Mapping Syrian civil society

My two Middle East Institute interns, Ala’ Alrababa’h and Idon Natanzon, have spent time this summer talking to civil society organizations both inside Syria and in the diaspora, especially in the US but also in Canada and Europe. The objective was to map Syrian civil society by understanding as best we could the objectives, views, constituencies, activities, shortcomings and needs of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). Together they collected data on 65 organizations, which is far from the total number out there but enough to sketch a preliminary snapshot of a civil society struggling to meet urgent needs with less than adequate means and insufficient collaboration.

We won’t be publishing the data collected, as that would make life easier for those who see many of these organizations as threatening.  But here is what Ala’ (with the kind assistance of Somar Abdullah of the Center for Civil Society and Democracy in Syria) and Idon found in broad strokes:

Inside Syria

Civil society organizations and civilian opposition in Syria are largely disorganized, overlapping, and do little coordination or even networking with similar groups. In addition to the difficulties in communicating inside Syria today, this is due to inexperience. Because of the emergency law, little formal civil society activity existed in Syria until the late 1990s, when restrictions were relaxed.

Two prominent organizations that existed prior to the revolution were the regime-sponsored Syria Trust for Development and the Damascus Center for Human Rights Studies. Asma al-Asad, President Asad’s wife, started the Syria Trust in 2001. The organization’s activities included Firdos, which focused on economic development in rural areas, but the project came to a halt in 2011. The Trust now organizes small-scale service work in regime-controlled areas. The Damascus Center started in 2005 and has since published extensively on human rights inside Syria.

Since the 2011 uprising, hundreds of organizations have sprung up around Syria. Many are limited in their activities to the Internet, but others are engaged actively with their communities. They conduct relief work, political opposition, and research simultaneously, sometimes to the detriment of efficiency and objectivity.

The NGOs fall into five, not always mutually exclusive, categories: Islamist organizations, minority organizations, regime-related organizations, youth organizations, and other, unaffiliated organizations.

Most of the many Islamist organizations are unnamed and use mosques to organize relief work. In addition, two main civilian Islamist groups exist in the rebel-controlled north. Neither is moderate. The Islamic Liberation Party focuses on missionary work (Da’wa) and support for militias. The Muslim Youth Committee works mainly on providing services.

Generally speaking, organizations that deal with minority affairs are political. They represent minority interests and organize protests. Some also conduct relief work for members of their group.  Others, like the Assyrian Union Party, have affiliated militias.

The Popular Front for Change and Liberation is one of the most prominent groups with ties to the regime. While the Front claims to be part of the opposition, it took part in the 2012 elections, boycotted by most of the opposition, and has joined the Syrian government established after the elections.

Youth organizations inside Syria, while small, are very promising. The Alawite Bees of the Coast uses “freedom money” to encourage Alawites to join the opposition, and tries to change the misconception that all Alawites are behind the regime. The Colors Initiative and Qur’an for revolution are two other creative campaigns created by the Syrian Non-violence Movement.

Finally, unaffiliated organizations do not fit any of the previous categories. Some are mainly political, like Building the Syrian State, while others focus on humanitarian work. Bihar Relief Organization, which works on humanitarian relief and food distribution in the north, uses an efficient and transparent system system of distribution. Other relief organizations could benefit from Bihar’s experience.

The diaspora

Since the ongoing crisis in Syria erupted in 2011, dozens of diaspora advocacy and relief organizations have been organized to help meet the overwhelming humanitarian needs of Syrians living inside the country, internally displaced persons (IDPs), and the millions of refugees that this conflict has created. Prior to 2011, only a handful of Syria-focused international NGOs existed, most of whom focused solely on networking and connecting Syrian expatriates.

Three years into the crisis, the international landscape for Syrian civil society is both diverse and complicated. While the Syrian-American community is small, estimated at roughly 150,000 people, relief efforts have been organized throughout the US as well as in Canada and parts of Europe. Many of the more active groups maintain non-political and non-religious affiliations in order to provide egalitarian aid to the most at-risk communities. However, Syrian-Americans are increasingly unified in their desire to see this conflict come to an end.

Much of the work being done in support of the Syrian people is conducted without significant US government funding. The Syrian American community has shouldered the majority of financial support, while the broader American public remains distant from this cause. If these organizations intend to maintain their relief work, they must do a better job at expanding their donor bases and increasing the willingness to help among ordinary Americans.

The Syrian American organizations face common challenges, many of which they highlight themselves. These include a lack of access inside of Syria, not enough focus on long-term development, a general lack of resources, an inability to properly document human rights violations, and extreme donor fatigue. Because they operate in the same space, many groups compete for the same resources and draw from the same pool of activists. While they cooperate on humanitarian issues, many conduct identical programs and struggle to make use of best practices. Additionally, the focus on the extreme short-term need limits the organizations’ abilities to strategize about longer-term projects and planning.

The Syrian American community is becoming increasingly coordinated. Over the past year policy groups have formed the Coalition for a Democratic Syria, which coordinates government and public relations. Separately, the American Relief Coalition for Syria has brought together over a dozen of the leading humanitarian groups. Combined these new structures signal a turning point in the international landscape of Syrian civil society. There is great potential for  coordination, collaboration, and expansion.  But we may be reaching a point of such extreme donor fatigue that aid groups will fail to meet the ever-increasing humanitarian needs in Syria and the affected region.