Syria’s Balance of Terror

LONDON – As the civil war in Syria nears the six-year mark, the mounting death toll and constantly shifting military landscape is making a mockery of the diplomatic track. With yet another round of talks on the horizon – new United Nations-led discussions are scheduled to begin today in Geneva – it’s worth asking why the conflict has been so intractable.

Syria’s violence might have ended years ago had it not been for meddling by some of the very players now pushing hardest for a truce. Sergei Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, conceded as much when he said in January that Damascus was 2-3 weeks from falling before Moscow intervened. Had rebels taken the Syrian capital, one of their key demands – the ouster of President Bashar al-Assad – would very likely have been met.

But it was not to be. Unlike in Libya, where French-led NATO action saved the revolution in March 2011, Iranian and Russian interventions in Syria – bolstered by armed non-state actors (both Sunni and Shia) from Lebanon, Palestine, Iraq, Pakistan, and Afghanistan – have saved the government.

That said, Assad’s army – which had 325,000 soldiers in 2010 – has suffered more than 100,000 fatalities, a similar number of injuries, and tens of thousands of defections. By relying on some 110,000 foreign state and non-state actors to maintain a hold on the small portion of Syria that he still controls, Assad’s regime is much like his military: a shadow of what it once was.

And yet, for all of Assad’s diminished capacity, six years of brutal fighting has left the rebels little to show for their efforts. Most of what was sought in March 2011 – from Assad’s removal to democratic reforms and civic equality regardless of ethnicity, region, or sect – remains aspirational.

Anti-Assad forces came close to a military victory on several occasions over the last six years. The first time was in July 2012, when fighters stormed Damascus and attacked the National Security headquarters, killing Assad’s top commanders, including the defense minister, the deputy defense minister, and the head of the National Security Bureau.

This was followed by rebel advances in the northwest of the country, primarily into Aleppo, Homs, and Idlib. But these gains were rolled back in late 2012 and early 2013, with the intervention of Hezbollah and other foreign-backed non-state actors.

Forces loyal to Assad were again pushed to the brink in July 2015, when opposition forces advanced on the regime’s coastal strongholds, specifically the port city of Latakia. Two months later, opposition units from Duma and Ghouta were close to cutting off Assad’s forces in Damascus from the north of the country, by controlling strategic hills and paralyzing the M5 motorway. But a Russian aerial bombardment rolled back these advances, too.

The absence of sustained military momentum by any side has led to a dizzying mix of new security realities and strategic demands (from the implementation of Sharia law in opposition-held areas to predictions of regional secession). By the end of 2016, five major coalitions with conflicting objectives had emerged: Assad’s forces and their allies; Arab-led opposition forces; Kurdish-led opposition forces; Jabhat Fatah al-Sham (JFS, formerly the al-Nusra Front, which was the official arm of al-Qaeda in Syria); and the so-called Islamic State (ISIS).

Defections, realignments, and infighting have occurred within and among all five coalitions, including reported sparring between pro-Assad militias and among ISIS units. A December Turkish-Russian ceasefire plan, and the Astana negotiation process that kicked off last month in the Kazakh capital, fueled more infighting between Arab-led opposition forces and JFS, especially in the overpopulated and relentlessly bombarded opposition stronghold of Idlib.

In response to the Astana process, JFS recently dissolved itself and merged with four other local northern-based organizations: the al-Zenki Movement, the Truth Brigade, the Army of al-Sunnah, and the Supporters of the Religion Front. The new coalition, the Organization for the Liberation of the Levant (HTS), also attracted factions from its main rival, Ahrar al-Sham. An estimated quarter of the Ahrar forces in the north, including their commander, Hashim al-Sheikh, defected to HTS, which al-Sheikh currently commands.

At the same time, five smaller armed organizations – the most important being the Hawks of the Levant, the Army of Islam-Idlib Sector, and the Levantine Front – joined the Ahrar to avoid being absorbed by HTS. The current Ahrar commander, Ali al-Omar, heads this new coalition.

These realignments reflect survival tactics more than ideological affinity. Mergers with other organizations are viewed as a way to lessen the risk of eradication by drone strikes or ground attacks from rival forces. Whereas Ahrar and other armed opposition groups accept the dual tracks of diplomatic and military action, HTS will continue to rally all factions and organizations that reject the diplomatic track and fear Ahrar’s domination of the northwest. The ceasefire between these two coalitions, sustained by the balance of terror, by no means signals the end of the infighting.

The weaknesses, splits, and fatigue of all local forces (both remnants of the regime and the opposition factions) may give regional powers like Russia, Turkey, and Iran more leverage in pushing for a sustainable ceasefire in Syria. But I am skeptical. In a war with endlessly shifting priorities, conflicting aims, few credible commitments, and plenty of foreign meddling, any ceasefire today is just as likely to be broken by violence tomorrow.

Omar Ashour, Senior Lecturer in Security Studies and the Director of Doctoral Studies at the University of Exeter, is the author of The De-Radicalization of Jihadists: Transforming Armed Islamist Movements and Collusion to Collision: Islamist-Military Relations in Egypt.

Breaking the WHO’s Glass Ceiling

TORONTO/NEW YORK – This year, the World Health Organization will elect a new Director-General. Last September, WHO member states nominated six candidates for the position: Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Flavia Bustreo, Philippe Douste-Blazy, David Nabarro, Sania Nishtar, and Miklós Szócska. On January 25, the WHO Executive Board will shortlist three candidates; and in May, the World Health Assembly will elect one of those candidates to succeed Margaret Chan.

All of the candidates have presented a vision for how they would lead the organization, and we personally know and admire several of them. But, ultimately, we believe that Ghebreyesus is the most qualified person for the job. Our endorsement is based on three considerations that are important in any hiring process, and especially for a position such as this: the candidate’s past achievements, leadership style, and the diversity that he or she brings to the table.

With respect to the first consideration, Ghebreyesus has a proven track record of success. As Ethiopia’s health minister from 2005 to 2012, he championed the interests of all of the country’s citizens, and strengthened primary-care services. He created 3,500 health centers and 16,000 health posts, and dramatically expanded the health-care workforce by building more medical schools and deploying more 38,000 community-based health extension workers.

Ghebreyesus’s efforts now serve as a model that other countries seek to emulate as they try to achieve universal health coverage for their citizens. He is the only candidate who has achieved such results at a national level.

Ghebreyesus is also a longtime champion and advocate of gender equality and the rights of women and girls. In fact, his efforts to strengthen Ethiopia’s health system played a crucial role in more than doubling the percentage of Ethiopian women with access to contraception, and in reducing maternal mortality by 75%.

When Ghebreyesus was Ethiopia’s foreign minister from 2012 to 2016, he gained extensive diplomatic experience, not least by leading negotiations for the Addis Ababa Action Agenda, the international community’s plan to finance the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. This same knack for diplomacy is now needed to bring WHO member states together for cooperative action on collective health challenges.

Ghebreyesus’s leadership style is also perfectly suited for this role: he speaks last, and encourages others to share their views. He also knows how to spot and nurture talent, and how to bring the best out of the people around him. He would undoubtedly boost organizational morale and motivate the staff to deliver maximum value and efficiency – to the benefit of all member states and their citizens. And while he is a receptive listener, he is also decisive, which is an attribute for the leader of the world’s foremost health institution, especially during global public-health emergencies.

Then there is Ghebreyesus’s extensive leadership experience within global health institutions. As Board Chair of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria between 2009 and 2011, and as Chair of the Roll Back Malaria Partnership between 2007 and 2009, Ghebreyesus pushed through sweeping changes that dramatically improved both organizations’ operations. What’s more, he helped them raise record-breaking financial commitments from donors: $11.7 billion for the Global Fund, and $3 billion for Roll Back Malaria.

This is precisely the kind experience and expertise that the WHO needs in today’s global health environment, and it explains why the African Union has officially endorsed Ghebreyesus’s candidacy. Amazingly, in its almost 70-year history, the WHO has never had a Director-General from Africa. This fact alone is not a reason to pick a candidate; but in Ghebreyesus’s case, his direct experience working in developing countries makes him uniquely qualified to tackle our toughest global health problems, which tend to hit developing countries the hardest.

It is time to break the WHO’s African-leadership glass ceiling. Sustainable development is truly achievable only when leaders of global institutions are from the communities most affected by those institutions’ work.

Ghebreyesus’s candidacy presents the WHO with an historic opportunity, which its Executive Board should seize on January 25.

Peter A. Singer is Chief Executive Officer of Grand Challenges Canada. Jill W. Sheffield is an independent consultant and longtime advocate for women’s health and rights.

Solidarity With Sharks

SAN JOSE – It has long been said that we know more about the Moon than we do about the oceans. After all, 12 people have walked on the surface of the Moon, but only three have been to the deepest part of the sea. But it now seems that we know even less about the oceans than we thought – and we may well have been doing even more damage than we realized.

Read more ...

Can the EU Survive Populism?

BRUSSELS – Another year, another threat to the European Union’s survival. The good news is that the greatest disruption of 2016, Britain’s vote to exit the EU, appears manageable. The bad news is that both France and Italy face the prospect of a populist political takeover this year. Either outcome could well spell the end of the EU.

Read more ...

The Abandonment of Progress

PARIS – Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan are remembered for the laissez-faire revolution they launched in the early 1980s. They campaigned and won on the promise that free-market capitalism would unleash growth and boost prosperity. In 2016, Nigel Farage, the then-leader of the UK Independence Party (UKIP) who masterminded Brexit, and US President-elect Donald Trump campaigned and won on a very different basis: nostalgia. Tellingly, their promises were to “take back control” and “make America great again” – in other words, to turn back the clock.

Read more ...

Sustainability in the Trump Era

COPENHAGEN – The forces fighting global warming and battling to strengthen environmental protection must brace for heavy collateral damage as a result of Donald Trump’s victory in the United States’ presidential election. Judging by Trump’s campaign rhetoric, and by statements from his Republican allies, environmental protection in the US will be gutted in a frenzy of deregulation and inducements for domestic oil, coal, and gas producers.

Read more ...

Skilling Up Latin America

CARACAS – In the last two decades, Latin America has achieved remarkable social and economic progress. The middle class has grown to historic levels; poverty has been cut almost in half; access to education and health care has been expanded; and prosperity is being shared more widely than ever. As a result, most countries in the region have now achieved “middle-income” status. But their work is far from done.

Read more ...

The Promise of Ethical Machines

STORRS, CONNECTICUT – The prospect of artificial intelligence (AI) has long been a source of knotty ethical questions. But the focus has often been on how we, the creators, can and should use advanced robots. What is missing from the discussion is the need to develop a set of ethics for the machines themselves, together with a means for machines to resolve ethical dilemmas as they arise. Only then can intelligent machines function autonomously, making ethical choices as they fulfill their tasks, without human intervention.

Read more ...

How Climate Action Can Make America Great

SINGAPORE– Climate change is the single biggest challenge facing humankind. Yet the next president of the United States – the world’s second-largest greenhouse-gas emitter and a critical actor in climate policy – does not believe it is happening, or at least that humans have a role in driving it. If Donald Trump actually wants to “Make America Great Again,” as his campaign slogan declared, he will need to change his attitude and embrace the climate agenda.

Read more ...

Confronting the Next Global Health Challenge

ZURICH – Thanks to unprecedented international cooperation, the world is making impressive progress in the fight against malaria. According to the World Health Organization’s just-released 2016 World Malaria Report, malaria mortality rates among children under age five have fallen by 69% since 2000.

Read more ...
We use cookies to improve our website. By continuing to use this website, you are giving consent to cookies being used. More details…