Idlib in crisis

The United Nations reported over 900,000 newly displaced Syrians in northwestern Syria since December 2019. This number is currently increasing due to the violence in Idlib. This tragic reality served as the foundation of the Middle East Institute’s  event on February 21, 2020, titled The Crisis In Syria’s Idlib. The discussion was moderated by Alexander Marquardt, Senior National Correspondent at CNN, with participation from Charles Lister, Senior Fellow and Director of the Countering Terrorism and Extremist Program at the Middle East Institute, Elizabeth Tsurkov, Fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute and Doctoral student at Princeton University, and Zaher Sahloul, President and Founder at MedGlobal.

“Unprecedented” Situation: Idlib 

The panelists accentuated the “unprecedented” nature of the current situation in Idlib. Unlike Syrians in other “de-escalation” zones, the residents of Idlib have nowhere to go. The Turkish border is closed. The 2.8 million people in Idlib are trapped, fearing for their lives. Tsurkov underlined that there is a genuine fear among the population in Idlib that they are all going to die.  Lister believes there are close to 2 million people on the border, IDP camps have been entirely full for months, and people are forced to sleep outside in freezing fields. 

Sahloul provided a more historical overview of the conflict in Syria, reemphasizing that the humanitarian crisis has been ongoing for over nine years. Assad’s tactics focus on attacking civilian infrastructure; this is an attack against humanity, as schools, markets, and hospitals are constantly being bombed and destroyed. The majority of people are not being killed by bombs, but by chronic disease and lack of available doctors and treatment facilities.

Tsurkov added that the people in Idlib do not want to stay and wait for the regime to capture them as they fear being placed in regime prisons, which essentially serve as “extermination sites.” She notes that even people who are employed by the Syrian government are afraid of remaining under regime control because they have seen what happens too often: execution.

The International community’s failure to respond 

Lister in dismay noted that the UN is unable to act. A French proposed statement to declare Idlib a crisis could not pass in the Security Council due to a Russian veto. Assad has recaptured around 35-40% of northwestern Syria in under a year. The key regime objective has been achieved: to control the north/south M5 highway. The next objective, control of the east/west M4 highway has not yet been accomplished.

The panelists emphasized that Erdogan is feeling huge political pressure not to allow any refugees over the border. Turkey has lost 18 observation posts in Idlib, but Turkish-controlled forces did fire at Russian jets. Turkey has established an end of February deadline for the regime to withdraw from Idlib. The panelists doubted this aspiration will be achieved.

Sahloul emphasized that the UNHCR office warned nongovernmental organizations in Syria last year of an additional million displaced people predicted in the next year. Therefore, Sahloul argues, the UN should not be surprised. He cited the lack of UN observers in Idlib and the failure of the UN Secretary General to visit Idlib as evidence of UN disinterest.

What could/should happen? 

Tsurkov believes that if the Russian and regime warplanes that conduct horrific bombing and displacement of civilians were threatened and risked being shot down, the bombing would stop. Therefore the US and international community should raise the stakes for Russia and Assad by not only intervening when chemical weapons are used, but also when civilians are bombed.

All the panelists suggested that Turkey should not stand alone in this crisis. While Turkey has made many deplorable policy decisions in Syria, Ankara is also currently the only force trying to stop the regime. Lister said that Turkey has no choice but to gradually escalate its force presence and strength in the region. Turkey has to find a way to force a stalemate or ceasefire. 

The only alternative to regime or Turkish control of Idlib is Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), whose ancestry includes Al Qaeda. In response to this alternative, Tsurkov professes that local support for HTS is limited and dwindling, due to its recent military losses, but Gaza-fication of Idlib (control by an extremist group) would be better than millions fleeing and mass slaughter.

She believes the only plausible alternative is Turkish-controlled Idlib. Sahloul emphasized that HTS would not be able to govern; it was tolerated only because of the stability it brought. Lister noted that HTS has been officially reaching out to conduct interviews with the international community so that its image can be more aligned with stability and governance than with terrorism. Or at least can be viewed as better than the alternative.

The panelists conclude that the the international community should be providing funds and urging the parties to achieve a ceasefire as a way of stabilizing the situation. Lister urges the US, at a minimum, to utilize diplomacy and put pressure on Russia.