entering a building or a home. When one removes one's shoes, the soles of the shoes are placed together, preventing the sole from being pointed at anyone. Also, among Muslims, one should never show the bottom of one's feet as it is considered offensive. Be sure not to walk on prayer mats, which will likely be present within homes.

4. Alcohol is permissible, except during the month of Ramadan when non-Muslims can only drink in certain hotels.

5. Be prepared for the separation between the genders and the rules concerning the appropriate behavior of each sex, especially in social situations. Men and women should not kiss, hug, hold hands or mingle in public. Even married couples should exercise reticence in their displays of affection. Women and men may also be separated at places such as movie theatres, restaurants and people's homes.

6. Syria is a predominantly Muslim culture and although it is not considered to be a fundamentalist Islamic country, clothing should be appropriate to this environment. Business wear is typically

Syria Review 2016 Page 445 of 540 pages Syria more conventional; suits are the norm for both men and women, although more casual attire may also be permissible. Western women should try to be more restrained in regard to makeup and jewelry. Both men and women should dress modestly. Tight, revealing clothing is simply not acceptable, while shorts, bikinis and short hems are objectionable. Necklines should be high and sleeves should come to the elbows. Hemlines should be well below the knee, if not ankle length. While the rules for men's attire is not as strict, men must keep their chest covered in public and should never wear shorts in public.

7. Visistors should avoid controversial subjects about religion, politics and terrorism, and sensitivity should be shown to the religious diversity of the country.

8. If one is invited into the home of a Syrian family, it is customary to take a gift to the host or hostess. Baked goods, chocolates, or a bag of sweets, are good choices. More elaborate offerings, such as a beautiful ornament, possibly from one's own country, would constitute an acceptable gift between business associates. A finely made compass, symbolizing the direction of Mecca to a devout Muslim, would constitute a thoughtful gesture on the part of the giver, and would most assuredly be treasured by the recipient.

Travel Information

Please Note:

This is a generalized travel guide and it is intended to coalesce several resources, which a traveler might find useful, regardless of a particular destination. As such, it does not include travel warnings for specific "hot spot" destinations.

For travel alerts and warnings, please see the United States Department of State's listings available at URL: http://travel.state.gov/content/passports/english/alertswarnings.html

Please note that travel to the following countries, based on these warnings, is ill-advised, or

Syria Review 2016 Page 446 of 540 pages Syria should be undertaken with the utmost precaution:

Afghanistan, Algeria, Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Colombia, Democratic Republic of Congo, Djibouti, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Guinea, Honduras, Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Mali, Mauritania, Mexico, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, North Korea, Pakistan, Palestinian Territories of West Bank and Gaza, Philippines areas of Sulu Archipelago, Mindanao, and southern Sulu Sea, Saudi Arabia, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Ukraine, Venezuela, and Yemen.

***

Please Note:

The Department of State continues to warn U.S. citizens against all travel to Syria and strongly recommends that U.S. citizens remaining in Syria depart immediately. The security situation in Syria remains dangerous and unpredictable as a civil war between government and armed anti-government groups continues throughout the country, along with an increased risk of kidnappings, bombings, murder, and terrorism.

No part of Syria should be considered safe from violence. The potential for hostile acts exists throughout the country, including kidnappings and the use of chemical warfare against civilian populations. Indiscriminate shelling and aerial bombardment, including of densely populated urban areas, have significantly raised the risk of death or serious injury. The destruction of infrastructure, housing, medical facilities, schools, and power and water utilities has also increased hardships inside the country.

There is a terrorist threat from violent extremist groups including the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, (ISIL), formerly known as al-Qa’ida in Iraq (AQ), the al-Nusrah Front, and others. Tactics for these groups include the use of suicide bombers, kidnapping, use of small and heavy arms, and improvised explosive devices in major city centers, including Damascus, Aleppo, Hamah, Dara, Homs, Idlib, and Dayr al-Zawr. U.S. citizens have been kidnapped, both for ransom and political purposes, and murdered by members of terrorist and violent extremist groups in Syria. U.S. citizens have disappeared within Syria. Public places, such as road checkpoints, border crossings, government buildings, shopping areas, and open spaces, have been targeted. Due to the security situation in Syria, the U.S. government’s ability to help U.S. citizens kidnapped or taken hostage is very limited.

Communications in Syria are difficult as phone and internet connections have become increasingly unreliable. The Department of State has received reports that U.S. citizens are

Syria Review 2016 Page 447 of 540 pages Syria experiencing difficulty and facing dangers traveling within the country and when trying to leave Syria via land borders, given the diminishing availability of commercial air travel out of Syria. Fierce clashes between pro-government and opposition forces continue in the vicinity of the Damascus and Aleppo airports. Land border checkpoints held by opposition forces should not be considered safe, as they are targeted by regime attacks and some armed groups have sought to fund themselves through kidnappings for ransom. Border areas are frequent targets of shelling and other armed conflict and are crowded because of internally-displaced refugees. Errant attacks will occasionally hit border towns just outside the borders as well. Road checkpoints have been controlled by armed terrorist and violent extremist groups and have been utilized to conduct kidnappings of individuals, including U.S. citizens.

The U.S. Department of State is concerned about the risks to civil aviation operating in the Damascus Flight Information Region (FIR) because of the ongoing armed conflict and volatile security environment.

The U.S. Embassy in Damascus suspended its operations in February 2012 and therefore cannot provide protection or routine consular services to U.S. citizens in Syria.

***

International Travel Guide

Checklist for Travelers

1. Take out travel insurance to cover hospital treatment or medical evacuation. Overseas medical costs are expensive to most international travelers, where one's domestic, nationalized or even private health insurance plans will not provide coverage outside one's home country. Learn about "reciprocal insurance plans" that some international health care companies might offer. 2. Make sure that one's travel insurance is appropriate. If one intends to indulge in adventurous activities, such as parasailing, one should be sure that one is fully insured in such cases. Many traditional insurance policies do not provide coverage in cases of extreme circumstances. 3. Take time to learn about one's destination country and culture. Read and learn about the place one is traveling. Also check political, economic and socio-cultural developments at the destination by reading country-specific travel reports and fact sheets noted below. 4. Get the necessary visas for the country (or countries) one intends to visit - but be aware that a visa does not guarantee entry. A number of useful sites regarding visa and other entry requirements

Syria Review 2016 Page 448 of 540 pages Syria are noted below. 5. Keep in regular contact with friends and relatives back at home by phone or email, and be sure to leave a travel itinerary. 6. Protect one's personal information by making copies of one's passport details, insurance policy, travelers checks and credit card numbers. Taking copies of such documents with you, while leaving another collection copies with someone at home is also good practice for travelers. Taking copies of one's passport photograph is also recommended. 7. Stay healthy by taking all possible precautions against illness. Also, be sure to take extra supplies of prescription drugs along for the trip, while also taking time to pack general pharmaceutical supplies, such as aspirin and other such painkillers, bandages, stomach ailment medication, anti- inflammatory medication and anti-bacterial medication. 8. Do not carry illicit drugs. Understand that the punishment for possession or use of illegal drugs in some countries may be capital punishment. Make sure your prescription drugs are legal in the countries you plan to visit. 9. Know the laws of one's destination country and culture; be sure to understand the repercussions of breaking those laws and regulations. Often the transparency and freedoms of the juridical system at home is not consistent with that of one's destination country. Become aware of these complexities and subtleties before you travel. 10. For longer stays in a country, or where the security situation is volatile, one should register one's self and traveling companions at the local embassy or consulate of one's country of citizenship. 11. Women should take care to be prepared both culturally and practically for traveling in a different country and culture. One should be sure to take sufficient supplies of personal feminine products and prescription drugs. One should also learn about local cultural standards for women, including norms of dressing. Be aware that it is simply inappropriate and unsafe for women to travel alone in some countries, and take the necessary precautions to avoid risk-filled situations. 12. If one is traveling with small children, one should pack extra supplies, make arrangements with the travel carrier for proper seating that would adequately accommodate children, infants or toddlers. Note also that whether one is male of female, traveling with children means that one's hands are thus not free to carry luggage and bags. Be especially aware that this makes one vulnerable to pickpockets, thieves and other sorts of crime. 13. Make proper arrangements for accommodations, well in advance of one's arrival at a destination. Some countries have limited accommodation, while others may have culturally distinctive facilities. Learning about these practicalities before one travels will greatly aid the enjoyment of one's trip. 14. Travel with different forms of currency and money (cash, traveler's checks and credit cards) in anticipation that venues may not accept one or another form of money. Also, ensuring that one's financial resources are not contained in one location, or by one person (if one is traveling with others) can be a useful measure, in the event that one loses a wallet or purse. 15. Find out about transportation in the destination country. In some places, it might be advisable to hire a local driver or taxi guide for safety reasons, while in other countries, enjoying one's travel

Syria Review 2016 Page 449 of 540 pages Syria experience may well be enhanced by renting a vehicle and seeing the local sights and culture independently. Costs may also be prohibitive for either of these choices, so again, prior planning is suggested.

Note to Travelers

The Syrian Arab Republic has a developing, mixed-sector economy. The ruling Ba'th party espouses a largely secular ideology, but Islamic traditions and beliefs provide a conservative foundation for the country's customs and practices. The constitution refers to Islamic jurisprudence as a principal source of legislation, but the legal system remains influenced by French practice. Tourist facilities are widely available, and they vary in quality depending on price and location. A passport and a visa are required. Visas must be obtained prior to arrival in Syria. The government of Syria does not allow persons with passports bearing an Israeli visa or entry/exit stamps to enter the country. Similar restrictions apply to persons born in the Gaza region or who are of Gaza descent. Entry into Syria via the land border with Israel is not possible. Foreigners who wish to stay 15 days or more in Syria must register with Syrian immigration authorities by their 15th day there. American men between the ages of 18 and 45 who are of Syrian birth or recent descent are subject to the Syrian compulsory military service requirement unless they receive a temporary or permanent exemption from the Syrian Embassy in the United States prior to their entry into Syria. An AIDS test is not required for foreigners prior to arrival in Syria; however, tests are mandatory for foreigners age 15 to 60 who wish to reside in Syria. The AIDS test must be conducted in Syria at a facility approved by the Syrian Ministry of Health. A residence permit will not be issued until the absence of the HIV virus has been determined. Foreigners wishing to marry Syrian nationals in Syria must also be tested for HIV. American citizens are cautioned that the Syrian government rigidly enforces restrictions on prior travel to Israel. Travelers with Israeli stamps in their passports, Jordanian entry cachets, or cachets from other countries that suggest prior travel to Israel will cause Syrian immigration authorities to refuse the traveler admission to Syria. Likewise, the absence of entry stamps from a country adjacent to Israel, which the traveler has just visited, will cause the Syrian immigration officials to refuse admittance. American citizen travelers suspected of having traveled to Israel have been detained for questioning. Syrian security officials are also sensitive about travel to Iraq. There have been instances in which Iraqi-Americans or Americans believed to have traveled to Iraq were detained for questioning at ports of entry/exit. Children under the age of eighteen whose fathers are Syrian must have the father's permission to leave Syria, even if the parents are separated or divorced and the mother has been granted full custody by a Syrian court. Women in Syria are often subject to strict family controls. On occasion, families of Syrian-American women visiting Syria have attempted to prevent them from leaving the country. This can be a particular problem for young single women of marriageable age. A Syrian husband may take legal action to prevent his wife from leaving the country, regardless of her

Syria Review 2016 Page 450 of 540 pages Syria nationality. Once such legal orders are in place, the U.S. Embassy cannot assist American citizens to leave Syria. In addition to being subject to all Syrian laws affecting U.S. citizens, dual nationals may also be subject to other laws that impose special obligations on Syrian citizens. Under Syrian law, children of Syrian fathers, even those who have never been to Syria and do not speak Arabic, are Syrian. Please take the time to read the "Safety and Security" section below.

Tips for Travelers

• Don't arrive without a visa. You cannot obtain one on arrival. If you stay more than 15 days in Syria you must obtain an extension of stay which is available at the immigration office. You will not be permitted to leave the country without it. You must also keep your Entry Card with your passport as you cannot leave the country without it.

• Don't arrive with Israeli stamps on your passport.

• Don't drive outside the main cities at night.

• Don't carry drugs. The punishment is life imprisonment.

• Don't take photographs near Military or any other governmental installations. Don't photograph people without their permission.

• Bring enough funds in cash only. US$ is preferable.

• Carry your identity document at all time.

• Respect local laws and customs. Women should dress modestly.

• Declare all foreign currency and valuables. You cannot take more foreign currency out of Syria than was declared on arrival.

• Check with your embassy, consulate, or appropriate government institution related to travel before traveling. Keep in touch with your Embassy.

Note: This information is directly quoted from the United Kingdom Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

Sources: United Kingdom Foreign and Commonwealth Office

Syria Review 2016 Page 451 of 540 pages Syria

Business Culture: Information for Business Travelers

The workweek in Syria is Saturday through Thursday.

For general information on etiquette in Syria, see our Cultural Etiquette page.

Online Resources Regarding Entry Requirements and Visas

Foreign Entry Requirements for Americans from the United States Department of State http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_1765.html

Visa Services for Non-Americans from the United States Department of State http://travel.state.gov/visa/visa_1750.html

Visa Bulletins from the United States Department of State http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_1360.html

Visa Waivers from the United States Department of State http://travel.state.gov/visa/temp/without/without_1990.html - new

Passport and Visa Information from the Government of the United Kingdom http://www.bia.homeoffice.gov.uk/

Visa Information from the Government of Australia http://www.dfat.gov.au/visas/index.html

Passport Information from the Government of Australia https://www.passports.gov.au/Web/index.aspx

Passport Information from the Government of Canada http://www.voyage.gc.ca/preparation_information/passport_passeport-eng.asp

Visa Information from the Government of Canada http://www.voyage.gc.ca/preparation_information/visas-eng.asp

Online Visa Processing by Immigration Experts by VisaPro http://www.visapro.com

Syria Review 2016 Page 452 of 540 pages Syria

Sources: United States Department of State, United Kingdom Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Government of Australia: Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Government of Canada Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade

Useful Online Resources for Travelers

Country-Specific Travel Information from United States http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_1765.html

Travel Advice by Country from Government of United Kingdom http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/travelling-and-living-overseas/travel-advice-by-country/

General Travel Advice from Government of Australia http://www.smartraveller.gov.au/zw-cgi/view/Advice/General

Travel Bulletins from the Government of Australia http://www.smartraveller.gov.au/zw-cgi/view/TravelBulletins/

Travel Tips from Government of Australia http://www.smartraveller.gov.au/tips/index.html

Travel Checklist by Government of Canada http://www.voyage.gc.ca/preparation_information/checklist_sommaire-eng.asp

Travel Checklist from Government of United Kingdom http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/travelling-and-living-overseas/staying-safe/checklist

Your trip abroad from United States Department of State http://travel.state.gov/travel/tips/brochures/brochures_1225.html

A safe trip abroad from United States Department of State http://travel.state.gov/travel/tips/safety/safety_1747.html

Tips for expatriates abroad from United States Department of State http://travel.state.gov/travel/living/residing/residing_1235.html

Tips for students from United States Department of State http://travel.state.gov/travel/living/studying/studying_1238.html http://travel.state.gov/travel/tips/brochures/brochures_1219.html

Medical information for travelers from United States Department of State

Syria Review 2016 Page 453 of 540 pages Syria http://travel.state.gov/travel/tips/health/health_1185.html

US Customs Travel information http://www.customs.gov/xp/cgov/travel/

Sources: United States Department of State; United States Customs Department, United Kingdom Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Government of Australia; Government of Canada: Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade

Other Practical Online Resources for Travelers

Foreign Language Phrases for Travelers http://www.travlang.com/languages/ http://www.omniglot.com/language/phrases/index.htm

World Weather Forecasts http://www.intellicast.com/ http://www.wunderground.com/ http://www.worldweather.org/

Worldwide Time Zones, Map, World Clock http://www.timeanddate.com/ http://www.worldtimezone.com/

International Airport Codes http://www.world-airport-codes.com/

International Dialing Codes http://www.kropla.com/dialcode.htm http://www.countrycallingcodes.com/

International Phone Guide http://www.kropla.com/phones.htm

International Mobile Phone Guide http://www.kropla.com/mobilephones.htm

International Internet Café Search Engine http://cybercaptive.com/

Syria Review 2016 Page 454 of 540 pages Syria

Global Internet Roaming http://www.kropla.com/roaming.htm

World Electric Power Guide http://www.kropla.com/electric.htm http://www.kropla.com/electric2.htm

World Television Standards and Codes http://www.kropla.com/tv.htm International Currency Exchange Rates http://www.xe.com/ucc/

Banking and Financial Institutions Across the World http://www.123world.com/banks/index.html

International Credit Card or Automated Teller Machine (ATM) Locator http://visa.via.infonow.net/locator/global/ http://www.mastercard.com/us/personal/en/cardholderservices/atmlocations/index.html

International Chambers of Commerce http://www.123world.com/chambers/index.html

World Tourism Websites http://123world.com/tourism/

Diplomatic and Consular Information

United States Diplomatic Posts Around the World http://www.usembassy.gov/

United Kingdom Diplomatic Posts Around the World http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/about-the-fco/embassies-and-posts/find-an-embassy-overseas/

Australia's Diplomatic Posts Around the World http://www.dfat.gov.au/missions/ http://www.dfat.gov.au/embassies.html

Canada's Embassies and High Commissions http://www.international.gc.ca/ciw-cdm/embassies-ambassades.aspx

Syria Review 2016 Page 455 of 540 pages Syria

Resources for Finding Embassies and other Diplomatic Posts Across the World http://www.escapeartist.com/embassy1/embassy1.htm

Safety and Security

Travel Warnings by Country from Government of Australia http://www.smartraveller.gov.au/zw-cgi/view/Advice/

Travel Warnings and Alerts from United States Department of State http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/tw/tw_1764.html http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/pa/pa_1766.html

Travel Reports and Warnings by Government of Canada http://www.voyage.gc.ca/countries_pays/menu-eng.asp http://www.voyage.gc.ca/countries_pays/updates_mise-a-jour-eng.asp

Travel Warnings from Government of United Kingdom http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/travelling-and-living-overseas/travel-advice-by-country/ http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/travelling-and-living-overseas/travel-advice-by-country/? action=noTravelAll#noTravelAll

Sources: United Kingdom Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the United States Department of State, the Government of Canada: Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, Government of Australia: Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade

Other Safety and Security Online Resources for Travelers

United States Department of State Information on Terrorism http://www.state.gov/s/ct/

Government of the United Kingdom Resource on the Risk of Terrorism http://www.fco.gov.uk/servlet/Front? pagename=OpenMarket/Xcelerate/ShowPage&c=Page&cid=1044011304926

Government of Canada Terrorism Guide http://www.international.gc.ca/crime/terrorism-terrorisme.aspx?lang=eng

Information on Terrorism by Government of Australia http://www.dfat.gov.au/icat/index.html

Syria Review 2016 Page 456 of 540 pages Syria

FAA Resource on Aviation Safety http://www.faasafety.gov/

In-Flight Safety Information for Air Travel (by British Airways crew trainer, Anna Warman) http://www.warman.demon.co.uk/anna/inflight.html

Hot Spots: Travel Safety and Risk Information http://www.airsecurity.com/hotspots/HotSpots.asp

Information on Human Rights http://www.state.gov/g/drl/hr/

Sources: The United States Department of State, the United States Customs Department, the Government of Canada, the Government of United Kingdom, the Government of Australia, the Federal Aviation Authority, Anna Warman's In-flight Website, Hot Spots Travel and Risk Information

Diseases/Health Data

Please Note: Most of the entry below constitutes a generalized health advisory, which a traveler might find useful, regardless of a particular destination.

As a supplement, however, the reader will also find below a list of countries flagged with current health notices and alerts issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Please note that travel to the following countries, based on these 3 levels of warnings, is ill-advised, or should be undertaken with the utmost precaution:

Level 3 (highest level of concern; avoid non-essential travel) --

Guinea - Ebola

Syria Review 2016 Page 457 of 540 pages Syria

Liberia - Ebola Nepal - Eathquake zone Sierra Leone - Ebola

Level 2 (intermediate level of concern; use utmost caution during travel) --

Cameroon - Polio Somalia - Polio Vanuatu - Tropical Cyclone zone Throughout Middle East and Arabia Peninsula - MERS ((Middle East Respiratory Syndrome)

Level 1 (standard level of concern; use practical caution during travel) -

Australia - Ross River disease Bosnia-Herzegovina - Measles Brazil - Dengue Fever Brazil - Malaria Brazil - Zika China - H7N9 Avian flu Cuba - Cholera Egypt - H5N1 Bird flu Ethiopia - Measles Germany - Measles Japan - Hand, foot, and mouth disease (HFMD) Kyrgyzstan - Measles Malaysia -Dengue Fever Mexico - Chikungunya Mexico - Hepatitis A Nigeria - Meningitis Philippines - Measles Scotland - Mumps Singapore - Hand, foot, and mouth disease (HFMD) South Korea - MERS ((Middle East Respiratory Syndrome) Throughout Caribbean - Chikungunya Throughout Central America - Chikungunya Throughout South America - Chikungunya Throughout Pacific Islands - Chikungunya

For specific information related to these health notices and alerts please see the CDC's listing available at URL:

Syria Review 2016 Page 458 of 540 pages Syria http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/travel/notices

***

Health Information for Travelers to Syria

The preventive measures you need to take while traveling in the Middle East depend on the areas you visit and the length of time you stay. You should observe the precautions listed in this document in most areas of this region. However, in highly developed areas of Israel, you should observe health precautions similar to those that would apply while traveling in the United States.

Travelers' diarrhea, the number one illness in travelers, can be caused by viruses, bacteria, or parasites, which can contaminate food or water. Infections may cause diarrhea and vomiting (E. coli, Salmonella, cholera, and parasites), fever (typhoid fever and toxoplasmosis), or liver damage (hepatitis). Make sure your food and drinking water are safe. (See below.)

Malaria is a preventable infection that can be fatal if left untreated. Prevent infection by taking prescription antimalarial drugs and protecting yourself against mosquito bites (see below). A low risk for malaria exists in parts of Iran, Iraq, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Syrian Arab Republic, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, and Yemen. Travelers to risk areas of Oman, Iran, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and Yemen should take mefloquine for malaria prevention. Travelers to risk areas of Iraq, Syria, and Turkey should take chloroquine. For specific locations, see Malaria Information for Travelers to the Middle East (http://www.cdc.gov/travel/regionalmalaria/mideast.htm).

A certificate of yellow fever vaccination may be required for entry into certain of these countries, but only if you are coming from a country in tropical South America or sub-Saharan Africa. (There is no risk for yellow fever in the Middle East.) For detailed information, see Comprehensive Yellow Fever Vaccination Requirements (http://www.cdc.gov/travel/yelfever.htm).

Dengue, filariasis, leishmaniasis, onchocerciasis, and plague are diseases carried by insects that also occur in this region. Protecting yourself against insect bites (see below) will help to prevent these diseases.

CDC Recommends the Following Vaccines (as Appropriate for Age): See your doctor at least 4-6 weeks before your trip to allow time for shots to take effect. • Hepatitis A or immune globulin (IG). • Hepatitis B, if you might be exposed to blood (for example, health-care workers), have sexual contact with the local population, stay longer than 6 months, or be exposed through medical treatment.

Syria Review 2016 Page 459 of 540 pages Syria

• Meningococcal vaccine is required for pilgrims to Mecca for the annual Hajj. However, CDC currently recommends the vaccine for all travelers to Mecca, including those traveling for the Umra. (For more information, please see Meningococcal Disease Among Travelers to Saudi Arabia at URL http://www.cdc.gov/travel/saudimenin.htm.) • Rabies, if you might be exposed to wild or domestic animals through your work or recreation. • Typhoid, particularly if you are visiting developing countries in this region. • As needed, booster doses for tetanus-diphtheria and measles, and a one-time dose of polio for adults. Hepatitis B vaccine is now recommended for all infants and for children ages 11-12 years who have not completed the series.

All travelers should take the following precautions, no matter the destination: • Wash hands often with soap and water. • Because motor vehicle crashes are a leading cause of injury among travelers, walk and drive defensively. Avoid travel at night if possible and always use seat belts. • Always use latex condoms to reduce the risk of HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases. • Don't eat or drink dairy products unless you know they have been pasteurized. • Don't share needles with anyone. • Eat only thoroughly cooked food or fruits and vegetables you have peeled yourself. Remember: boil it, cook it, peel it, or forget it. • Never eat undercooked ground beef and poultry, raw eggs, and unpasteurized dairy products. Raw shellfish is particularly dangerous to persons who have liver disease or compromised immune systems.

Travelers visiting undeveloped areas should take the following precautions:

To Stay Healthy, Do: • Drink only bottled or boiled water, or carbonated (bubbly) drinks in cans or bottles. Avoid tap water, fountain drinks, and ice cubes. If this is not possible, make water safer by BOTH filtering through an "absolute 1-micron or less" filter AND adding iodine tablets to the filtered water. "Absolute 1-micron filters" are found in camping/outdoor supply stores. • If you visit an area where there is risk for malaria, take your malaria prevention medication before, during, and after travel, as directed. (See your doctor for a prescription.) • Protect yourself from insects by remaining in well-screened areas, using repellents (applied sparingly at 4-hour intervals), and wearing long-sleeved shirts and long pants from dusk through dawn. • To prevent fungal and parasitic infections, keep feet clean and dry, and do not go barefoot.

To Avoid Getting Sick: • Don't eat food purchased from street vendors. • Don't drink beverages with ice. • Don't handle animals (especially monkeys, dogs, and cats), to avoid bites and serious diseases

Syria Review 2016 Page 460 of 540 pages Syria

(including rabies and plague). (For more information, please see the Animal-Associated Hazards on the Making Travel Safe page at URL http://www.cdc.gov/travel/safety.htm.) • Don't swim in fresh water. Salt water is usually safer. (For more information, please see the Swimming Precautions on the Making Travel Safe page.)

What You Need To Bring with You: • Long-sleeved shirt and long pants to wear while outside whenever possible, to prevent illnesses carried by insects (e.g., malaria, dengue, filariasis, leishmaniasis, and onchocerciasis). • Insect repellent containing DEET (diethylmethyltoluamide), in 30%-35% strength for adults and 6%-10% for children. • Over-the-counter antidiarrheal medicine to take if you have diarrhea. • Iodine tablets and water filters to purify water if bottled water is not available. See Do's above for more details about water filters. • Sunblock, sunglasses, hat. • Prescription medications: make sure you have enough to last during your trip, as well as a copy of the prescription(s).

After You Return Home: If you have visited an area where there is risk for malaria, continue taking your malaria medication weekly for 4 weeks after you leave the area. If you become ill-even as long as a year after your trip-tell your doctor the areas you have visited.

For More Information: Ask your doctor or check the CDC web sites for more information about protecting yourself against diseases that occur in the Middle East, such as:

For information about diseases-

Carried by Insects Dengue, Malaria, Plague Carried in Food or Water Cholera, Escherichia coli, diarrhea, Hepatitis A, Schistosomiasis, Typhoid Fever

Person-to-Person Contact Hepatitis B, HIV/AIDS

For more information about these and other diseases, please check the Diseases (http://www.cdc.gov/travel/diseases.htm) section and the Health Topics A-Z (http://www.cdc.gov/health/diseases.htm).

Note:

Syria Review 2016 Page 461 of 540 pages Syria

Syria is located in the Middle East health region.

Sources:

The Center for Disease Control Destinations Website: http://www.cdc.gov/travel/destinat.htm

Syria Review 2016 Page 462 of 540 pages Syria

Chapter 6

Environmental Overview

Syria Review 2016 Page 463 of 540 pages Syria

Environmental Issues

General Overview:

Syria is made up predominantly of desert and mountains, with a narrow belt of coast. Less than a third of the country is made up of forests, arable land is severely limited, and of that terrain, there is a high degree of land degradation due to poor irrigation practices. As well, overgrazing in those limited areas has contributed to further problems of desertification. Further, in the coastal areas along the Mediterranean Sea, pollution from oil has become an increasing problem. Water scarcity, as well as contamination of the existing water supply, comprises yet another host of challenges.

Current Issues:

-deforestation -overgrazing -soil erosion -desertification -water pollution from dumping of raw sewage and petroleum refining -inadequate supplies of potable water -inadequate sewage and waste treatment systems

Total Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Mtc):

19.3

Country Rank (GHG output):

56th

Syria Review 2016 Page 464 of 540 pages Syria

Natural Hazards:

-dust storms -sandstorms

Environmental Policy

Regulation and Jurisdiction:

The regulation and protection of the environment in Syria is under the jurisdiction of the following:

Ministry of State for Environmental Affairs Ministry of Agriculture and Agrarian Reform

Major Non-Governmental Organizations:

N/A

International Environmental Accords:

Party to:

Biodiversity Climate Change Desertification Endangered Species Hazardous Wastes Nuclear Test Ban Ozone Layer Protection Ship Pollution Wetlands

Signed but not ratified:

Environmental Modification

Kyoto Protocol Status (year ratified):

Syria is not a signatory to the Kyoto Protocol

Syria Review 2016 Page 465 of 540 pages Syria

Greenhouse Gas Ranking

GHG Emissions Rankings

Country Country Rank

1 United States

2 China

4 Russia

5 Japan

6 India

7 Germany

8 United Kingdom

9 Canada

Syria Review 2016 Page 466 of 540 pages Syria

10 Korea, South

11 Italy

12 Mexico

13 France

14 South Africa

15 Iran

16 Indonesia

17 Australia

18 Spain

19 Brazil

20 Saudi Arabia

21 Ukraine

22 Poland

23 Taiwan

24 Turkey

25 Thailand

26 Netherlands

27 Kazakhstan

Syria Review 2016 Page 467 of 540 pages Syria

28 Malaysia

29 Egypt

30 Venezuela

31 Argentina

32 Uzbekistan

33 Czech Republic

34 Belgium

35 Pakistan

36 Romania

37 Greece

38 United Arab Emirates

39 Algeria

40 Nigeria

41 Austria

42 Iraq

43 Finland

44 Philippines

45 Vietnam

Syria Review 2016 Page 468 of 540 pages Syria

46 Korea, North

47 Israel

48 Portugal

49 Colombia

50 Belarus

51 Kuwait

52 Hungary

53 Chile

54 Denmark

55 Serbia & Montenegro

56 Sweden

57 Syria

58 Libya

59 Bulgaria

60 Singapore

61 Switzerland

62 Ireland

63 Turkmenistan

Syria Review 2016 Page 469 of 540 pages Syria

64 Slovakia

65 Bangladesh

66 Morocco

67 New Zealand

68 Oman

69 Qatar

70 Azerbaijan

71 Norway

72 Peru

73 Cuba

74 Ecuador

75 Trinidad & Tobago

76 Croatia

77 Tunisia

78 Dominican Republic

79 Lebanon

80 Estonia

81 Yemen

Syria Review 2016 Page 470 of 540 pages Syria

82 Jordan

83 Slovenia

84 Bahrain

85 Angola

86 Bosnia & Herzegovina

87 Lithuania

88 Sri Lanka

89 Zimbabwe

90 Bolivia

91 Jamaica

92 Guatemala

93 Luxembourg

94 Myanmar

95 Sudan

96 Kenya

97 Macedonia

98 Mongolia

99 Ghana

Syria Review 2016 Page 471 of 540 pages Syria

100 Cyprus

101 Moldova

102 Latvia

103 El Salvador

104 Brunei

105 Honduras

106 Cameroon

107 Panama

108 Costa Rica

109 Cote d'Ivoire

110 Kyrgyzstan

111 Tajikistan

112 Ethiopia

113 Senegal

114 Uruguay

115 Gabon

116 Albania

117 Nicaragua

Syria Review 2016 Page 472 of 540 pages Syria

118 Botswana

119 Paraguay

120 Tanzania

121 Georgia

122 Armenia

123 Congo, RC

124 Mauritius

125 Nepal

126 Mauritius

127 Nepal

128 Mauritania

129 Malta

130 Papua New Guinea

131 Zambia

132 Suriname

133 Iceland

134 Togo

135 Benin

Syria Review 2016 Page 473 of 540 pages Syria

136 Uganda

137 Bahamas

138 Haiti

139 Congo, DRC

140 Guyana

141 Mozambique

142 Guinea

143 Equatorial Guinea

144 Laos

145 Barbados

146 Niger

147 Fiji

148 Burkina Faso

149 Malawi

150 Swaziland

151 Belize

152 Afghanistan

153 Sierra Leone

Syria Review 2016 Page 474 of 540 pages Syria

154 Eritrea

155 Rwanda

156 Mali

157 Seychelles

158 Cambodia

159 Liberia

160 Bhutan

161 Maldives

162 Antigua & Barbuda

163 Djibouti

164 Saint Lucia

165 Gambia

166 Guinea-Bissau

167 Central African Republic

168 Palau

169 Burundi

170 Grenada

171 Lesotho

Syria Review 2016 Page 475 of 540 pages Syria

172 Saint Vincent & the Grenadines

173 Solomon Islands

174 Samoa

175 Cape Verde

176 Nauru

177 Dominica

178 Saint Kitts & Nevis

179 Chad

180 Tonga

181 Sao Tome & Principe

182 Comoros

183 Vanuatu

185 Kiribati

Not Ranked Andorra

Not Ranked East Timor

Not Ranked Holy See

Not Ranked Hong Kong

Not Ranked Liechtenstein

Syria Review 2016 Page 476 of 540 pages Syria

Not Ranked Marshall Islands

Not Ranked Micronesia

Not Ranked Monaco

Not Ranked San Marino

Not Ranked Somalia

Not Ranked Tuvalu

* European Union is ranked 3rd Cook Islands are ranked 184th Niue is ranked 186th

Global Environmental Snapshot

Introduction

The countries of the world face many environmental challenges in common. Nevertheless, the nature and intensity of problem vary from region to region, as do various countries' respective capacities, in terms of affluence and infrastructure, to remediate threats to environmental quality.

Consciousness of perils affecting the global environment came to the fore in the last third or so of the 20th century has continued to intensify well into the new millennium. According to the United Nations Environment Programme, considerable environmental progress has been made at the level of institutional developments, international cooperation accords, and public participation. Approximately two-dozen international environmental protection accords with global implications have been promulgated since the late 1970s under auspices of the United Nations and other international organizations, together with many additional regional agreements. Attempts to address and rectify environmental problems take the form of legal frameworks, economic instruments, environmentally sound technologies and cleaner production processes as well as conservation efforts. Environmental impact assessments have increasingly been applied across the globe.

Syria Review 2016 Page 477 of 540 pages Syria

Environmental degradation affects the quality, or aesthetics, of human life, but it also displays potential to undermine conditions necessary for the sustainability of human life. Attitudes toward the importance of environmental protection measures reflect ambivalence derived from this bifurcation. On one hand, steps such as cleaning up pollution, dedicating parkland, and suchlike, are seen as embellishments undertaken by wealthy societies already assured they can successfully perform those functions deemed, ostensibly, more essential-for instance, public health and education, employment and economic development. On the other hand, in poorer countries, activities causing environmental damage-for instance the land degradation effects of unregulated logging, slash-and-burn agriculture, overgrazing, and mining-can seem justified insofar as such activities provide incomes and livelihoods.

Rapid rates of resource depletion are associated with poverty and high population growth, themselves correlated, whereas consumption per capita is much higher in the most developed countries, despite these nations' recent progress in energy efficiency and conservation. It is impossible to sequester the global environmental challenge from related economic, social and political challenges.

First-tier industrialized countries have recently achieved measurable decreases in environmental pollution and the rate of resource depletion, a success not matched in middle income and developing countries. It is believed that the discrepancy is due to the fact that industrialized countries have more developed infrastructures to accommodate changes in environmental policy, to apply environmental technologies, and to invest in public education. The advanced industrialized countries incur relatively lower costs in alleviating environmental problems, in comparison to developing countries, since in the former even extensive environmental programs represent a rather minuscule percentage of total expenditures. Conversely, budget constraints, lagged provision of basic services to the population, and other factors such as debt service and militarization may preclude institution of minimal environmental protection measures in the poorest countries.

A synopsis for the current situation facing each region of the world follows:

Regional Synopsis: Africa

The African continent, the world's second-largest landmass, encompasses many of the world's least developed countries. By global standards, urbanization is comparatively low but rising at a rapid rate. More heavily industrialized areas at the northern and southern ends of the continent experience the major share of industrial pollution. In other regions the most serious environmental problems typically stem from inefficient subsistence farming methods and other forms of land degradation, which have affected an increasingly extensive area under pressure of a widely impoverished, fast-growing population. Africa's distribution of natural resources is very uneven. It is the continent at greatest risk of desertification, especially in the Sahel region at the edge of the

Syria Review 2016 Page 478 of 540 pages Syria

Sahara but also in other dry-range areas. Yet at the same time, Africa also harbors some of the earth's richest and most diverse biological zones.

Key Points:

Up to half a billion hectares of African land are moderately to severely degraded, an occurrence reflecting short-fallow shifting cultivation and overgrazing as well as a climatic pattern of recurrent droughts.

Soil degradation is severe along the expanse directly south of the Sahara, from the west to the east coasts. Parts of southern Africa, central-eastern Africa, and the neighboring island of Madagascar suffer from serious soil degradation as well.

Africa contains about 17 percent of the world's forest cover, concentrated in the tropical belt of the continent. Many of the forests, however, are severely depleted, with an estimated 70 percent showing some degree of degradation.

Population growth has resulted in continuing loss of arable land, as inefficient subsistence farming techniques affect increasingly extensive areas. Efforts to implement settled, sustainable agriculture have met with some recent success, but much further progress in this direction is needed. Especially in previously uninhabited forestlands, concern over deforestation is intensifying.

By contrast, the African savanna remains the richest grassland in the world, supporting a substantial concentration of animal and plant life. Wildlife parks are sub-Saharan Africa's greatest tourist attraction, and with proper management-giving local people a stake in conservation and controlling the pace of development-could greatly enhance African economies.

Significant numbers of mammal species in parts of northern, southern and eastern Africa are currently threatened, while the biological diversity in Mauritania and Madagascar is even further compromised with over 20 percent of the mammal species in these two countries currently under threat.

With marine catch trends increasing from 500,000 metric tons in the 1950s to over 3,000,000 metric tons by 2000, there was increasing concern about the reduction in fisheries and marine life, should this trend continue unabated.

Water resource vulnerability is a major concern in northeastern Africa, and a moderate concern across the rest of the continent. An exception is central Africa, which has plentiful water supplies.

Many Africans lack adequate access to resources, not just (if at all) because the resources are unevenly distributed geographically, but also through institutional failures such as faulty land tenure

Syria Review 2016 Page 479 of 540 pages Syria systems or political upheaval. The quality of Africa's natural resources, despite their spotty distribution, is in fact extraordinarily rich. The infrastructure needed to protect and benefit from this natural legacy, however, is largely lacking.

Regional Synopsis: Asia and the Pacific

Asia-earth's largest landmass-and the many large and nearly innumerable small islands lying off its Pacific shore display extraordinarily contrasting landscapes, levels of development, and degrees of environmental stress. In the classification used here, the world's smallest continent, Australia, is also included in the Asia-Pacific region.

The Asia-Pacific region is home to 9 of the world's 14 largest urban areas, and as energy use for utilities, industry and transport increases in developing economies, urban centers are subject to worsening air quality. Intense population density in places such as Bangladesh or Hong Kong is the quintessential image many people have of Asia, yet vast desert areas such as the Gobi and the world's highest mountain range, the Himalayas, span the continent as well. Forested areas in Southeast Asia and the islands of Indonesia and the Philippines were historically prized for their tropical hardwood, but in many places this resource is now severely depleted. Low-lying small island states are extremely vulnerable to the effects of global warming, both rising sea levels and an anticipated increase in cyclones.

Key Points:

Asian timber reserves are forecast to be depleted in the next 40 years. Loss of natural forest is irreversible in some areas, but plantation programs to restore tree cover may ameliorate a portion of the resulting land degradation.

Increased usage of fossil fuels in China and other parts of southern Asia is projected to result in a marked increase in emissions, especially in regard to carbon dioxide. The increased usage of energy has led to a marked upsurge in air pollution across the region.

Acidification is an emerging problem regionally, with sulfur dioxide emissions expected to triple by 2010 if the current growth rate is sustained. China, Thailand, India, and Korea seem to be suffering from particularly high rates of acid deposition. By contrast, Asia's most highly developed economy, Japan, has effected substantial improvements in its environmental indicators.

Water pollution in the Pacific is an urgent concern since up to 70 percent of the water discharged into the region's waters receives no treatment. Additionally, the disposal of solid wastes, in like manner, poses a major threat in a region with many areas of high population density.

Syria Review 2016 Page 480 of 540 pages Syria

The Asia-Pacific region is the largest expanse of the world's land that is adversely affected by soil degradation.

The region around Australia reportedly suffers the largest degree of ozone depletion.

The microstates of the Pacific suffer land loss due to global warming, and the consequent rise in the levels of ocean waters. A high-emissions scenario and anthropogenic climate impact at the upper end of the currently predicted range would probably force complete evacuation of the lowest-elevation islands sometime in this century.

The species-rich reefs surrounding Southeast Asia are highly vulnerable to the deleterious effects of coastal development, land-based pollution, over-fishing and exploitative fishing methods, as well as marine pollution from oil spills and other activities.

With marine catch trends increasing from 5,000,000 metric tons in the 1950s to over 20,000,000 metric tons by 2000, there was increasing concern about the reduction in fisheries and marine life, should this trend continue unabated.

Significant numbers of mammal species in parts of China and south-east Asia are currently threatened, while the biological diversity in India, Japan, Australia, the Philippines, Indonesia and parts of Malaysia is even further compromised with over 20 percent of the mammal species in these countries currently under threat.

Water resource vulnerability is a serious concern in areas surrounding the Indian subcontinent.

Regional Synopsis: Central Asia

The Central Asian republics, formerly in the Soviet Union, experience a range of environmental problems as the result of poorly executed agricultural, industrial, and nuclear programs during the Soviet era. Relatively low population densities are the norm, especially since upon the breakup of the U.S.S.R. many ethnic Russians migrated back to European Russia. In this largely semi-arid region, drought, water shortages, and soil salinization pose major challenges.

Key Points:

The use of agricultural pesticides, such as DDT and other chemicals, has contributed to the contamination of soil and groundwater throughout the region.

Land and soil degradation, and in particular, increased salinization, is mostly attributable to faulty irrigation practices.

Syria Review 2016 Page 481 of 540 pages Syria

Significant desertification is also a problem in the region.

Air pollution is prevalent, mostly due to use of low octane automobile fuel.

Industrial pollution of the Caspian Sea and the Aral Sea, as a result of industrial effluents as well as mining and metal production, presents a challenge to the countries bordering these bodies of water.

One of the most severe environmental problems in the region is attributable to the several billion tons of hazardous materials stored in landfills across Central Asia.

Uzbekistan's particular problem involves the contraction of the Aral Sea, which has decreased in size by a third, as a consequence of river diversions and poor irrigation practices. The effect has been the near-total biological destruction of that body of water.

Kazakhstan, as a consequence of being the heartland of the former Soviet Union's nuclear program, has incurred a high of cancerous malignancies, biogenetic abnormalities and radioactive contamination.

While part of the Soviet Union, the republics in the region experienced very high levels of greenhouse gas emissions, as a consequence of rapid industrialization using cheap but dirty energy sources, especially coal.

By contrast, however, there have recently been substantial reductions in the level of greenhouse gas emissions, especially those attributable to coal burning, with further decreases anticipated over the next decade. These changes are partially due to the use of cleaner energy technologies, such as natural gas, augmented by governmental commitment to improving environmental standards.

Regional Synopsis: Europe

Western Europe underwent dramatic transformation of its landscape, virtually eliminating large- scale natural areas, during an era of rapid industrialization, which intensified upon its recovery from World War II. In Eastern Europe and European Russia, intensive land development has been less prevalent, so that some native forests and other natural areas remain. Air and water pollution from use of dirty fuels and industrial effluents, however, are more serious environmental problems in Eastern than in Western Europe, though recent trends show improvement in many indicators. Acid rain has inflicted heavy environmental damage across much of Europe, particularly on forests. Europe and North America are the only regions in which water usage for industry exceeds that for agriculture, although in Mediterranean nations agriculture is the largest water consumer.

Syria Review 2016 Page 482 of 540 pages Syria

Key Points:

Europe contributes 36 percent of the world's chlorofluorocarbon emissions, 30 percent of carbon dioxide emissions, and 25 percent of sulfur dioxide emissions.

Sulfur and nitrogen oxide emissions are the cause of 30 to 50 percent of Central and Eastern Europe's deforestation.

Acid rain has been an environmental concern for decades and continues to be a challenge in parts of Western Europe.

Overexploitation of up to 60 percent of Europe's groundwater presents a problem in industrial and urban areas.

Significant numbers of mammal species in parts of western Europe, Eastern Europe and Russia are currently threatened, while the biological diversity on the Iberian Peninsula is even further compromised with over 40 percent of the mammal species in this region currently under threat. As a result, there has been a 10 percent increase in protected areas of Europe.

A major environmental issue for Europe involves the depletion of various already endangered or threatened species, and most significantly, the decline of fish stocks. Some estimates suggest that up to 50 percent of the continent's fish species may be considered endangered species. Coastal fisheries have been over-harvested, resulting in catch limits or moratoriums on many commercially important fish species.

Fortunately, in the last few years, these policies have started to yield measurable results with decreasing trends in marine fish catch.

Recently, most European countries have adopted cleaner production technologies, and alternative methods of waste disposal, including recycling.

The countries of Eastern Europe have made air quality a major environmental priority. This is exemplified by the Russian Federation's addition to the 1995 "Berlin Mandate" (transnational legislation based on resolutions of the Rio Earth Summit) compelling nations to promote "carbon sinks" to absorb greenhouse gases.

On a relative basis, when compared with the degree of industrial emissions emitted by many

Syria Review 2016 Page 483 of 540 pages Syria

Eastern European countries until the late 1980s, there has been some marked increase in air quality in the region, as obsolete plants are closed and a transition to cleaner fuels and more efficient energy use takes place.

Regional Synopsis: The Middle and Near East

Quite possibly, the Middle East will exemplify the adage that, as the 20th century was a century fixated on oil, the 21st century will be devoted to critical decisions about water. Many (though far from all) nations in the Middle East rank among those countries with the largest oil and gas reserves, but water resources are relatively scarce throughout this predominantly dry region. Effects of global warming may cause moderately high elevation areas that now typically receive winter "snowpack" to experience mainly rain instead, which would further constrain dry-season water availability. The antiquities and religious shrines of the region render it a great magnet for tourism, which entails considerable economic growth potential but also intensifies stresses on the environment.

Key Points:

Water resource vulnerability is a serious concern across the entire region. The increased usage of, and further demand for water, has exacerbated long-standing water scarcity in the region. For instance, river diversions and industrial salt works have caused the Dead Sea to shrink by one-third from its original surface area, with further declines expected.

The oil industry in the region contributes to water pollution in the Persian Gulf, as a result of oil spills, which have averaged 1.2 million barrels of oil spilt per year (some sources suggest that this figure is understated). The consequences are severe because even after oil spills have been cleaned up, environmental damage to the food webs and ecosystems of marine life will persist for a prolonged period.

The region's coastal zone is considered one of the most fragile and endangered ecosystems of the world. Land reclamation, shoreline construction, discharge of industrial effluents, and tourism (such as diving in the Red Sea) contribute to widespread coastal damage.

Significant numbers of mammal species in parts of the Middle East are currently threatened.

Since the 1980s, 11 percent of the region's natural forest has been depleted.

Regional Synopsis: Latin America and the Caribbean

Syria Review 2016 Page 484 of 540 pages Syria

The Latin American and Caribbean region is characterized by exceedingly diverse landforms that have generally seen high rates of population growth and economic development in recent decades. The percentage of inhabitants residing in urban areas is quite high at 73.4 percent; the region includes the megacities of Mexico City, Sao Paulo, and Rio de Janeiro. The region also includes the world's second-highest mountain range, the Andes; significant expanses of desert and grassland; the coral reefs of the Caribbean Sea; and the world's largest contiguous tropical forest in the Amazon basin. Threats to the latter from subsistence and commercial farming, mineral exploitation and timbering are well publicized. Nevertheless, of eight countries worldwide that still retain at least 70 percent of their original forest cover, six are in Latin America. The region accounts for nearly half (48.3 percent) of the world's greenhouse gas emissions derived from land clearing, but as yet a comparatively minuscule share (4.3 percent) of such gases from industrial sources.

Key Points:

Although Latin America is one of the most biologically diverse regions of the world, this biodiversity is highly threatened, as exemplified by the projected extinction of up to 100,000 species in the next few decades. Much of this loss will be concentrated in the Amazon area, although the western coastline of South America will also suffer significant depletion of biological diversity. The inventory of rainforest species with potentially useful commercial or medical applications is incomplete, but presumed to include significant numbers of such species that may become extinct before they are discovered and identified.

Up to 50 percent of the region's grazing land has lost its soil fertility as a result of soil erosion, salinization, alkalinization and overgrazing.

The Caribbean Sea, the Atlantic Ocean, and the Pacific Ocean have all been contaminated by agricultural wastes, which are discharged into streams that flow into these major waters. Water pollution derived from phosphorous, nitrates and pesticides adversely affects fish stocks, contributes to oxygen depletion and fosters overgrowth of aquatic vegetation. Marine life will continue to be severely compromised as a result of these conditions.

Due to industrial development in the region, many beaches of eastern Latin America and the Caribbean suffer from tar deposits.

Most cities in the region lack adequate sewage treatment facilities, and rapid migration of the rural poor into the cities is widening the gap between current infrastructure capacity and the much greater level needed to provide satisfactory basic services.

The rainforest region of the Amazon Basin suffers from dangerously high levels of deforestation, which may be a significant contributory factor to global warming or "the greenhouse effect." In the

Syria Review 2016 Page 485 of 540 pages Syria late 1990s and into the new millennium, the rate of deforestation was around 20 million acres of rainforest being destroyed annually.

Deforestation on the steep rainforest slopes of Caribbean islands contributes to soil erosion and landslides, both of which then result in heavy sedimentation of nearby river systems. When these sedimented rivers drain into the sea and coral reefs, they poison the coral tissues, which are vital to the maintenance of the reef ecosystem. The result is marine degradation and nutrient depletion. Jamaica's coral reefs have never quite recovered from the effects of marine degradation.

The Southern Cone of Latin America (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Paraguay, and Uruguay) suffers the effects of greatly increased ultraviolet-B radiation, as a consequence of more intense ozone depletion in the southern hemisphere.

Water resource vulnerability is an increasingly major concern in the northwestern portion of South America.

Regional Synopsis: North America

North American nations, in particular the United States and Canada, rank among the world's most highly developed industrial economies-a fact which has generated significant pollution problems, but also financial resources and skills that have enabled many problems to be corrected. Although efforts to promote energy efficiency, recycling, and suchlike have helped ease strains on the environment in a part of the world where per capita consumption levels are high, sprawling land development patterns and recent preferences many households have demonstrated for larger vehicles have offset these advances.

Meanwhile, a large portion of North America's original forest cover has been lost, though in many cases replaced by productive second-growth woodland. In recent years, attitudes toward best use of the region's remaining natural or scenic areas seem to be shifting toward recreation and preservation and away from resource extraction. With increasing attention on the energy scarcity in the United States, however, there is speculation that this shift may be short-lived. Indeed, the energy shortage on the west coast of the United States and associated calls for energy exploration, indicate a possible retrenchment toward resource extraction. At the same time, however, it has also served to highlight the need for energy conservation as well as alternative energy sources.

Despite generally successful anti-pollution efforts, various parts of the region continue to suffer significant air, water and land degradation from industrial, vehicular, and agricultural emissions and runoff. Mexico, as a middle-income country, displays environmental problems characteristic of a developing economy, including forest depletion, pollution from inefficient industrial processes and dirty fuels, and lack of sufficient waste-treatment infrastructure.

Syria Review 2016 Page 486 of 540 pages Syria

Key Points:

Because of significantly greater motor vehicle usage in the United States (U.S.) than in the rest of the world, the U.S. contribution of urban air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, especially carbon dioxide, is disproportionately high in relation to its population.

Acid rain is an enduring issue of contention in the northeastern part of the United States, on the border with Canada.

Mexico's urban areas suffer extreme air pollution from carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and other toxic air pollutants. Emissions controls on vehicles are in their infancy, compared to analogous regulations in the U.S.

The cities of Mexico, including those on the U.S. border, also discharge large quantities of untreated or poorly treated sewage, though officials are currently planning infrastructure upgrades.

Deforestation is noteworthy in various regions of the U.S., especially along the northwest coastline. Old growth forests have been largely removed, but in the northeastern and upper midwestern sections of the United States, evidence suggests that the current extent of tree cover probably surpasses the figure for the beginning of the 20th century.

Extreme weather conditions in the last few years have resulted in a high level of soil erosion along the north coast of California; in addition, the coastline itself has shifted substantially due to soil erosion and concomitant landslides.

Agricultural pollution-including nitrate contamination of well water, nutrient runoff to waterways, and pesticide exposure-is significant in various areas. Noteworthy among affected places are California's Central Valley, extensive stretches of the Midwest, and land in the Chesapeake Bay watershed.

Inland waterways, especially around the Great Lakes, have substantially improved their water quality, due to concentrated efforts at reducing water pollution by governmental, commercial and community representatives. Strict curbs on industrial effluents and near-universal implementation of sewage treatment are the chief factors responsible for this improvement.

A major environmental issue for Canada and the United States involves the depletion of various already endangered or threatened species, and most significantly, the decline of fish stocks. Coastal fisheries have been over-harvested, resulting in catch limits or moratoriums on many commercially important fish species. In the last few years, these policies have started to yield measurable results

Syria Review 2016 Page 487 of 540 pages Syria with decreasing trends in marine fish catch.

Due to the decay of neighboring ecosystems in Central America and the Caribbean, the sea surrounding Florida has become increasingly sedimented, contributing to marine degradation, nutrient depletion of the ecosystem, depletion of fish stocks, and diseases to coral species in particular.

Polar Regions

Key Points:

The significant rise in sea level, amounting 10 to 25 centimeters in the last 100 years, is due to the melting of the Arctic ice sheets, and is attributed to global warming.

The Antarctic suffers from a significant ozone hole, first detected in 1976. By 1985, a British scientific team reported a 40 percent decrease in usual regeneration rates of the ozone. Because a sustained increase in the amount of ultraviolet-B radiation would have adverse consequences upon all planetary life, recent environmental measures have been put into effect, aimed at reversing ozone depletion. These measures are projected to garner significant results by 2050.

Due to air and ocean currents, the Arctic is a sink for toxic releases originally discharged thousands of miles away. Arctic wildlife and Canada's Inuit population have higher bodily levels of contaminants such as PCB and dioxin than those found in people and animals in much of the rest of the world.

Global Environmental Concepts

1. Global Warming and Greenhouse Gases

The Greenhouse Effect:

In the early 19th century, the French physicist, Jean Fourier, contended that the earth's atmosphere functions in much the same way as the glass of a greenhouse, thus describing what is now understood as the "greenhouse effect." Put simply, the "greenhouse effect" confines some of the

Syria Review 2016 Page 488 of 540 pages Syria sun's energy to the earth, preserving some of the planet's warmth, rather than allowing it to flow back into space. In so doing, all kinds of life forms can flourish on earth. Thus, the "greenhouse effect" is necessary to sustain and preserve life forms and ecosystems on earth.

In the late 19th century, a Swedish chemist, Svante Arrhenius, noticed that human activities, such as the burning of coal and other fossil fuels for heat, and the removal of forested lands for urban development, led to higher concentrations of greenhouse gases, like carbon dioxide and methane, in the atmosphere. This increase in the levels of greenhouse gases was believed to advance the "greenhouse effect" exponentially, and might be related to the trend in global warming.

In the wake of the Industrial Revolution, after industrial development took place on a large scale and the total human population burgeoned simultaneously with industrialization, the resulting increase in greenhouse gas emissions could, many scientists believe, be significant enough to have some bearing on climate. Indeed, many studies in recent years support the idea that there is a linkage between human activities and global warming, although there is less consensus on the extent to which this linkage may be relevant to environmental concerns.

That said, some scientists have argued that temperature fluctuations have existed throughout the evolution of the planet. Indeed, Dr. S. Fred Singer, the president of the Science and Environment Policy Project has noted that 3,000-year-old geological records of ocean sediment reveal changes in the surface temperature of the ocean. Hence, it is possible that climate variability is merely a normal fact of the planet's evolution. Yet even skeptics as to anthropogenic factors concur that any substantial changes in global temperatures would likely have an effect upon the earth's ecosystems, as well as the life forms that inhabit them.

The Relationship Between Global Warming and Greenhouse Gases:

A large number of climatologists believe that the increase in atmospheric concentrations of "greenhouse gas emissions," mostly a consequence of human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels, are contributing to global warming. The cause notwithstanding, the planet has reportedly warmed 0.3°C to 0.6°C over the last century. Indeed, each year during the 1990s was one of the very warmest in the 20th century, with the mean surface temperature for 1999 being the fifth warmest on record since 1880.

In early 2000, a panel of atmospheric scientists for the National Research Council concluded in a report that global warming was, indeed, a reality. While the panel, headed by Chairman John Wallace, a professor of atmospheric sciences at the University of Washington, stated that it remained unclear whether human activities have contributed to the earth's increasing temperatures, it was apparent that global warming exists.

In 2001, following a request for further study by the incoming Bush administration in the United

Syria Review 2016 Page 489 of 540 pages Syria

States, the National Academy of Sciences again confirmed that global warming had been in existence for the last 20 years. The study also projected an increase in temperature between 2.5 degrees and 10.4 degrees Fahrenheit by the year 2100. Furthermore, the study found the leading cause of global warming to be emissions of carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels, and it noted that greenhouse gas accumulations in the earth's atmosphere was a result of human activities.

Within the scientific community, the controversy regarding has centered on the difference between surface air and upper air temperatures. Information collected since 1979 suggests that while the earth's surface temperature has increased by about a degree in the past century, the atmospheric temperature five miles above the earth's surface has indicated very little increase. Nevertheless, the panel stated that this discrepancy in temperature between surface and upper air does not invalidate the conclusion that global warming is taking place. Further, the panel noted that natural events, such as volcanic eruptions, can decrease the temperature in the upper atmosphere.

The major consequences of global warming potentially include the melting of the polar ice caps, which, in turn, contribute to the rise in sea levels. Many islands across the globe have already experienced a measurable loss of land as a result. Because global warming may increase the rate of evaporation, increased precipitation, in the form of stronger and more frequent storm systems, is another potential outcome. Other consequences of global warming may include the introduction and proliferation of new infectious diseases, loss of arable land (referred to as "desertification"), destructive changes to existing ecosystems, loss of biodiversity and the isolation of species, and concomitant adverse changes in the quality of human life.

International Policy Development in Regard to Global Warming:

Regardless of what the precise nature of the relationship between greenhouse gas emissions and global warming may be, it seems that there is some degree of a connection between the phenomena. Any substantial reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and global warming trends will likely involve systematic changes in industrial operations, the use of advanced energy sources and technologies, as well as global cooperation in implementing and regulating these transformations.

In this regard, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) stipulated the following objectives:

1. To stabilize "greenhouse gas" concentrations within the atmosphere, in such a manner that would preclude hazardous anthropogenic intervention into the existing biosphere and ecosystems of the world. This stabilization process would facilitate the natural adaptation of ecosystems to changes in climate.

2. To ensure and enable sustainable development and food production on a global scale.

Syria Review 2016 Page 490 of 540 pages Syria

*** See section on "International Environmental Agreements and Associations" for information related to international policies related to limiting greenhouse gases and controlling climate change emanating from historic summits at Kyoto, Copenhagen, Doha, and Paris. ***

2. Air Pollution

Long before global warming reared its head as a significant issue, those concerned about the environment and public health noted the deleterious effects of human-initiated combustion upon the atmosphere. Killer smogs from coal burning triggered acute health emergencies in London and other places. At a lower level of intensity motor vehicle, power plant, and industrial emissions impaired long-range visibility and probably had some chronic adverse consequences on the respiratory systems of persons breathing such air.

In time, scientists began associating the sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides released from coal burning with significant acid deposition in the atmosphere, eventually falling as "acid rain." This phenomenon has severely degraded forestlands, especially in Europe and a few parts of the United States. It has also impaired some aquatic ecosystems and eaten away the surface of some human artifacts, such as marble monuments. Scrubber technology and conversion to cleaner fuels have enabled the level of industrial production to remain at least constant while significantly reducing acid deposition. Technologies aimed at cleaning the air and curtailing acid rain, soot, and smog may, nonetheless, boomerang as the perils of global warming become increasingly serious. In brief, these particulates act as sort of a sun shade -- comparable to the effect of volcanic eruptions on the upper atmosphere whereby periods of active volcanism correlate with temporarily cooler weather conditions. Thus, while the carbon dioxide releases that are an inevitable byproduct of combustion continue, by scrubbing the atmosphere of pollutants, an industrial society opens itself to greater insolation (penetration of the sun's rays and consequent heating), and consequently, it is likely to experience a correspondingly greater rise in ambient temperatures.

The health benefits of removing the sources of acid rain and smog are indisputable, and no one would recommend a return to previous conditions. Nevertheless, the problematic climatic effects of continually increasing emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases pose a major global environmental challenge, not as yet addressed adequately.

3. Ozone Depletion

The stratospheric ozone layer functions to prevent ultraviolet radiation from reaching the earth. Normally, stratospheric ozone is systematically disintegrated and regenerated through natural

Syria Review 2016 Page 491 of 540 pages Syria photochemical processes. The stratospheric ozone layer, however, has been depleted unnaturally as a result of anthropogenic (man-made) chemicals, most especially chlorine and bromide compounds such as chloroflorocarbons (CFCs), halons, and various industrial chemicals in the form of solvents, refrigerants, foaming agents, aerosol propellants, fire retardants, and fumigants. Ozone depletion is of concern because it permits a greater degree of ultraviolet-B radiation to reach the earth, which then increases the incidences of cancerous malignancies, cataracts, and human immune deficiencies. In addition, even in small doses, ozone depletion affects the ecosystem by disturbing food chains, agriculture, fisheries and other forms of biological diversity.

Transnational policies enacted to respond to the dangers of ozone depletion include the 1985 Vienna Convention on the Protection of the Ozone Layer and the 1987 Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer. The Montreal Protocol was subsequently amended in London in 1990, Copenhagen in 1992 and Vienna in 1995. By 1996, 155 countries had ratified the Montreal Protocol, which sets out a time schedule for the reduction (and eventual elimination) of ozone depleting substances (OPS), and bans exports and imports of ODS from and to non- participant countries.

In general, the Protocol stipulates that developed countries must eliminate halon consumption by 1994 and CFC consumption by 1996, while developing countries must eliminate these substances by 2010. Consumption of methyl bromide, which is used as a fumigant, was to be frozen at the 1995 in developed countries, and fully eliminated in 2010, while developing countries are to freeze consumption by 2002, based on average 1995-1998 consumption levels. Methyl chloroform is to be phased out by 2005. Under the Montreal Protocol, most ODS will be completely eliminated from use by 2010.

4. Land Degradation

In recent decades, land degradation in more arid regions of the world has become a serious concern. The problem, manifest as both "desertification" and "devegetation," is caused primarily by climate variability and human activities, such as "deforestation," excessive cultivation, overgrazing, and other forms of land resource exploitation. It is also exacerbated by inadequate irrigation practices. Although the effects of droughts on drylands have been temporary in the past, today, the productivity and sustainability of these lands have been severely compromised for the long term. Indeed, in every region of the world, land degradation has become an acute issue.

Desertification and Devegetation:

"Desertification" is a process of land degradation causing the soil to deteriorate, thus losing its nutrients and fertility, and eventually resulting in the loss of vegetation, known as "devegetation."

Syria Review 2016 Page 492 of 540 pages Syria

As aforementioned, "desertification" and "devegetation" are caused by human activities, yet human beings are also the greatest casualties. Because these forms of land degradation affect the ability of the soil to produce crops, they concomitantly contribute to poverty. As population increases and demographic concentrations shift, the extent of land subject to stresses by those seeking to wrest subsistence from it has inexorably risen.

In response, the United Nations has formed the Convention to Combat Desertification-aimed at implementing programs to address the underlying causes of desertification, as well as measures to prevent and minimize its effects. Of particular significance is the formulation of policies on transboundary resources, such as areas around lakes and rivers. At a broader level, the Convention has established a Conference of Parties (COP), which includes all ratifying governments, for directing and advancing international action.

To ensure more efficacious use of funding, the Convention intends to reconfigure international aid to utilize a consultative and coordinated approach in the disbursement and expenditure of donor funds. In this way, local communities that are affected by desertification will be active participants in the solution-generation process. In-depth community education projects are envisioned as part of this new international aid program, and private donor financing is encouraged. Meanwhile, as new technologies are developed to deal with the problem of desertification, they need to be distributed for application across the world. Hence, the Convention calls for international cooperation in scientific research in this regard.

Desertification is a problem of sustainable development. It is directly connected to human challenges such as poverty, social and economic well-being and environmental protection as well. Broader environmental issues, such as climate change, biological diversity, and freshwater supplies, are indirectly related, so any effort to resolve this environmental challenge must entail coordinated research efforts and joint action.

Deforestation:

Deforestation is not a recent phenomenon. For centuries, human beings have cut down trees to clear space for land cultivation, or in order to use the wood for fuel. Over the last 200 years, and most especially after World War II, deforestation increased because the logging industry became a globally profitable endeavor, and so the clearing of forested areas was accelerated for the purposes of industrial development. In the long term, this intensified level of deforestation is considered problematic because the forest is unable to regenerate itself quickly. The deforestation that has occurred in tropical rainforests is seen as an especially serious concern, due to the perceived adverse effects of this process upon the entire global ecosystem.

The most immediate consequence of deforestation is soil degradation. Soil, which is necessary for

Syria Review 2016 Page 493 of 540 pages Syria the growth of vegetation, can be a fragile and vital property. Organically, an extensive evolution process must take place before soil can produce vegetation, yet at the same time, the effects of natural elements, such as wind and rain, can easily and quickly degrade this resource. This phenomenon is known as soil erosion. In addition, natural elements like wind and rain reduce the amount of fertile soil on the ground, making soil scarcity a genuine problem. When fertile topsoil that already exists is removed from the landscape in the process of deforestation, soil scarcity is further exacerbated. Equally significant is the fact that once land has been cleared so that the topsoil can be cultivated for crop production, not only are the nutrient reserves in the soil depleted, thus producing crops of inferior quality, but the soil structure itself becomes stressed and deteriorates further.

Another direct result of deforestation is flooding. When forests are cleared, removing the cover of vegetation, and rainfall occurs, the flow of water increases across the surface of land. When extensive water runoff takes place, the frequency and intensity of flooding increases. Other adverse effects of deforestation include the loss of wildlife and biodiversity within the ecosystem that supports such life forms.

At a broader level, tropical rainforests play a vital role in maintaining the global environmental system. Specifically, destruction of tropical rainforests affects the carbon dioxide cycle. When forests are destroyed by burning (or rotting), carbon dioxide is released into the air, thus contributing to an intensified "greenhouse effect." The increase in greenhouse gas emissions like carbon dioxide is a major contributor to global warming, according to many environmental scientists. Indeed, trees themselves absorb carbon dioxide in the process of photosynthesis, so their loss also reduces the absorption of greenhouse gases.

Tropical rainforest destruction also adversely affects the nitrogen cycle. Nitrogen is a key nutrient for both plants and animals. Plants derive nitrogen from soil, while animals obtain it via nitrogen- enriched vegetation. This element is essential for the formation of amino acids, and thereby for proteins and biochemicals that all living things need for metabolism and growth. In the nitrogen cycle, vegetation acquires these essential proteins and biochemicals, and then cyclically returns them to the atmosphere and global ecosystem. Accordingly, when tropical rainforest ecosystems are compromised, not only is vegetation removed; the atmosphere is also affected and climates are altered. At a more immediate level, the biodiversity within tropical rainforests, including wildlife and insect species and a wealth of plant varieties, is depleted. Loss of rare plants is of particular concern because certain species as yet unknown and unused could likely yield many practical benefits, for instance as medicines.

As a result of the many challenges associated with deforestation, many environmental groups and agencies have argued for government policies on the sustainable development of forests by governments across the globe. While many countries have instituted national policies and programs aimed at reducing deforestation, and substantial research has been advanced in regard to

Syria Review 2016 Page 494 of 540 pages Syria sustainable and regenerative forestry development, there has been very little progress on an international level. Generally speaking, most tropical rainforests are located in developing and less developed countries, where economic growth is often dependent upon the exploitation of tropical rainforests. Timber resources as well as wildlife hunting tend to be particularly lucrative arenas.

In places such as the Amazon, where deforestation takes place for the construction of energy plants aimed at industrialization and economic development, there is an exacerbated effect on the environment. After forests are cleared in order to construct such projects, massive flooding usually ensues. The remaining trees then rot and decay in the wake of the flooding. As the trees deteriorate, their biochemical makeup becomes more acidic, producing poisonous substances such as hydrogen sulphide and methane gases. Acidified water subsequently corrodes the mechanical equipment and operations of the plants, which are already clogged by rotting wood after the floodwaters rise.

Deforestation generally arises from an economically plausible short-term motivation, but nonetheless poses a serious global concern because the effects go beyond national boundaries. The United Nations has established the World Commission on Forest and Sustainable Development. This body's task is to determine the optimal means of dealing with the issue of deforestation, without unduly affecting normal economic development, while emphasizing the global significance of protecting tropical forest ecosystems.

5. Water Resources

For all terrestrial fauna, including humans, water is the most immediate necessity to sustain life. As the population has increased and altered an ever-greater portion of the landscape from its natural condition, demand on water resources has intensified, especially with the development of industrialization and large-scale irrigation. The supply of freshwater is inherently limited, and moreover distributed unevenly across the earth's landmasses. Moreover, not just demand for freshwater but activities certain to degrade it are becoming more pervasive. By contrast, the oceans form a sort of "last wilderness," still little explored and in large part not seriously affected by human activity. However, coastal environments - the biologically richest part of the marine ecosystem-are experiencing major depletion due to human encroachment and over-exploitation.

Freshwater:

In various regions, for instance the Colorado River in the western United States, current withdrawals of river water for irrigation, domestic, and industrial use consume the entire streamflow so that almost no water flows into the sea at the river's mouth. Yet development is ongoing in many such places, implying continually rising demand for water. In some areas reliant

Syria Review 2016 Page 495 of 540 pages Syria on groundwater, aquifers are being depleted at a markedly faster rate than they are being replenished. An example is the San Joaquin Valley in California, where decades of high water withdrawals for agriculture have caused land subsidence of ten meters or more in some spots. Naturally, the uncertainty of future water supplies is particularly acute in arid and semi-arid regions. Speculation that the phenomenon of global warming will alter geographic and seasonal rainfall patterns adds further uncertainty.

Water conservation measures have great potential to alleviate supply shortages. Some city water systems are so old and beset with leaking pipes that they lose as much water as they meter. Broad- scale irrigation could be replaced by drip-type irrigation, actually enhancing the sustainability of agriculture. In many areas where heavy irrigation has been used for decades, the result is deposition of salts and other chemicals in the soil such that the land becomes unproductive for farming and must be abandoned.

Farming is a major source of water pollution. Whereas restrictions on industrial effluents and other "point sources" are relatively easy to implement, comparable measures to reform hydraulic practices at farms and other "nonpoint sources" pose a significantly knottier challenge. Farm- caused water pollution takes the following main forms:

- Nitrate pollution found in wells in intensive farming areas as a consequence of heavy fertilizer use is a threat to human health. The most serious danger is to infants, who by ingesting high-nitrate water can contract methemoglobinemia, sometimes called "blue baby syndrome," a potentially fatal condition.

- Fertilizer runoff into rivers and lakes imparts unwanted nutrients that cause algae growth and eventual loss of oxygen in the body of water, degrading its ability to support fish and other desirable aquatic life.

- Toxic agricultural chemicals - insecticides, herbicides, and fungicides - are detectable in some aquifers and waterways.

In general, it is much easier to get a pollutant into water than to retrieve it out. Gasoline additives, dry cleaning chemicals, other industrial toxins, and in a few areas radionucleides have all been found in water sources intended for human use. The complexity and long time scale of subterranean hydrological movements essentially assures that pollutants already deposited in aquifers will continue to turn up for decades to come. Sophisticated water treatment processes are available, albeit expensive, to reclaim degraded water and render it fit for human consumption. Yet source protection is unquestionably a more desirable alternative.

In much of the developing world, and even some low-income rural enclaves of the developed world, the population lacks ready access to safe water. Surface water and shallow groundwater

Syria Review 2016 Page 496 of 540 pages Syria supplies are susceptible to contamination from untreated wastewater and failing septic tanks, as well as chemical hazards. The occurrence of waterborne disease is almost certainly greatly underreported.

Marine Resources:

Coastal areas have always been desirable places for human habitation, and population pressure on them continues to increase. Many types of water degradation that affect lakes and rivers also affect coastal zones: industrial effluents, untreated or partially treated sewage, nutrient load from agriculture figure prominently in both cases. Prospects for more extreme storms as a result of global warming, as well as the pervasiveness of poorly planned development in many coastal areas, forebode that catastrophic hurricanes and landslides may increase in frequency in the future. Ongoing rise in sea levels will force remedial measures and in some cases abandonment of currently valuable coastal property.

Fisheries over much of the globe have been overharvested, and immediate conservation measures are required to preserve stocks of many species. Many governments subsidized factory-scale fishing fleets in the 1970s and 1980s, and the resultant catch increase evidently surpassed a sustainable level. It is uncertain how much of the current decline in fish stocks stems from overharvesting and how much from environmental pollution. The deep ocean remains relatively unaffected by human activity, but continental shelves near coastlines are frequently seriously polluted, and these close-to-shore areas are the major biological nurseries for food fish and the smaller organisms they feed on.

6. Environmental Toxins

Toxic chemical pollution exploded on the public consciousness with disclosure of spectacularly polluted industrial areas such as Love Canal near Buffalo, New York. There is no question that pollutants such as organophosphates or radionucleides can be highly deleterious to health, but evidence to date suggests that seriously affected areas are a localized rather than universal problem.

While some explore the possibilities for a lifestyle that fully eschews use of modern industrial chemicals, the most prevalent remediative approach is to focus on more judicious use. The most efficient chemical plants are now able to contain nearly all toxic byproducts of their production processes within the premises, minimizing the release of such substances into the environment. Techniques such as Integrated Pest Management (IPM) dictate limited rather than broadcast use of pesticides: application only when needed using the safest available chemical, supplemented as much as possible with nontoxic controls.

Syria Review 2016 Page 497 of 540 pages Syria

While heightened public awareness and growing technical sophistication suggest a hopeful outlook on limiting the damage from manmade environmental toxins, one must grant that previous incidents of their misuse and mishandling have already caused environmental damage that will have to be dealt with for many years to come. In the case of the most hazardous radioactive substances, the time scale for successful remediation actually extends beyond that of the recorded history of civilization. Moreover, in this era of high population density and rapid economic growth, quotidian activities such as the transport of chemicals will occasionally, seemingly inevitably result in accidents with adverse environmental consequences.

7. "Islandization" and Biodiversity

With increased awareness regarding the adverse effects of unregulated hunting and habitat depletion upon wildlife species and other aspects of biodiversity, large-scale efforts across the globe have been initiated to reduce and even reverse this trend.

In every region of the world, many species of wildlife and areas of biodiversity have been saved from extinction. Nationally, many countries have adopted policies aimed at preservation and conservation of species, and one of the most tangible measures has been the proliferation of protected habitats. Such habitats exist in the form of wildlife reserves, marine life reserves, and other such areas where biodiversity can be protected from external encroachment and exploitation.

Despite these advances in wildlife and biodiversity protection, further and perhaps more intractable challenges linger. Designated reserves, while intended to prevent further species decline, exist as closed territories, fragmented from other such enclaves and disconnected from the larger ecosystem. This environmental scenario is referred to as "islandization." Habitat reserves often serve as oversized zoos or game farms, with landscapes and wildlife that have effectively been "tamed" to suit. Meanwhile, the larger surrounding ecosystem continues to be seriously degraded and transformed, while within the islandized habitat, species that are the focus of conservation efforts may not have sufficient range and may not be able to maintain healthy genetic variability.

As a consequence, many conservationists and preservationists have demanded that substantially larger portions of land be withheld as habitat reserves, and a network of biological corridors to connect continental reserves be established. While such efforts to combat islandization have considerable support in the United States, how precisely such a program would be instituted, especially across national boundaries, remains a matter of debate. International conservationists and preservationists say without a network of reserves a massive loss of biodiversity will result.

The concept of islandization illustrates why conservation and preservation of wildlife and biodiversity must consider and adopt new, broader strategies. In the past, conservation and preservation efforts have been aimed at specific species, such as the spotted owl and grizzly bear in

Syria Review 2016 Page 498 of 540 pages Syria

North America, the Bengal tiger in Southeast Asia, the panda in China, elephants in Africa. Instead, the new approach is to simultaneously protect many and varied species that inhabit the same ecosystem. This method, referred to as "bio-regional conservation," may more efficaciously generate longer-term and more far-reaching results precisely because it is aimed at preserving entire ecosystems, and all the living things within.

More About Biodiversity Issues:

This section is directly taken from the United Nations Environmental Program: "Biodiversity Assessment"

The Global Biodiversity Assessment, completed by 1500 scientists under the auspices of United Nations Environmental Program in 1995, updated what is known (or unknown) about global biological diversity at the ecosystem, species and genetic levels. The assessment was uncertain of the total number of species on Earth within an order of magnitude. Of its working figure of 13 million species, only 13 percent are scientifically described. Ecological community diversity is also poorly known, as is its relationship to biological diversity, and genetic diversity has been studied for only a small number of species. The effects of human activities on biodiversity have increased so greatly that the rate of species extinctions is rising to hundreds or thousands of times the background level. These losses are driven by increasing demands on species and their habitats, and by the failure of current market systems to value biodiversity adequately. The Assessment calls for urgent action to reverse these trends.

There has been a new recognition of the importance of protecting marine and aquatic biodiversity. The first quantitative estimates of species losses due to growing coral reef destruction predict that almost 200,000 species, or one in five presently contributing to coral reef biodiversity, could die out in the next 40 years if human pressures on reefs continue to increase.

Since Rio, many countries have improved their understanding of the status and importance of their biodiversity, particularly through biodiversity country studies such as those prepared under the auspices of UNEP/GEF. The United Kingdom identified 1250 species needing monitoring, of which 400 require action plans to ensure their survival. Protective measures for biodiversity, such as legislation to protect species, can prove effective. In the USA, almost 40 percent of the plants and animals protected under the Endangered Species Act are now stable or improving as a direct result of recovery efforts. Some African countries have joined efforts to protect threatened species through the 1994 Lusaka Agreement, and more highly migratory species are being protected by specialized cooperative agreements among range states under the Bonn Agreement.

There is an emerging realization that a major part of conservation of biological diversity must take place outside of protected areas and involve local communities. The extensive agricultural areas

Syria Review 2016 Page 499 of 540 pages Syria occupied by small farmers contain much biodiversity that is important for sustainable food production. Indigenous agricultural practices have been and continue to be important elements in the maintenance of biodiversity, but these are being displaced and lost. There is a new focus on the interrelationship between agrodiversity conservation and sustainable use and development practices in smallholder agriculture, with emphasis on use of farmers' knowledge and skills as a source of information for sustainable farming.

Perhaps even more important than the loss of biodiversity is the transformation of global biogeochemical cycles, the reduction in the total world biomass, and the decrease in the biological productivity of the planet. While quantitative measurements are not available, the eventual economic and social consequences may be so significant that the issue requires further attention.

******

Specific sources used for this section:

Bendall, Roger. 1996. "Biodiversity: the follow up to Rio". The Globe 30:4-5, April 1996.

Global Environmental Change: Human and Policy Implications. 1995. Special issue on "People, Land Management and Environmental Change", Vol. 3, No. 4, September 1995.

Golubev, Genady N. (Moscow University) In litt. 29 June 1996.

Heywood, V.H. (ed.). 1995. Global Biodiversity Assessment. United Nations Environment Programme. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Heywood, V.H. 1996. "The Global Biodiversity Assessment". The Globe, 30:2-4, April 1996.

Reaka-Kudla, Marjorie. 1996. Paper presented at American Association for Advancement of

Syria Review 2016 Page 500 of 540 pages Syria

Science, February 1996. Quoted in Pain, Stephanie. "Treasures lost in reef madness". New Scientist, 17 February 1996.

Uitto, Juha I., and Akiko Ono (eds). 1996. Population, Land Management and Environmental Change. The United Nations University, Tokyo.

USFWS. 1994. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service report to Congress, cited in news release 21 July 1994.

Online resources used generally in the Environmental Overview:

Environmental Protection Agency Global Warming Site. URL: http://www.epa.gov/globalwarming

Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nations: Forestry. URL: http://www.fao.org/forestry/site/sofo/en/

Global Warming Information Page. URL: http://globalwarming.org

United Nations Environmental Program. URL: http://www.unep.org/GEO/GEO_Products/Assessment_Reports/

United Nations Global Environmental Outlook. URL: http://www.unep.org/geo/geo4/media/

Note on Edition Dates:

The edition dates for textual resources are noted above because they were used to formulate the original content. We also have used online resources (cited above) to update coverage as needed.

Information Resources

For more information about environmental concepts, CountryWatch recommends the following resources:

Syria Review 2016 Page 501 of 540 pages Syria

The United Nations Environmental Program Network (with country profiles)

The United Nations Environment Program on Climate Change

The United Nations Environmental Program on Waters and Oceans

The United Nations Environmental Program on Forestry: "Forests in Flux"

FAO "State of the World's Forests"

World Resources Institute.

Harvard University Center for Health and the Global Environment

The University of Wisconsin Center for Sustainability and the Global Environment http://sage.aos.wisc.edu/

International Environmental Agreements and Associations

International Policy Development in Regard to Global Warming:

Introduction

Syria Review 2016 Page 502 of 540 pages Syria

In this regard, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) stipulated the following objectives:

2. To ensure and enable sustainable development and food production on a global scale.

Following are two discusssions regarding international policies on the environment, followed by listings of international accords.

Special Entry: The Kyoto Protocol

The UNFCCC was adopted at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992, and entered into force in 1994. Over 175 parties were official participants.

Meanwhile, however, many of the larger, more industrialized nations failed to reach the emissions' reduction targets, and many UNFCCC members agreed that the voluntary approach to reducing emissions had not been successful. As such, UNFCCC members reached a consensus that legally binding limits were necessitated, and agreed to discuss such a legal paradigm at a meeting in Kyoto, Japan in 1997. At that meeting, the UNFCCC forged the Kyoto Protocol. This concord is the first legally binding international agreement that places limits on emissions from industrialized countries. The major greenhouse gas emissions addressed in the Kyoto Protocol include carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, sulfur hexafluoride, and methane.

The provisions of the Kyoto Protocol stipulate that economically advanced nations must reduce their combined emissions of greenhouse gases, by approximately five percent from their 1990 levels, before the 2008-2010 deadline. Countries with the highest carbon dioxide emissions, such as the United States (U.S.), many of the European Union (EU) countries, and Japan, are to reduce emissions by a scale of 6 to 8 percent. All economically advanced nations must show "demonstrable progress" by 2005. In contrast, no binding limits or timetable have been set on

Syria Review 2016 Page 503 of 540 pages Syria developing countries. Presumably, this distinction is due to the fact that most developing countries - - with the obvious exceptions of India and China -- simply do not emit as many greenhouse gases as do more industrially advanced countries. Meanwhile, these countries are entrenched in the process of economic development.

Regardless of the aforementioned reasoning, there has been strong opposition against the asymmetrical treatment assigned to emissions limits among developed and developing countries. Although this distinction might be regarded as unfair in principle, associations such as the Alliance of Small Island States have been vocal in expressing how global warming -- a result of greenhouse gas emissions - has contributed to the rise in sea level, and thus deleteriously affected their very existence as island nation states. For this reason, some parties have suggested that economically advanced nations, upon returning to their 1990 levels, should be required to further reduce their greenhouse gas emissions by a deadline of 2005. In response, interested parties have observed that even if such reductions were undertaken by economically advanced nations, they would not be enough to completely control global warming. Indeed, a reduction in the rate of fossil fuel usage by developing nations would also be necessary to have substantial ameliorative effect on global warming. Indeed, a reduction in the rate of fossil fuel usage by developing nations would also be necessary to have substantial ameliorative effect on global warming.

As such, the Protocol established a "Clean Development Mechanism" which permits developed countries to invest in projects aimed at reducing emissions within developing countries in return for credit for the reductions. Ostensibly, the objective of this mechanism is to curtail emissions in developing countries without unduly penalizing them for their economic development. Under this model, the countries with more potential emissions credits could sell them to other signatories of the Kyoto Protocol, whose emissions are forecast to significantly rise in the next few years. Should this trading of emissions credits take place, it is estimated that the Kyoto Protocol's emissions targets could still be met.

In 1999, the International Energy Outlook projected that Eastern Europe, the former Soviet Union and Newly Independent States, as well as parts of Asia, are all expected to show a marked decrease in their level of energy-related carbon emissions in 2010. Nations with the highest emissions, specifically, the U.S., the EU and Japan, are anticipated to reduce their emissions by up to 8 percent by 2012. By 2000, however, the emissions targets were not on schedule for achievement. Indeed, the U.S. Department of Energy estimates forecast that by 2010, there will be a 34 percent increase in carbon emissions from the 1990 levels, in the absence of major shifts in policy, economic growth, energy prices, and consumer trends. Despite this assessment in the U.S., international support for the Kyoto Protocol remained strong, especially among European countries and island states, who view the pact as one step in the direction away from reliance on fossil fuels and other sources of greenhouse gases.

In 2001, U.S. President, George W. Bush, rejected his country's participation in the Kyoto

Syria Review 2016 Page 504 of 540 pages Syria

Protocol, saying that the costs imposed on the global economic system, and especially, on the US, overshadowed the benefits of the Protocol. He also cited the unfair burden on developed nations to reduce emissions, as another primary reasons for withdrawal from the international pact, as well as insufficient evidence regarding the science of global warming. Faced with impassioned international disapproval for his position, the U.S. president stated that his administration remained interested in dealing with the matter of global warming, but would endorse alternative measures to combat the problem, such as voluntary initiatives limiting emissions. Critics of Bush's position, however, have noted that it was the failure of voluntary initiatives to reduce emissions following the Rio Summit that led to the establishment of the Kyoto Protocol in the first place.

In the wake of the Bush administration's decision, many participant countries resigned themselves to the reality that the goals of the Kyoto Protocol might not be achieved without U.S. involvement. Nevertheless, in Bonn, Germany, in July 2001, the remaining participant countries struck a political compromise on some of the key issues and sticking points, and planned to move forward with the Protocol, irrespective of the absence of the U.S. The key compromise points included the provision for countries to offset their targets with carbon sinks (these are areas of forest and farmland which can absorb carbon through the process of photosynthesis). Another compromise point within the broader Bonn Agreement was the reduction of emissions cuts of six gases from over 5 percent to a more achievable 2 percent. A third key change was the provision of funding for less wealthy countries to adopt more progressive technologies.

In late October and early November 2001, the UNFCC's 7th Conference of the Parties met in Marrakesh, Morocco, to finalize the measures needed to make the Kyoto Protocol operational. Although the UNFCC projected that ratification of the Protocol would make it legally binding within a year, many critics noted that the process had fallen short of implementing significant changes in policy that would be necessary to actually stop or even slow climate change. They also maintained that the absence of U.S. participation effectively rendered the Protocol into being a political exercise without any substance, either in terms of transnational policy or in terms of environmental concerns.

The adoption of the compromises ensconced within the Bonn Agreement had been intended to make the provisions of the Kyoto Protocol more palatable to the U.S. In this regard, it failed to achieve its objective as the Bush administration continued to eschew participation in the international accord. Still, however, the Bonn Agreement did manage to render a number of other positive outcomes. Specifically, in 2002, key countries, such as Russia, Japan and Canada agreed to ratify the protocol, bringing the number of signatories to 178. The decision by key countries to ratify the protocol was regarded as "the kiss of life" by observers.

By 2005, on the eve of a climate change conference in London, British Prime Minister Tony Blair was hoping to deal with the problems of climate change beyond the provisions set forth in the

Syria Review 2016 Page 505 of 540 pages Syria

Kyoto Protocol. Acknowledging that the Kyoto Protocol could not work in its current form, Blair wanted to open the discussion for a new climate change plan.

Blair said that although most of the world had signed on to Kyoto, the protocol could not meet any of its practical goals of cutting greenhouse gas emissions without the participation of the United States, the world's largest polluter. He also noted that any new agreement would have to include India and China -- significant producers of greenhouse gas emissions, but exempt from Kyoto because they have been classified as developing countries. Still, he said that progress on dealing with climate change had been stymied by "a reluctance to face up to reality and the practical action needed to tackle problem."

Blair also touted the "huge opportunities" in technology and pointed toward the possibilities offered by wind, solar and nuclear power, along with fuel cell technology, eco-friendly biofuels, and carbon capture and storage which could generate low carbon power. Blair also asserted that his government was committed to achieving its domestic goal of reducing carbon dioxide emissions by 20 percent by 2010.

In the United States, President George W. Bush has said that global warming remained a debatable issue and despite conclusions reached by his own Environmental Protection Agency, he has not agreed with the conclusion that global warming and climate change are linked with human activities. Bush has also refused to ratify Kyoto on the basis of its economic costs.

Australia, an ally of the United States, has taken a similarly dim view of the Kyoto Protocol. Ahead of the November 2005 climate change meeting in Canada in which new goals for the protocol were to be discussed, Australia 's Environment Minister, Ian Campbell, said that negotiating new greenhouse gas emission levels for the Kyoto Protocol would be a waste of time. Campbell said, "There is a consensus that the caps, targets and timetables approach is flawed. If we spend the next five years arguing about that, we'll be fiddling and negotiating while Rome burns." Campbell, like the Bush administration, has also advocated a system of voluntary action in which industry takes up new technologies rather than as a result of compelling the reduction of emissions. But the Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) has called on its government to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, to establish a system of emissions trading, and to set binding limits on emissions. Interestingly, although it did not sign on to Kyoto , Australia was expected to meet its emissions target by 2012 (an 8 percent increase in 1990 levels in keeping with the country's reliance on coal). But this success has nothing to do with new technologies and is due to state- based regulations on land clearing.

Note: The Kyoto Protocol calls for developed nations to cut greenhouse emissions by 5.2 percent of 1990 levels by 2012.

Syria Review 2016 Page 506 of 540 pages Syria

Special Entry: Climate Change Summit in Copenhagen (2009) --

In December 2009, the United Nations Climate Change Summit opened in the Danish capital of Copenhagen. The summit was scheduled to last from Dec. 7-18, 2009. Delegates from more than 190 countries were in attendance, and approximately 100 world leaders, including British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and United States President Barack Obama, were expected to participate. At issue was the matter of new reductions targets on greenhouse gas emissions by 2020.

Despite earlier fears that little concurrence would come from the conference, effectively pushing significant actions forward to a 2010 conference in Mexico City, negotiators were now reporting that the talks were productive and several key countries, such as South Africa, had pledged to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The two main issues that could still lead to cleavages were questions of agreement between the industrialized countries and the developing countries of the world, as well as the overall effectiveness of proposals in seriously addressing the perils of climate change.

On Dec. 9, 2009, four countries -- the United Kingdom, Australia, Mexico and Norway -- presented a document outlining ideas for raising and managing billions of dollars, which would be intended to help vulnerable countries dealing with the perils of climate change. Described as a "green fund," the concept could potentially help small island states at risk because of the rise in sea level. Bangladesh identified itself as a potential recipient of an assistance fund, noting that as a country plagued by devastating floods, it was particularly hard-hit by climate change. The "green fund" would fall under the rubric of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, for which developed countries have been committed to quantifying their emission reduction targets, and also to providing financial and technical support to developing countries.

The United Kingdom, Australia, Mexico and Norway also called for the creation of a new legal treaty that would replace the Kyoto Protocol. This new treaty, which could go into force in 2012, would focus largely on the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 2020. But Australia went even further in saying that the successor treaty to the Kyoto Protocol, should be one with provisions covering all countries. Such a move would be a departure from the structure of the Kyoto Protocol, which contained emissions targets for industrialized countries due to the prevailing view that developed countries had a particular historic responsibility to be accountable for climate change. More recently, it has become apparent that substantial reductions in greenhouse gas emissions demanded by scientists would only come to pass with the participation also of significant developing nation states, such as China and India. Indeed, one of the most pressing critiques of the Kyoto Protocol was that it was a "paper tiger" that failed to address the impact of the actions of emerging economies like China and India, with its focus on the developed economies.

Now, in 2009, China -- as the world's biggest greenhouse gas emitter -- was responding this dubious distinction by vocalizing its criticism of the current scenario and foregrounding its new

Syria Review 2016 Page 507 of 540 pages Syria commitments. Ahead of the Copenhagen summit, China had announced it would reduce the intensity of its carbon emissions per unit of its GDP in 2020 by 40 to 45 percent against 2005 levels. With that new commitment at hand, China was now accusing the United States and the European Union of shirking their own responsibilities by setting weak targets for greenhouse gas emissions cuts. Senior Chinese negotiator, Su Wei, characterized the goals of the world's second largest greenhouse gas emitter -- the United States -- as "not notable," and the European Union's target as "not enough." Su Wei also took issue with Japan for setting implausible preconditions.

On Dec. 11, 2009, China demanded that developed and wealthy countries in Copenhagen should help deliver a real agreement on climate change by delivering on their promises to reduce carbon emissions and provide financial support for developing countries to adapt to global warming. In so doing, China's Vice Foreign Minister He Yafei said his country was hoping that a "balanced outcome" would emerge from the discussions at the summit. Echoing the position of the Australian government, He Yafei spoke of a draft agreement as follows: "The final document we're going to adopt needs to be taking into account the needs and aspirations of all countries, particularly the most vulnerable ones."

China's Vice Foreign Minister emphasized the fact that climate change was "a matter of survival" for developing countries, and accordingly, such countries need wealthier and more developed countries to accentuate not only their pledges of emissions reduction targets, but also their financial commitments under the aforementioned United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. To that end, scientists and leaders of small island states in the Indian Ocean, the Pacific Ocean and the Caribbean Sea, have highlighted the existential threat posed by global warming and the concomitant rise in sea level.

China aside, attention was also on India -- another major player in the developing world and a country with an industrializing economy that was impacting the environment. At issue was the Indian government's decision to set a carbon intensity target, which would slow emissions growth by up to 25 percent by the 2020 deadline. This strong position was resisted by some elements in India, who argued that their country should not be taking such a strong position when developed wealthy countries were yet to show accountability for their previous commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The matter grew so heated that the members of the opposition stormed out of the parliament in protest as Indian Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh defended the policy. But the political pressure at home in India was leaving the Indian delegation in Copenhagen in a state of chaos as well. In fact, India's top environmental negotiator refused to travel to Copenhagen in protest of the government's newly-announced stance.

China and India were joined by Brazil and South Africa in the crafting of a draft document calling for a new global climate treaty to be completed by June 2010. Of concern has been the realization that there was insufficient time to find concurrence on a full legal treaty, which would leave countries only with a politically-binding text by the time the summit at Copenhagen closed. But Guyana's leader, President Bharrat Jagdeo, warned that the summit in Denmark would be

Syria Review 2016 Page 508 of 540 pages Syria classified as a failure unless a binding document was agreed upon instead of just political consensus. He urged his cohorts to act with purpose saying, "Never before have science, economics, geo-strategic self-interest and politics intersected in such a way on an issue that impacts everyone on the planet."

Likewise, Tuvalu demanded that legally binding agreements emerge from Copenhagen. Its proposal was supported by many of the vulnerable countries, from small island states and sub- Saharan Africa, all of whom warned of the catastrophic impact of climate change on their citizens. Tuvalu also called for more aggressive action, such as an amendment to the 1992 agreement, which would focus on sharp greenhouse gas emissions and the accepted rise in temperatures, due to the impact the rise in seas. The delegation from Kiribati joined the call by drawing attention to the fact that one village had to be abandoned due to waist-high water, and more such effects were likely to follow. Kiribati's Foreign Secretary, Tessie Lambourne, warned that the people of Kiribati could well be faced with no homeland in the future saying, "Nobody in this room would want to leave their homeland." But despite such impassioned pleas and irrespective of warnings from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that the rise in sea level from melting polar ice caps would deleteriously affect low-lying atolls such as such as Tuvalu and Kiribati in the Pacific, and the Maldives in the Indian Ocean, the oil-giant Saudi Arabia was able to block this move.

Meanwhile, within the developed countries, yet another power struggle was brewing. The European Union warned it would only agree to raise its target of 20 percent greenhouse gas emissions reductions to 30 percent if the United States demonstrated that it would do more to reduce its own emissions. It was unknown if such pressure would yield results. United States President Barack Obama offered a "provisional" 2020 target of 17 percent reductions, noting that he could not offer greater concessions at Copenhagen due to resistance within the United States Congress, which was already trying to pass a highly controversial "cap and trade" emissions legislation. However, should that emissions trading bill fail in the Senate, the United States Environment Protection Agency's declaration that greenhouse gases pose a danger to human health and the environment was expected to facilitate further regulations and limits on power plants and factories at the national level. These moves could potentially strengthen the Obama administration's offering at Copenhagen. As well, President Obama also signaled that he would be willing to consider the inclusion of international forestry credits.

Such moves indicated willingness by the Obama administration to play a more constructive role on the international environmental scene than its predecessor, the Bush administration. Indeed, ahead of his arrival at the Copenhagen summit, President Barack Obama's top environmental advisors promised to work on a substantial climate change agreement. To that end, United States Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson said at a press conference, "We are seeking robust engagement with all of our partners around the world." But would this pro- engagement assertion yield actual results?

Syria Review 2016 Page 509 of 540 pages Syria

By Dec. 12, 2009, details related to a draft document prepared by Michael Zammit Cutajar, the head of the Ad-hoc Working Group on Long-Term Cooperative Action, were released at the Copenhagen climate conference. Included in the document were calls for countries to make major reductions in carbon emissions over the course of the next decade. According to the Washington Post, industrialized countries were called on to make cuts of between 25 percent and 40 percent below 1990 levels -- reductions that were far more draconian than the United States was likely to accept. As discussed above, President Obama had offered a provisional reduction target of 17 percent. The wide gap between the released draft and the United States' actual stated position suggested there was much more negotiating in the offing if a binding agreement could be forged, despite the Obama administration's claims that it was seeking greater engagement on this issue.

In other developments, the aforementioned call for financial support of developing countries to deal with the perils of climate change was partly answered by the European Union on Dec. 11, 2009. The European bloc pledged an amount of 2.4 billion euros (US$3.5 billion) annually from 2010 to 2012. Environment Minister Andreas Carlgren of Sweden -- the country that holds the rotating presidency of the European Union at the time of the summit -- put his weight behind the notion of a "legally binding deal." Meanwhile, Yvo de Boer, a top United Nations climate change official, focused less on the essence of the agreement and more on tangible action and effects saying, "Copenhagen will only be a success if it delivers significant and immediate action that begins the day the conference ends."

The division between developed and developing countries in Copenhagen reached new heights on Dec. 14, 2009, when some of the poor and less developed countries launched a boycott at the summit. The move, which was spurred by African countries but backed by China and India, appeared to be geared toward redirecting attention and primary responsibility to the wealthier and more industrialized countries. The impasse was resolved after the wealthier and more industrialized countries offered assurances that they did not intend on shirking from their commitments to reducing greenhouse gases. As a result, the participating countries ceased the boycott.

Outside the actual summit, thousands of protestors had gathered to demand crucial global warming, leading to clashes between police and demonstrators elsewhere in the Danish capital city. There were reports of scattered violence across Copenhagen and more than 1,000 people were arrested.

Nevertheless, by the second week of the climate change summit, hopes of forging a strong deal were eroding as developed and developing nations remained deadlocked on sharing cuts in greenhouse gases, and particularly on the matters of financing and temperature goals. In a bid to shore up support for a new climate change, United States President Barack Obama joined other world leaders in Copenhagen. On Dec. 14, 2009, there was a standoff brewing between the United States and China. At issue was China's refusal to accept international monitoring of its

Syria Review 2016 Page 510 of 540 pages Syria expressed targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The United States argued that China's opposition to verification could be a deal-breaker.

By the close of the summit, the difficult process eventually resulted in some consensus being cultivated. A draft text called for $100 billion a year by 2020 to assist poor nations cope with climate change, while aiming to limit global warming to two degrees Celsius compared with pre- industrial levels. The deal also included specific targets for developed countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and called for reductions by developing countries as a share of their economies. Also included in the agreement was a mechanism to verify compliance. The details of the agreement were supported by President Barack Obama, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.

This draft would stand as an interim agreement, with a legally-binding international pact unlikely to materialize until 2010. In this way, the summit in Copenhagen failed to achieve its central objective, which was to negotiate a successor to the Kyoto Protocol on greenhouse gas emissions.

Editor's Note

In the background of these developments was the growing global consciousness related to global warming and climate change. Indeed, as the Copenhagen summit was ongoing, it was clear there was enormous concurrence on the significance of the stakes with an editorial on the matter of climate change being published in 56 newspapers in 45 countries. That editorial warned that without global action, climate change would "ravage our planet." Meanwhile, a global survey taken by Globescan showed that concern over global warming had exponentially increased from 1998 -- when only 20 percent of respondents believed it to be a serious problem -- to 64 percent in 2009. Such survey data, however, was generated ahead of the accusations by climate change skeptics that some climate scientists may have overstated the case for global warming, based on emails derived in an illicit manner from a British University.

Special Entry: Climate change talks in Doha in Qatar extend life of Kyoto Protocol (2012)

December 2012 saw climate talks ensue in the Qatari city of Doha as representatives from countries across the world gathered to discuss the fate of the Kyoto Protocol, which seeks to minimize greenhouse gas emissions. The summit yielded results with decisions made (1) to extend the Kyoto Protocol until 2020, and (2) for wealthier countries to compensate poorer countries for the losses and damage incurred as a result of climate change.

In regards to the second matter, Malia Talakai of Nauru, a leading negotiator for the Alliance of Small Island States, explained the necessity of the compensation package as follows: “We are trying to say that if you pollute you must help us.”

Syria Review 2016 Page 511 of 540 pages Syria

This measure was being dubbed the "Loss and Damage" mechanism, and was being linked with United States President Barack Obama's request for $60 billion from Congress to deal with the devastation caused by Hurricane Sandy months before. The sight of a hurricane bearing down on the northern Atlantic seaboard, along with the reality of the scope of reconstruction, appeared to have illustrated the economic costs of climate change -- not so much as a distant environmental issue -- but as a danger to the quotidian lives of people. Still, there was blame to be placed on the United States and European countries -- some of world's largest emitters -- for failing to do more to reduce emissions.

To that latter end, there was in fact little progress made on the central issue of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Had those emissions been reduced, there would have been less of a need to financially deal with the devastation caused by climate change. One interpretation was that the global community was accepting the fact that industrialization was contributing to global warming, which had deleterious effects on the polar ice caps and concomitantly on the rise of sea level, with devastating effects for small island nations. Thus, wealthier countries were willing to pay around $10 billion a year through 2020, effectively in "damages," to the poor countries that could be viewed as the "collateral damage" of industrial progress. But damages today could potentially be destruction tomorrow, leaving in place the existential challenges and burdens to be born by some of the world's smallest and least wealthy island countries.

Perhaps not surprisingly, the representative for the small island nation states at the Doha summit responded with ire, characterizing the lack of progress on reducing emissions as follows: "We see the package before us as deeply deficient in mitigation (carbon cuts) and finance. It's likely to lock us on the trajectory to a 3,4,5C rise in global temperatures, even though we agreed to keep the global average temperature rise of 1.5C to ensure survival of all islands. There is no new finance (for adapting to climate change and getting clean energy) -- only promises that something might materialize in the future. Those who are obstructive need to talk not about how their people will live, but whether our people will live."

Indeed, in most small island countries not just in the Pacific, but also the Caribbean and Indian Ocean, ecological concerns and the climate crisis have been dominant themes with dire life and death consequences looming in the background for their people. Small island nations in these region are already at risk from the rise of sea-level, tropical cyclones, floods. But their very livelihoods of fishing and subsistence farming were also at risk as a result of ecological and environmental changes. Increasingly high storm surges can wipe out entire villages and contaminate water supplies. Accordingly, the very existence of island nations, such as Kiribati and Tuvalu, are at severe risk of being obliterated from the map. Yet even with the existential threat of being wiped off the map in the offing, the international community has been either slow or restrictive in its efforts to deal with global warming, climate change, economic and ecological damage, as well as the emerging global challenge of environmental refugees.

Syria Review 2016 Page 512 of 540 pages Syria

A 2012 report from the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) and the Pacific Regional Environment Program underlined the concerns of small island nations and their people as it concluded that the livelihoods of approximately 10 million people in Pacific island communities were increasingly vulnerable to climate change. In fact, low-lying islands in that region would likely confront losses of up to 18 percent of gross domestic product due to climate change, according to the report. The report covers 21 countries and territories, including Fiji, Kiribati, Samoa and Tonga, and recommended environmental legislation intended to deal with the climate crisis facing the small island countries particularly. As noted by David Sheppard, the director general of the Pacific Regional Environment Program that co-sponsored this study: “The findings... emphasize the need more than ever to raise the bar through collective actions that address the region's environmental needs at all levels."

Regardless of the failures of the summit in Qatar (discussed above), the meeting did facilitate a process starting in 2015, which would bind both wealthy and poor countries together in the mission of forging a new binding treaty that would replace the Kyoto Protocol and tackle the central causes of climate change.

For more information on the threats faced in small island nations by climate change and the measures being undertaken to lobby for international action, please see the Alliance for Small Island States available online at the URL: http://aosis.org/

Special Report

COP 21 summit in Paris ends with historic agreement to tackle climate change; rare international consensus formed on environmental crisis facing the planet (2015) --

In mid-December 2015, the highly-anticipated United Nations climate conference of parties (COP) in Paris, France, ended with a historic agreement. In fact, it would very likely be understood as the most significant international agreement signed by all the recognized countries of the world since the Cold War. Accordingly, the Paris Agreement was being distinguished as the first multilateral pact that would compel all countries across the world to cut its carbon emissions -- one of the major causes of increasing greenhouse gas emissions, which contribute to global warming, and its deleterious effects ranging from the dangerous rise in sea level to catastrophic climate change.

The accord, which was dubbed to be the "Paris Agreement," was the work of rigorous diplomacy and fervent environmental advocacy, and it aimed to address the climate change crisis facing the planet. As many as 195 countries were represented in the negotiations that led to the landmark climate deal. Indeed, it was only after weeks of passionate debate that international concurrence

Syria Review 2016 Page 513 of 540 pages Syria was reached in addressing the environmental challenges confronting the world, with particular attention to moving beyond fossil fuels and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

The success of the COP 21 summit in Paris and the emergence of the landmark Paris Agreement was, to some extent, attributed to the efforts of France's Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius who presided over the negotiations. The French foreign minister's experience and credentials as a seasoned diplomat and respected statesman paid dividends. He skillfully guided the delegates from almost 200 countries and interest groups along the negotiations process, with ostensibly productive results and a reasonably robust deal to show for it.

On Dec. 12, 2015, French Foreign Minister Fabius officially adopted the agreement, declaring: "I now invite the COP to adopt the decision entitled Paris Agreement outlined in the document. Looking out to the room I see that the reaction is positive, I see no objections. The Paris agreement is adopted." Once Foreign Minister Fabius' gavel was struck, symbolically inaugurating the Paris Agreement into force, the COP delegate rushed to their feet with loud and bouyant cheers as well as thunderous applause.

In general, the Paris Agreement was being hailed as a victory for enviromental activists and a triumph for international diplomats, while at the same time being understood as simply an initial -- and imperfect -- move in the direction of a sustainable future. China's chief negotiator, Xie Zhenhua, issued this message, saying that while the accord was not ideal, it should "not prevent us from marching historical steps forward."

United States President Barack Obama lauded the deal as both "ambitious" and "historic," and the work of strenuous multilateral negotiations as he declared, "Together, we've shown what's possible when the world stands as one." The United States leader acknowledged that the accord was not "perfect," but he reminded the critics that it was "the best chance to save the one planet we have. "

Former United States Vice President Al Gore, one of the world's most well known environmental advocates, issued a lengthy statement on the accompishments ensconced in the Paris Agreement. He highlighted the fact that the Paris Agreement was a first step towards a future with a reduced carbon footprint on Planet Earth as he said, "The components of this agreement -- including a strong review mechanism to enhance existing commitments and a long-term goal to eliminate global-warming pollution this century -- are essential to unlocking the necessary investments in our future. No agreement is perfect, and this one must be strengthened over time, but groups across every sector of society will now begin to reduce dangerous carbon pollution through the framework of this agreement."

The central provisions of the Paris Agreement included the following items:

- Greenhouse gas emissions should peak as quickly as possible, with a move towards balancing

Syria Review 2016 Page 514 of 540 pages Syria energy sources, and ultimately the decrease of greenhouse gases in the second half of this century - Global temperature increase would be limited to 1.5 degrees Centigrade above pre-industrial levels and would be held "well below" the two degrees Centigrade threshold - Progress on these goals would be reviewed every five years beginning in 2020 with new greenhouse gas reduction targets issued every five years - $100 billion would be expended each year in climate finance for developing countries to move forward with green technologies, with further climate financing to be advanced in the years beyond

It should be noted that there both legally binding and voluntary elements contained within the Paris Agreement. Specifically, the submission of an emissions reduction target and the regular review of that goal would be legally mandatory for all countries. Stated differently, there would be a system in place by which experts would be able to track the carbon-cutting progress of each country. At the same time, the specific targets to be set by countries would be determined at the discretion of the countries, and would not be binding. While there was some criticism over this non-binding element, the fact of the matter was that the imposition of emissions targets was believed to be a major factor in the failure of climate change talks in Copenhagen, Denmark, in 2009.

In 2015, the talks faced challenges as several countries, such as China and India, objected to conditions that would stymie economic and development. In order to avoid that kind of landmine, a system Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) was developed and formed the basis of the accord. As such, the Paris Agreement would, in fact, facilitate economic growth and development, as well as technological progress, but with the goal of long-term ecological sustainability based on low carbon sources. In fact, the agreement heralded as "the beginning of the end of the fossil fuel era." As noted by Nick Mabey, the head of the climate diplomacy organization E3G, said, "Paris means governments will go further and faster to tackle climate change than ever before. The transition to a low carbon economy is now unstoppable, ensuring the end of the fossil fuel age."

A particular sticking point in the agreement was the $100 billion earmarked for climate financing for developing countries to transition from traditional fossil fuels to green energy technologies and a low carbon future. In 2014, a report by the International Energy Agency indicated that the cost of that transition would actually be around $44 trillion by the mid-century -- an amount that would render the $100 billion being promised to be a drop in the proverbial bucket. However, the general expectation was that the Republican-controlled Senate in the United States, which would have to ratify the deal in that country, was not interested in contributing significant funds for the cause of climate change.

A key strength of the Paris Agreement was the ubiquitous application of measures to all countries. Of note was the frequently utilized concept of "flexibility" with regard to the Paris Agreement. Specifically, the varying capacities of the various countries in meeting their obligations would be

Syria Review 2016 Page 515 of 540 pages Syria anticipated and accorded flexibility. This aspect presented something of a departure from the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which drew a sharp distinction between developed and developing countries, and mandated a different set of obligations for those categories of countries. Thus, under Kyoto, China and India were not held to the same standards as the United States and European countries. In the Paris Agreement, there would be commitments from all countries across the globe.

Another notable strength of the Paris Agreement was the fact that the countries of the world were finally able to reach consensus on the vital necessity to limit global temperature increases to 1.5 degrees Centrigrade. Ahead of the global consensus on the deal, and as controversy continued to surface over the targeted global temperature limits, the leaders of island countries were sounding the alarm about the melting of the Polar ice caps and the associated rise in seal level. Prime Minister Enele Sopoaga of Tuvalu issued this dismal reminder: “Tuvalu’s future … is already bleak and any further temperature increase will spell the total demise of Tuvalu. No leader in this room carries such a level of worry and responsibility. Just imagine you are in my shoes, what would you do?” It was thus something of a victory for environmental advocates that the countries of the world could find cnsensus on the lower number -- 1.5 degrees rather than 2 degrees.

A significant weak point with regard to the Paris deal was a "loss and damage" provision, which anticipates that even with all the new undertakings intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and move to a low carbon future, there would nonetheless be unavoidable climate change consequences. Those consequences ranged from the loss of arable land for farmers as well as soil erosion and contamination of potable water by sea water, to the decimation of territory in coastal zones and on small islands, due to the rise in sea level, with entire small island countries being rendered entirely uninhabitable. The reality was that peoples' homes across the world would be destroyed along with their way of life.

With that latter catastrophic effect being a clear and present danger for small island countries, the Association of Small Island States (AOSIS) demanded that the developed world acknowledge its responsibility for this irreversible damage.. Despite the fact that greenhouse gas emissions and the ensuing plague of global warming was, indeed, the consequence of development in the West (the United States and Europe) and the large power house countries, such as Russia, China and India, there was no appetite by those countries to sign on to unlimited liability. Under the Paris Agreement, there was a call for research on insurance mechanisms that would address loss and damage issues, with recommendations to come in the future.

The call for research was being regarded as an evasion of sorts and constituted the weakest aspect of the Paris Agreement. Not surprisingly, a coalition of small island nations demanded a "Marshall Plan" for the Pacific. Borrowing the term "Marshall Plan" from the post-World War II reconstruction effort, the coalition of Pacific island nation, which included Kiribati, Tuvalu, Fiji, and the Marshall Islands, called for an initiative that would include investment in renewable energy

Syria Review 2016 Page 516 of 540 pages Syria and shoreline protection, cultural preservation, economic assistance for economies in transition, and a plan for migration and resettlement for these countries as they confront the catastrophic effects of the melting of the Polar ice caps and the concomitant rise in sea level. The precise contours of the initiative remained unknown, unspecified, and a mere exercise in theory at the time of writing. Yet such an initiative would, at some point, have to be addressed, given the realities of climate change and the slow motion calamity unfolding each day for low-lying island nations across the world.

As noted by Vice President Greg Stone of Conservation International, who also functions as an adviser to the government of Kiribati, “Imagine living in a place where you know it’s going to go away someday, but you don’t know what day that wave’s going to come over and wash your home away." He added, “It’s a disaster we know is going to happen.” Meanwhile, the intervening years promised to be filled with hardship for small island nations, such as Kiribati. Stone explained, “For every inch of sea-level rise, these islands lose 10 feet of their freshwater table to saltwater intrusion,” Stone explained. “So it’s not just about the day the water finally goes over the island; it’s also about the day that there’s just not enough water left and everyone has to move off the island.” Presaging the future for island nations that could face submersion, Stone said, “If you look ahead 50 years, a country like Kiribati could become the first aqueous nation. possibility of migration. That is, they own this big patch of ocean, and they administer it from elsewhere.”

Foreign Minister Minister Tony Debrum of the Marshall Islands emerged as the champion advocating on behalf of small island nation states and a loose coalition of concerned countries from the Pacific to the Caribbean, but with support from the United States. He addressed the comprehensive concerns of small island nations regarding the weaknesses of the deal, while simultaneously making clear that the Paris Agreement signified hope for the countries most at risk. In a formal statement, Debrum declared: "We have made history today. Emissions targets are still way off track, but this agreement has the tools to ramp up ambition, and brings a spirit of hope that we can rise to this challenge. I can go back home to my people and say we now have a pathway to survival.” Debrum highlighted the imperatives of Pacific island nations, saying, “Our High Ambition Coalition was the lightning rod we needed to lift our sights and expectations for a strong agreement here in Paris. We were joined by countries representing more than half the world. We said loud and clear that a bare-bones, minimalist agreement would not fly. We instead demanded an agreement to mark a turning point in history, and the beginning of our journey to the post-carbon era.”

Debrum of the Marshall Islands espoused the quintessential synopsis of the accord and its effects for those most likely to be affected by climate change as he noted, “Climate change won’t stop overnight, and my country is not out of the firing line just yet, but today we all feel a little safer.”

Editor's Entry on Environmental Policy:

Syria Review 2016 Page 517 of 540 pages Syria

The low-lying Pacific island nations of the world, including Kiribati, Tuvalu, the Marshall Islands, Fiji, among others, are vulnerable to the threats posed by global warming and cimate change, derived from carbon emissions, and resulting in the rise in sea level. Other island nations in the Caribbean, as well as poor countries with coastal zones, were also at particular risk of suffering the deleterious effects of climate change.

Political policy in these countries are often connected to ecological issues, which have over time morphed into an existential crisis of sorts. Indeed, ecological concerns and the climate crisis have also been dominant themes with life and death consequences for the people of island nations in the Pacific. Indeed, the very livelihoods of fishing and subsistence farming remain at risk as a result of ecological and environmental changes. Yet even so, these countries are threatened by increasingly high storm surges, which could wipe out entire villages and contaminate water supplies. Moreover, because these are low lying island nations, the sustained rise in sea level can potentially lead to the terrain of these countries being unihabitable at best, and submerged at worst. Stated in plain terms, these countries are at severe risk of being obliterated from the map and their plight illuminates the emerging global challenge of environmental refugees. In these manifold senses, climate change is the existential crisis of the contemporary era.

Since the time of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, there have been efforts aimed at extending the life of that agreement, with an eye on minimizing greenhouse gas emissions, and thus minimizing the effects of climate change. Those endeavors have largely ended in failure, as exemplified by the unsuccessful Copenhagen talks in 2009 and the fruitless Doha talks in 2012 respectively. The success of the COP 21 talks in France, with the adoption of the landmark Paris Agreement in 2015, was regarded as the first glimmer of hope. Not only did the Paris Agreement signify the triumph of international diplomacy and global consensus, but it also marked the start of the end of the fossil fuel era, with the path forward toward a low carbon future reliant on greener technologies. Most crucially, the Paris Agreement stood as the first significant response in recent times to the central challenge of climate change and its quotidian effects on the lives of real human beings across the world.

1. Major International Environmental Accords:

General Environmental Concerns

Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context, Espoo, 1991.

Accords Regarding Atmosphere

Syria Review 2016 Page 518 of 540 pages Syria

Annex 16, vol. II (Environmental Protection: Aircraft Engine Emissions) to the 1044 Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation, Montreal, 1981

Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (LRTAP), Geneva, 1079

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), New York, 1002

Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer, Vienna, 1985 including the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Depleted the Ozone Layer, Montreal, 1987

Accords Regarding Hazardous Substances

Convention on the Ban of the Import into Africa and the Control of Transboundary Movements and Management of Hazardous Wastes within Africa, Bamako, 1991

Convention on Civil Liability for Damage Caused during Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road, Rail and Inland Navigation Vessels (CRTD), Geneva, 1989

Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal (Basel Convention), Basel, 1989

Convention on the Transboundary Effects of Industrial Accidents, Helsinki, 1992

Convention to Ban the Importation into Forum Island Countries of Hazardous and Radioactive Wastes and to Control the Transboundary Movement and Management of Hazardous Wastes within the South Pacific Region (Waigani Convention), Waigani, 1995

European Agreement Concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road (ADR), Geneva 1957

FAO International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides, Rome, 1985

2. Major International Marine Accords:

Global Conventions

Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter (London Convention 1972), London, 1972

Syria Review 2016 Page 519 of 540 pages Syria

International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by Protocol of 1978 relation thereto (MARPOL 73/78), London, 1973 and 1978

International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage 1969 (1969 CLC), Brussels, 1969, 1976, and 1984

International Convention on the Establishment of an International Fund for Compensation for Oil Pollution Damage 1971 (1971 Fund Convention), Brussels, 1971

Convention on Liability and Compensation for Damage in Connection with the Carriage of Hazardous and Noxious Substances by Sea (HNS), London 1996

International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response, and Co-operation (OPRC), London, 1990

International Convention Relation to Intervention on the High Seas in Cases of Oil Pollution Casualties (Intervention Convention), Brussels, 1969

United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), Montego Bay, 1982

Regional Conventions

Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping from Ships and Aircraft (Oslo Convention), Oslo, 1972

Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution from Land-based Sources (Paris Convention), Paris, 1974

Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North East Atlantic (OSPAR Convention), Paris, 1992

Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea Area (1974 Helsinki Convention), Helsinki 1974

Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea Area (1992 Helsinki Convention), Helsinki 1992

Conventions within the UNEP Regional Seas Programme

Syria Review 2016 Page 520 of 540 pages Syria

Convention on the Protection of the Black Sea against Pollution, Bucharest, 1992

Convention for the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment of the Wider Caribbean Region, Cartagena de Indias, 1983

Convention for the Protection, Management, and Development of the Marine and Coastal Environment of the Eastern African Region, Nairobi, 1985

Kuwait Regional Convention for Co-operation on the Protection of the Marine Environment from Pollution, Kuwait, 1978

Convention for the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment and Coastal Region of the Mediterranean Sea (Barcelona Convention), Barcelona, 1976

Regional Convention for the Conservation of the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden Environment, Jeddah, 1982

Convention for the Protection of the Natural Resources and Environment of the South Pacific Region, Noumea, 1986

Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment and Coastal Area of the South-East Pacific, Lima, 1981

Convention for Co-operation in the Protection and Development of the Marine and Coastal Environment of the West and Central African Region, Abidjan, 1981

3. Major Conventions Regarding Living Resources:

Marine Living Resources

Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR), Canberra, 1980

International Convention for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), Rio de Janeiro, 1966

International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW), Washington, 1946

Nature Conservation and Terrestrial Living Resources

Syria Review 2016 Page 521 of 540 pages Syria

Antarctic Treaty, Washington, D.C., 1959

Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (World Heritage Convention), Paris, 1972

Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), Nairobi, 1992

Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS), Bonn, 1979

Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), Washington, D.C., 1973

Convention on Wetlands of International Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar Convention), Ramsar, 1971

Convention to Combat Desertification (CCD), Paris 1994

FAO International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources, Rome, 1983

International Tropical Timber Agreement, 1994 (ITTA, 1994), Geneva, 1994

Freshwater Resources

Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes, Helsinki, 1992

4. Major Conventions Regarding Nuclear Safety:

Convention on Assistance in the Case of a Nuclear Accident or Radiological Emergency (Assistance Convention), Vienna, 1986

Convention on Early Notification of a Nuclear Accident (Notification Convention), Vienna, 1986

Convention on Nuclear Safety, Vienna, 1994

Vienna Convention on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage, Vienna, 1963

5. Major Intergovernmental Organizations

Syria Review 2016 Page 522 of 540 pages Syria

Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD)

European Union (EU): Environment

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)

Global Environment Facility (GEF)

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)

International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES)

International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD)

International Labour Organization (ILO)

International Maritime Organization (IMO)

International Monetary Fund (IMF)

International Oil Pollution Compensation Funds (IOPC Funds)

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Environment Policy Committee (EPOC)

United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF)

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)

United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)

United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)

United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO)

United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA)

World Bank

World Food Programme (WFP)

Syria Review 2016 Page 523 of 540 pages Syria

World Health Organization (WHO)

World Meteorological Organization (WMO)

World Trade Organization (WTO)

6. Major Non-Governmental Organizations

Atmosphere Action Network East Asia (AANEA)

Climate Action Network (CAN)

Consumers International (CI)

Earth Council

Earthwatch Institute

Environmental Liaison Centre International (ELCI)

European Environmental Bureau (EEB)

Forest Stewardship Council (FSC)

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI)

Greenpeace International

International Chamber of Commerce (ICC)

International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU)

International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF)

International Solar Energy Society (ISES)

IUCN-The World Conservation Union

Pesticide Action Network (PAN)

Syria Review 2016 Page 524 of 540 pages Syria

Sierra Club

Society for International Development (SID)

Third World Network (TWN)

Water Environment Federation (WEF)

Women's Environment and Development Organization (WEDO)

World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD)

World Federalist Movement (WFM)

World Resources Institute (WRI)

World Wide Fund For Nature (WWF)

7. Other Networking Instruments

Arab Network for Environment and Development (RAED)

Global Legislators for a Balanced Environment (GLOBE)

Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe (REC)

United Nations Non-Governmental Liaison Service (UN-NGLS)

Syria Review 2016 Page 525 of 540 pages Syria

Syria Review 2016 Page 526 of 540 pages Syria

Appendices

Syria Review 2016 Page 527 of 540 pages Syria

Bibliography

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Sources: Key Data

Altapedia. URL: http://www.atlapedia.com/online/country_index.htm

Ethnologue. URL: http://www.ethnologue.com

Geobase Global Statistics. URL: http://www.geoba.se

Infoplease: URL: http://www.infoplease.com

The Statesman's Year Book 2006. Barry Turner, ed. London: St. Martin's Press.

United States Department of State, Background Notes. URL: http://www.state.gov/www/background_notes/index.htm

United States Central Intelligence Agency, World Factbook. Washington, D.C.: Printing and Photography Group. URL: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/index.html

World Bank. URL: http://www.worldbank.org/

World Climate Data Online. URL: http://www.worldclimate.com

Methodology Note for Demographic Data:

The demographic numbers for cities and national populations listed in CountryWatch content are derived from the Geoba.se website, which analyzes data from the World Bank. The current demographic numbers displayed on the Countrywatch website are reflective of the latest available estimates.

The demographic information for language, ethnicity and religion listed in CountryWatch content is

Syria Review 2016 Page 528 of 540 pages Syria derived from a mix of sources including the Altapedia, Central Intelligence Agency Factbook, Infoplease, and State Department Background Notes.

Sources: Political Overview

Agence France Presse. URL: http://www.afp.com/en/

BBC International News. URL: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/ (Various editions and dates as cited in particular reviews)

Britannica Book of the Year. 1998-present. David Calhoun, ed. Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc.

Britannica Online URL :http://www.eb.com

Britannica Year in Review. URL: http://www.britannica.com/browse/year

Chiefs of State and Cabinet Members of Foreign Governments. URL: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/chiefs/index.html

Christian Science Monitor. URL: http://www.csmonitor.com/ (Various editions and dates as cited in particular reviews)

CNN International News. URL:http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/ (Various editions and dates as cited in particular reviews)

Current Leaders of Nations. 1997. Jennifer Mossman, ed. Detroit: Gale Research

The Economist Magazine. (Various editions and dates as cited in particular reviews)

The Economist Country Briefings. URL: http://www.economist.com/countries/

Eldis Country Profiles. URL: http://www.eldis.org/country/index.htm

Elections Around the World. URL: http://www.electionworld.org/

Election Resources. URL: http://electionresources.org/

Europa World Yearbook 1999. Vols. I & II. 1999. London: Europa Publications Ltd.

Syria Review 2016 Page 529 of 540 pages Syria

Europe World Online. URL: http://www.europaworld.com/pub/

Financial Times. URL: http://www.financialtimes.com

Foreign Government Resources. URL: http://www.lib.umich.edu/govdocs/foreign.html

Human Rights Watch. URL: http://www.hrw.org

IFES Election Guide. URL: http://www.electionguide.org

International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance. URL: http://www.idea.int/

International Who's Who 1997-1998, 61st Edition. 1997. London: Europa Publications Ltd.

Leadership Views, Chiefs of State Online. URL : http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/chiefs/index.html

Library of Congress Country Studies. URL: http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/cshome.html

New Encyclopedia Britannica. 1998. Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica Inc.

New York Times. URL: http://www.nytimes.com (Various editions and dates as cited in particular reviews)

Patterns of Global Terrorism. n.d. United States Department of State. Washington D.C.: United States Department of State Publications.

Political Handbook of the World. n.d. Arthur S. Banks, Thomas C. Muller, ed. Binghamton, New York: CSA Publications.

Political Reference Almanac Online. URL: http://www.polisci.com/almanac/nations.htm

Reuters News. URL: http://www.reuters.com/

Rulers. URL: http://rulers.org/

The Guardian Online. URL: http://www.guardian.co.uk/ (Various editions and dates as cited in particular reviews)

The Statesman's Year-Book 2006. Barry Turner, ed. London: St. Martin's Press.

Syria Review 2016 Page 530 of 540 pages Syria

United Nations Development Programme. URL: http://hdr.undp.org

United Nations Refugee Agency. URL: http://www.unhcr.org

United States Central Intelligence Agency, World Factbook.Washington, D.C.: Printing and Photography Group. URL: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/index.html

United States Department of State, World Military Expenditures and Arms Transfers (WMEAT) URL : http://www.state.gov/www/global/arms/bureau_ac/reports_ac.html

United States Department of State, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices. URL: http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2002/18245.htm

United States Department of State, Background Notes. URL: http://www.state.gov/www/background_notes/index.html

Virtual Library: International Relations Resources. URL: http://www.etown.edu/vl/countgen.html

World Bank: Governance Indicators. URL: http://info.worldbank.org/governance

-- See also list of News Wires services below, which are also used for research purposes. --

Note on Edition Dates:

The earlier edition dates are noted above because they were used to formulate the original Country Reviews and serve as the baseline for some of the information covered. Later editions have been used in some cases, and are cited as such, while other more recent online resources (cited above) contain recent and ever-updated data sets used for research.

Sources: Economic Overview

BP Statistical Review of World Energy. URL: http://www.bp.com/genericsection.do? categoryId=92&contentId=7005893

BP Statistical Review of World Energy, June 1998. 1998 to present. Page 1.C. London: The British Petroleum Company.

International Monetary Fund, Direction of Trade Statistics Yearbook. Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund Publication Services.

Syria Review 2016 Page 531 of 540 pages Syria

International Monetary Fund, International Financial Statistics. 1998 to present. Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund Publication Services.

International Monetary Fund, International Financial Statistics Yearbook. 1999 to present. Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund Publication Services.

International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook, May 1999. 1999 to present. Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund Publication Services.

International Labour Office, World Employment Report, 1998-99. 1998 to present. Geneva: International Labour Office.

United Nations Statistical Division Online. URL: http://unstats.un.org/unsd/default.htm

United Nations Statistics Division, Monthly Bulletin of Statistics (MBS On Line), November 1999 Edition. 1999 to present. New York: United Nations.

United Nations, Statistical Yearbook, 43rd Issue. 1999. 1999 to present New York: United Nations.

United Nations, Food & Agricultural Organization, FAOSTAT Database. URL : http://apps.fao.org/ United Nations, Comtrade Data Base, http://comtrade.un.org/

United States Department of Energy, Country Analysis Briefs. URL:http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/contents.html

United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics Database

United States Geological Service, Mineral Information

United States Department of State, Country Commercial Guides. Washington, D.C. United States of America. URL:http://www.state.gov/www/about_state/business/com_guides/index.html

The World Bank, Global Development Finance, Country Tables. 1999 to present. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank.

The World Bank Group, World Development Indicators. 1999 to present. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank.

Yearbook of Tourism Statistics, World Tourism Organization. 1998 to present. Madrid: The World Tourism Organization.

Syria Review 2016 Page 532 of 540 pages Syria

Note on Edition Dates:

The earlier edition dates are noted above because they were used to formulate the original country reviews and serve as the baseline for some of the information covered. Later editions have been used in some cases, and are cited as such, while other more recent online resources (cited above) contain recent and ever-updated data sets used for research.

Methodology Notes for Economic Data:

Estimates by CountryWatch.com of GDP in dollars in most countries are made by converting local currency GDP data from the International Monetary Fund World Economic Outlook to US dollars by market exchange rates estimated from the International Monetary Fund International Financial Statistics and projected out by the CountryWatch Macroeconomic Forecast. Real GDP was estimated by deflating current dollar values by the US GDP Implicit Price Deflator.

Exceptions to this method were used for: • Bosnia-Herzegovina • Nauru • Cuba • Palau • Holy See • San Marino • Korea, North • Serbia & Montenegro • Liberia • Somalia • Liechtenstein • Tonga • Monaco • Tuvalu

In these cases, other data and/or estimates by CountryWatch.com were utilized.

Investment Overview

Corruption and Transparency Index. URL: http://www.transparency.org/documents/cpi/2001/cpi2001.html#cpi

Deloitte Tax Guides. URL: http://www.deloittetaxguides.com

Syria Review 2016 Page 533 of 540 pages Syria

Trade Policy Reviews by the World Trade Organization . URL: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tpr_e/tp_rep_e.htm#bycountry

United States Department of Energy, Country Analysis Briefs. URL: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/contents.html

United States Department of State, Background Notes. URL: http://www.state.gov/www/background_notes/index.html

United States Department of State, Country Commercial Guides. 1996-2006. Washington, D.C. United States of America. URL: http://www.state.gov/www/about_state/business/com_guides/index.html

World Bank: Doing Business. URL: http://www.doingbusiness.org

World Bank: Governance Indicators. URL: http://info.worldbank.org/governance

Social Overview

Borden, G.A., Conaway, W.A., Morrison, T. 1994. Kiss, Bow, or Shake Hands: How to do Business in Sixty Countries. Holbrook, Massachusetts, 1994.

Center for Disease Control. URL: http://www.cdc.gov

Eldis Country Profiles. URL: http://www.eldis.org/country/index.htm

Ethnologue. URL: http://www.ethnologue.com/

Government of Australia Department of Foreign Affiars and Trade. URL: http://www.dfat.gov.au/geo

Government of Canada Foreign Affairs and International Trade. URL: http://www.voyage.gc.ca/consular_home-e.htm

Library of Congress Country Studies. URL: http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/cshome.html

Lonely Planet. URL: http://www.lonelyplanet.com/worldguide/

Steve Kropla's Online Help For World Travelers. URL: http://www.kropla.com/

Syria Review 2016 Page 534 of 540 pages Syria

United Kingdom Ministry of Foreign and Commonwealth Office. URL: http://www.fco.gov.uk/

United Nations Human Development Report. URL: http://www.undp.org/hdro

UNICEF Statistical Database Online. URL: http://www.unicef.org/statis/atoz.html

United States Central Intelligence Agency, World Factbook. 2001. Washington, D.C.: Printing and Photography Group. URL: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/index.html

United States Department of State, Background Notes. URL: http://www.state.gov/www/background_notes/index.html

United States Department of State, Commercial and Business Affairs: Travel Tips. URL: http://www.state.gov/www/about_state/business/cba_travel.html

United States Department of State, Bureau of Consular Affairs. URL: http://travel.state.gov/

World Health Organization. URL: http://www.who.int/home-page/

World News Connection, National Technical Information Service. Springfield, Virginia, USA.

Internet News Service, Xinhua News Agency (U.S.) Inc. Woodside, New York. URL: http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/

Note on Edition Dates:

Methodology Notes for the HDI:

Since 1990, the United Nations Development Programme, in concert with organizations across the globe, has produced the Human Development Index (or HDI). According to the UNDP, the index measures average achievement in basic human development in one simple composite index, and produces from this index a ranking of countries. The HDI is a composite of three basic components of human development: longevity, knowledge and standard of living. Longevity is measured by life expectancy. Knowledge is measured by combination of adult literacy and mean

Syria Review 2016 Page 535 of 540 pages Syria years of schooling. Standard of living is measured by purchasing power, based on real GDP per capita (in constant US$) adjusted for differences in international living costs (or, purchasing power parity, PPP). While the index uses these social indicators to measure national performance with regard to human welfare and development, not all countries provide the same level of information for each component needed to compute the index; therefore, as in any composite indicator, the final index is predicated on projections, predictions and weighting schemes. The index is a static measure, and thus, an incomplete measure of human welfare. In fact, the UNDP says itself the concept of human development focuses on the ends rather than the means of development and progress, examining in this manner, the average condition of all people in a given country.

Specifically, the index is calculated by determining the maximum and minimum for each of the three components (as listed above) and then measuring where each country stands in relation to these scales-expressed as a value between 0 and 1. For example, the minimum adult literary rate is zero percent, the maximum is 100 percent, and the reading skills component of knowledge in the HDI for a country where the literacy rate is 75 percent would be 0.75. The scores of all indicators are then averaged into the overall index.

For a more extensive examination of human development, as well as the ranking tables for each participating country, please visit: http://www.undp.org

Note on History sections

In some CountryWatch Country Reviews, open source content from the State Department Background Notes and Country Guides have been used.

Environmental Overview

Environmental Profiles: A Global Guide to Projects and People. 1993. Linda Sobel Katz, Sarah Orrick, and Robert Honig. New York: Garland Publishing.

The Environment Encyclopedia and Directory, 2nd Edition. 1998. London: Europa.

Environmental Protection Agency Global Warming Site. URL: http://www.epa.gov/globalwarming

Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nations: Forestry. URL: http://www.fao.org/forestry/site/sofo/en/

Global Warming Information Page. URL: http://globalwarming.org

Introduction to Global Environmental Issues, 2nd Edition. 1997. Kevin Pickering and Lewis Owen.

Syria Review 2016 Page 536 of 540 pages Syria

London: Routledge.

Trends: Compendium of Data on Global Change. URL: http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/trends/emis/em_cont.htm

United Nations Environmental Program. URL: http://www.unep.org/GEO/GEO_Products/Assessment_Reports/

United Nations Global Environmental Outlook. URL: http://www.unep.org/geo/geo4/media/

United States Department of Energy, Country Analysis Briefs. URL: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/contents.html

World Climate Data Online. URL: http://www.worldclimate.com

World Directory of Country Environmental Studies. 1996. The World Resource Institute.

World Factbook. US Central Intelligence Agency. Washington, D.C.: Printing and Photography Group.

1998-1999 World Resources Guide to the Global Environment by the World Resources Institute. May, 1998.

1998/1999 Yearbook of International Cooperation on Environment and Development. 1998. London: Earthscan Publications.

Note on Edition Dates:

Other Sources:

General information has also been used in the compilation of this review, with the courtesy of governmental agencies from this country.

News Services:

Syria Review 2016 Page 537 of 540 pages Syria

CANA Daily Bulletin. Caribbean Media Agency Ltd., St. Michael, Barbados.

Central and Eastern Africa Report, United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs - Integrated Regional Information Network for Central and Eastern Africa.

Daily News, Panafrican News Agency. Dakar, Senegal.

PACNEWS, Pacific Islands Broadcasting Association. Suva, Fiji.

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. Washington D.C. USA.

Reuters News. Thomson Reuters. New York, New York. USA.

Southern Africa Report, United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs - Integrated Regional Information Network for Southern Africa.

Voice of America, English Service. Washington D.C.

West Africa Report, United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs - Integrated Regional Information Network for West Africa. 1998-1999

Note: Some or all these news services have been used to research various sections of this Country Review.

USING COUNTRYWATCH.COM AS AN ELECTRONIC SOURCE:

MLA STYLE OF CITATION

Commentary

For items in a "Works Cited" list, CountryWatch.com suggests that users follow recommended patterns forindentation given in the MLA Handbook, 4th edition.

Individual Works

Basic form, using an Internet protocol:

Syria Review 2016 Page 538 of 540 pages Syria

Author/editor. Title of Print Version of Work. Edition statement (if given). Publication information (Place of publication: publisher, date), if given. Title of Electronic Work. Medium. Available Protocol (if applicable):Site/Path/File. Access date.

Examples:

Youngblood-Coleman, Denise. Country Review: France. 2003. Houston, Texas: CountryWatch Publications, 2003. Country Review:France. Online. Available URL: http://www.countrywatch.com/cw_country.asp?vCOUNTRY=61 October, 12, 2003. Note: This is the citation format used when the print version is not used in the reference.

Parts of Works

Basic form, using an Internet protocol:

Author/editor. "Part title." Title of Print Version of Work. Edition statement (if given). Publication information (Place of publication: publisher, date), if given. Title of Electronic Work. Medium. AvailableProtocol (if applicable): Site/Path/File. Access date.

Examples:

Youngblood-Coleman, Denise. "People." CountryWatch.com: France. 2003. Houston, Texas: CountryWatch Publications, 2003. CountryWatch.com: France. Online. Available URL : http://www.countrywatch.com/cw_topic.asp? vCOUNTRY=61&SECTION=SOCIAL&TOPIC=CLPEO&TYPE=TEXT. October 12, 2003.

Note: This is the citation format used when the print version is not used in the reference.

For further source citation information, please email: [email protected] or [email protected].

Syria Review 2016 Page 539 of 540 pages CountryWatch

CountryWatch is an information provider for public and private sector organizations that operate globally. The management of CountryWatch has extensive international experience and has utilized this experience to provide a concise and useful set of political, economic, and business information for its clients in the form of Country Reviews, the Country Wire, CountryWatch Data, Elections Central, CountryWatch Videos and CountryWatch Forecast.

This Country Review is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information on the subject matter covered. It is sold with the understanding that the publication is not intended to provide legal, accounting, investment, or other professional advice.

CountryWatch believes that the information and opinions contained here in are reliable, but does not make any warranties, express or implied, and assumes no liability for reliance on or use of the information or opinions contained herein.

The offices of CountryWatch are located at:

CountryWatch, Inc. 5005 Riverway Suite 220 Houston, Texas 77056 U.S.A. Tel: 800-879-3885 Fax: 713-355-3770 Web address: http://www.countrywatch.com Email: [email protected]

ISBN: 1- 60523- 783-3 Syria Country Review 2016

ISSN: 1- 60523- 893-5

Printed in the United States of America