This thesis is a study of international relations theory and the case of the Lebanese state's relations with Syria between 1975 and 2002. It aims to answer the following questions: (1) Why has Lebanon generally "bandwagoned" with Syria, a country which has managed to intervene in and subdue it at the expense of Lebanese sovereignty. (2) How have Lebanese state officials, along with other political actors, tried to manipulate Syria for their own interests, whether to defend Lebanese sovereignty, to maintain and increase their status, or to contain and appease their rivals and opponents. (3) Parallel to the discussions generated by these two questions, which kinds of theory are relevant to or best explain Lebanese relations with Syria. Specifically this study demonstrates that the behavior of a penetrated weak state, Lebanon, toward a regional middle power, Syria, cannot usefully be explained by simple realism's state-to-state power balancing model. Rather, it is necessary to differentiate the multitude of state (office-holders) and sub-state actors. In addition, their behavior can only be explained by a combination of factors identified in a variety of theories: reaction to an external threat (simple realism) which explain a very few cases; "omni-alignments" against interrelated threats (complex realism) which result from the weaknesses of the Lebanese state and which explain much more; still powerful transstate ties (constructivism) which themselves needed to be understood in terms of the contradiction between sovereignty and identity and which have some impact; and complex interdependence and shared interests (pluralism) which generally exist between Lebanese and Syrian elites.

The Change of Morphology and Function of Public Spaces: Case Study of Latakia Since French Mandate till 2010 Yara Issa Abstract: This thesis explores the history and the practice of making use of squares in Syria in 20th century, particularly in the Syrian coastal city: Latakia. The thesis mainly focuses on the period from the beginning of the twentieth century till 2010. The thesis understands squares as a kind of urban public spaces in cities, which have a tradition ever since the Ancient times, and correspond to the Mediterranean concept of the city. It examines their morphological and functional transformation throughout history, analyzes the squares of Latakia and assets them according to special criteria for successful squares which have been articulated by occidental urban planners and architects. Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Magister Legum - LLM / The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant is a jihadist militant group. The members of this militant group have committed criminal acts of unspeakable cruelty. These staggering criminal conducts are documented by the United Nations, international human rights organisations, and media. Besides, the group itself gives first-hand information through social media and its magazine. Having witnessed the atrocities committed by Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, the United Nations Security Council affirmed that the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant’s conduct in Syria and Iraq is a threat to international peace and security. Therefore, the media and various role players have called for the intervention of International Criminal Court. This research paper analyses whether the International Criminal Court is a viable prosecutorial option to account the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant members for their crimes. For the Court to be a viable prosecutorial avenue, it must have a jurisdiction. Accordingly, this research paper critically examines whether the International Criminal Court has subject matter, personal and/or territorial jurisdictions to try the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant perpetrators. The study concludes that although the criminal conducts by Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant members constitute crimes under the Rome Statute, the Court, however, has limited jurisdictional reach over the perpetrators. It is submitted that with a limited and fragmented territorial and personal jurisdictional reach over the perpetrators, the Court is not a viable prosecutorial avenue. / German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD).

No description available.

This PhD thesis compares Egypt and Syria’s authoritarian political systems. While the tendency in social science political research treats Egypt and Syria as similarly authoritarian, this research emphasizes differences between the two systems with special reference to institutions and co-optation. Rather than reducibly understanding Egypt and Syria as sharing similar histories, institutional arrangements, or ascribing to the oft-repeated convention that “Syria is Egypt but 10 years behind,” this thesis focuses on how events and individual histories shaped each states current institutional strengthens and weaknesses. Specifically, it explains the how varying institutional politicization or de-politicization affects each state’s capabilities for co-opting elite and non-elite individuals. Beginning with a theoretical framework that considers the limited utility of democratization and transition theoretical approaches, the work underscores the persistence and durability of authoritarianism. Chapter two details the politicized institutional divergence between Egypt and Syria that began in the 1970s. Chapter three and four examines how institutional politicization or de-politicization affects elite and non-elite individual co-optation in Egypt and Syria. Chapter five discusses the study’s general conclusions and theoretical implications. This thesis’s argument is that Egypt and Syria co-opt elites and non-elites differently because of the varying degrees of institutional politicization in each governance system. Rather than view one country as more politically developed than the other, this work argues that Syria’s political institutions are more politicized than their Egyptian counterparts. Syria’s political arena is, thus, described as politicized-patrimonialism. Syria’s politicized-patrimonial arena produces uneven co-optation of elites and non-elites as they are diffused through competing institutions. Conversely, the Egyptian political arena remains highly personalized as weak institutions and individuals are manipulated and molded according to the president’s ruling clique. This is referred to as personalized-patrimonialism. As a consequence, Egypt’s political establishment demonstrates more flexibility in ad hoc altering and adapting its arena depending on the emergence of crises. This study’s theoretical implications suggest that, contrary to modernization and democratization theory’s adage that institutions lead to a political development, politicized institutions within a patrimonial order actually hinder regime adaptation because consensus is harder to achieve and maintain. It is within this context that Egypt’s de-politicized institutional framework advantages its top political elite. In this reading of Egyptian and Syrian politics, Egypt’s personalized political arena is more adaptable than Syria’s. These conclusions do not indicate that political reform is a process underway in either state.

This paper will focus on three alternative options for addressing the current crisis in Syria (direct military intervention, arming the rebels, and a diplomatic/political solution) that have been discussed by both scholars and politicians. The paper is divided into four main chapters. The introduction is the first one. The second chapter presents the three alternative policies, and the debate among some scholars and politicians in relevant issues. In the third chapter, the author analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of the arguments for each alternative. In chapter four, the author offers his recommendation by determining the best policy to pursue in Syria, arguing why it is the most suitable one.

This thesis explores the dynamics involved in shaping the Anglo-Syrian relationship. It argues that to understand UK relations towards Syria over the past century, they have to be viewed in the broader context of British policy on Middle East regional issues, and wider foreign policy priorities. With no direct interests invested in Syria, it is both Britain's continued involvement in Middle East affairs and Syria's standing as a key regional power that assures a continuing relationship. Consequently, the stance of leading UK politicians on the issues of post-World War regional order, international terrorism, military interventionism, arms sales, dictatorship and democratisation have circumscribed UK policy options in relation to Syria. Using the tools of Neoclassical realism this study considers British foreign policy behaviour, in terms of Britain's attempt to mobilize the power to protect its interests. It reviews Britain's international behaviour in part by how it is affected by changes in the international system, as Britain has declined from being a great imperial power, to a European power. Alliances are a key tool Britain has used to manage its decline, and this study identifies the impact that this has had on Anglo-Syrian relations with particular reference to the US and EU. Finally, it demonstrates that understanding how the foreign policy process works in Britain is key to understanding its international behaviour. In this it takes into account elite perceptions both of what these interests are and how best Britain can achieve them. This adds a layer of understanding as to why foreign policy outcomes do not always conform with what would be predicted purely in terms of the pursuit of the national interest.

During the Syrian conflict the number of European Foreign Fighters has increased exponentially and has become an ever-growing concern for European policymakers. This phenomenon presents host of major security challenges for European policymakers and governments. Among European countries, France provides the highest number of citizens who have gone to Syria to fight against Assad´s regime. The French authorities have estimated that by mid-2014, over 700 French citizens have left France and travelled to Syria to fight. Historically France has had a relationship with Syria which started with its role as a border-drawing colonial power. Grounded in a framework of realism, that emphasizes nation-states as the primary actor within the international system, the analysis concentrates on the role of France´s foreign policy on the Syria as push factor for terrorism and radicalization. This paper attempts to determinate a specific correlation between the policy that France has been conducting towards Syria between 2000 and 2015, and the phenomenon of French Foreign Fighters. Findings suggest that France´s foreign policy towards Syria is the main root cause of the French Foreign Fighters phenomenon.

This paper attempts to answer the question of why the war in Syria has been particularly long and violent. To do this, it draws upon the explanatory value of Benjamin Miller’s theory of regional war and peace (2007). The main claim here is that state weakness, a mismatch be- tween state boundaries and national identities, and great power competition in the area can explain why the war has been particularly long and violent. The study concludes that the fol- lowing major factors and their interacting effects have had a major role in protracting and ex- acerbating the war: weak Syrian nationalism; extreme Islamism; weakness of the Syrian state; competition between the West and Russia; and to a lesser extent, Kurdish presence and acts of relative disengagement by the United States.

No description available.