Syrian civil society

Italian art conservationist shows a badly damaged funerary bust from the ancient city of Palmyra, Syria that is being painstakingly restored in Rome, February 16, 2017. Vandeville Eric/Press Assocation. All rights reserved.The third annual meeting of the Syrian Civil Coalition was
held in Beirut on January 27-30 2017. Compared with the first meeting of this
group of people three years ago, it was a much a sadder occasion. In the summer
of 2013, civil society activists were able to reach Beirut from all parts of
Syria (government-controlled areas,
opposition-controlled areas, and Kurdish majority areas) and the energy and
enthusiasm, despite the terrible odds, that had its origins in the 2011 demonstrations
was palpable.

Civil society has been battered by this war. There are huge
difficulties of communication. It was very difficult for the groups in
opposition-controlled areas to get the necessary travel documents to reach
Beirut via Turkey. The groups in the Kurdish majority areas could not leave
Syria because of new controls on the Turkish border. ‘Civil society’ said
several speakers ’has been split up’ and they described tensions between those
inside Syria and those outside, those in different parts of Syria, and those in
Lebanon, Turkey or Jordan and even in Europe. Many groups reported members who
were missing, who had been arrested, or who had been forced to flee and now are
refugees in Europe and elsewhere. One of them was assassinated by ISIS last
year.

Nevertheless, as the different groups described what they do,
it became evident that civil society remains almost the only source of social
cohesion and that it undertakes most of the activities needed for survival. The
range of issues, roles, campaigns and services remains impressive. They
include:

–       
Help for victims of war, including children, the
war injured, the handicapped, the elderly, displaced persons; one group that
calls itself the ‘Smile makers’ focuses on social integration.

–       
Economic empowerment, especially employment for
both displaced persons and host communities.

–       
Education, especially help for those children
who have been unable to go to school or whose schools were disrupted by bombing

–       
Peace negotiations, mediation and conflict resolution.
One group in a Damascus suburb organises a Global Café and interactive theatre
where people with different viewpoints can engage with each other.

–       
Documentation and evidence collection on
prisoners, human rights violations and justice monitoring.

–       
Campaigns against sexual violence including male
rape.

–       
Work on the future constitution as well as
increasing awareness of citizenship rights, political equality, and the role of
the ICC

–       
Capacity-building for local councils and civil
society activists.

What was striking was the way that almost all groups
emphasised gender equality and women’s empowerment. Indeed, several people
stressed the importance of the feminist movement as a source of the democratic
movement. One group of women who are religious activists explained that they
promote an understanding of Islam in which the core meaning is about a fair
life for both men and women and in which ‘crimes of honour’ are completely
excluded. 

Also striking was the emphasis on evidence and data. The
participants were very diverse, young and old, urban intellectuals and people
from villages, secular and religious, with a noteworthy respect for each other.
They came from all different parts of Syria. Major discussions were held to
think through areas of activity: how to improve relations between host
communities and displaced people; the problem of the status of refugees in
Lebanon and Turkey and their treatment as ‘visitors’ or ‘tourists’; the
problems of health and education.

Compared with three years ago, civil society is much better
funded. The coalition now has offices in Beirut, Damascus and Gazientep. Many
activists have become much more professional. At the same time there was a lot
of discussion about the problems of outside funding; the way international NGOs
take most of the money intended for civil society and sub-contract activities
to locally-based civil society to undertake tasks that are not necessarily the
most useful. There was a sense that this kind of funding can often undermine
dignity and commitment and divert efforts from what is really needed.

Diplomatic openings?

Present at the first two days of the meeting were diplomats from
the UK and Germany, the EU, and representatives from the UN Office of the
Special Envoy to Syria, particularly the ones that are in charge of
communicating with civil society and liaising with them to ensure that their
views are represented at the negotiation table. 
What has changed since the beginning of the conflict is an understanding
by some of the international players that outside approaches to peace-building
must involve civil society and not just armed groups, must be bottom-up as well
as top-down, and must deal with economic and social issues and not just
politics; this is reflected in several recent reports from the UN on peace-building
as well as the new EU Global Strategy.

Staffan de Mistura, the UN Special Envoy to Syria, in charge
of the negotiations, is experimenting with the involvement of civil society and
has introduced some significant innovations. He has set up a Syrian Women
Advisory Board (WAB) which includes in its membership 12 women from very
diverse political backgrounds, and a mechanism for involving civil society
which they call the Civil Society Room (CSR). The membership of the CSR is
wider than the WAB. Both the WAB and the CSR get invited to Geneva when there
are talks.  One of the members of the WAB
described their work; the board includes women from all the different political backgrounds including opposition and pro-regime, and they discuss
their vision for a democratic Syria, scenarios for democratic transition, as
well as making suggestions for the negotiations, including the Istana process
initiated by Russia and Turkey; they also try to arrange meetings with both the
regime and the opposition.

A lively and sophisticated discussion about the CSR included
the problem of representation, how to include people from all different areas
and not just those who are well connected to the international community and speak
English; the problem that many of the most dedicated activists do not have
passports or are concerned about the security risk of participation in such a high
level process; and the appropriate channels of influence and whether a focus on
the negotiations is the best use of advocacy efforts.

Most importantly civil society activists demanded to be
treated as equals, not just subsidiary or track two, but as a party to the
negotiations. The conflict started as a conflict between  democracy versus authoritarianism not between
the regime and the armed groups. While the regime and the armed groups have to
end the violence, it is civil society that is needed when it comes to
discussing Syria’s political future. Without them there will be no truly
inclusive solution that is responsive to the real issues on the ground.

So can this new understanding between civil society and
international actors such as the UN and the EU lead to a new approach? It may
have come too late. It is Russia, Turkey and Iran that are calling the tune,
and the UN and the EU have been increasingly sidelined. A Trump Administration
in the US and a May government in Britain will further weaken international
organisations and openness to the role of civil society.