Syria presents complex issues. Eschewing simple explanations, the article delves deeper and examines the underlying drivers, and lessons for Asia which is likely to face increasing geopolitical challenges
By Vivek Joshi
Advisor to A-Joshi Strategy Consultants, Mumbai, India
"Syria
presents complex issues. Eschewing
simple explanations, the article delves deeper and examines the underlying
drivers, and lessons for Asia which is likely to face increasing geopolitical
challenges"
The situation
in Syria is very complex and difficult to comprehend. An analysis of the country, region and global
factors (beyond usual suspects of oil & arms industry) could help to draw
some lessons. For this, it would be
useful to step back from the trees and observe the bigger picture of the
forest. The resulting analysis is not
prescriptive or critical, and given the complexities of the subject, no
analysis can be comprehensive.
When viewed
through Adam Smith’s framework, Syria does not have an abundance of productive
land, labor & capital, while having small reserves of oil & natural
resources.Aleppo (north) &
Damascus (south) are the two major commercial centers. Much of the land in the
eastern half is not conducive to agriculture. The north-east has the Euphrates
& its allied rivers, and the main agrarian region. Restricted access to the
Mediterranean via the Homs gap, distance from the Suez & Persian Gulf and a
very weak navy imply that its ability to interdict supply chains of commerce is
not a serious threat. By itself Syria
would not be a critical area for those interested in trade in the region. The
country does not have significant comparative advantages. Low indices for
education & gender inequality limit the ability to develop competitive
advantages.
In 2012, the Gini coefficient of inequality was 0.36, per capita annual income was about
$5300 & population living in poverty was about 17%. These indicators &
the (relatively low) HDI score compare favorably with many other developing
countries. Syria has been admirably secular in its religious outlook. Despite such favorable indicators, scholars
have pointed out for decades that it is a potential tinder-box of the
middle-east. It is a dictatorship, and a multi-ethnic/multi-cultural country in
which significantly greater than half of the population was deprived of
political opportunities. It is
collapsing like some other countries (notably Yugoslavia, Iraq & even the
Soviet Union) have collapsed earlier. One of the common features in these
collapsed multi-ethnic states has been that they have not been politically
inclusive. Regardless of economic
welfare & equality, when a number of ethnicities/sects believe that they do
not have opportunities for equitable political representation (like one
–person-one vote), the stage seems to be set for failure of the nation-state.
Syria has been
on the path of almost every empire going from east to west (or vice-versa) for
two millennia. These empires extend in time from the Egyptian, Persian,
Macedonian, Roman, Byzantine, Abbasid, Ottoman, to the British-French &
USSR. Its location in the Levant makes
it important to the “south-eastern” edge of Europe across the Mediterranean. A
country on the travel path of empires was generally subjected to suffering in
the past. In modern times, Singapore
(smaller & less complex clearly), has used its location on the maritime
pathways to build itself into a prosperous country from 1962. Its success
highlights the importance of focus on development, equality among ethnicities
and a “win-win” approach overall. Mr.
Lee Kuan Yew’s autobiography highlights the challenges for small developing
countries located in strategic spaces & bereft of natural resources.
The multi-polar
region has four key players: Saudi Arabia, Iran, Turkey & Egypt, and a
fifth one if Israel is included. The
interests of these players do not seem to coincide, and may indeed
conflict. These rivalries draw in
external players who have interests in the region, or who come in to support
one or more of the regional players. After WWII multi-polarity & centuries
of conflict ended in Europe, and the system became bi-polar with a land
power(USSR) in balance with an overseas balancer(USA). The resultant stability
facilitated the development of W.Europe.
Multi-polarity seems to contribute to making a region more unstable and
conflict prone. The middle-east does not yet show structural stability, as seen
through the Liberalism & Realism lenses.
The thoughts of Kenneth Waltz or John Meirsheimer in their works are
illustrative.
The conflict
prone ASEAN region grasped the opportunities of regional (1977) & global
changes (1991), & evolved a regional vision of co-prosperity. They have
partially succeeded in developing co-operative institutions, despite countries
being at widely varying stages of development. By 2050 ASEAN can potentially
develop to collectively have the 3rd highest GDP in the world. (There are early signs of political
challenges in ASEAN now which may need to be managed). In contrast the region in which Syria lies
has not focused on co-prosperity and all round regional development, despite
receiving trillions of dollars from proceeds of oil sales. In a region with
many countries with high per capita incomes, Syria received about $12 per
capita in developmental aid in 2011.
The
inexplicable war of 2003, whose strategic rationale (if any) is unclear, has
been a driver & catalyzer of serious regional instability. Winning a war
seems to be much easier than winning the peace in a complex region. The
fledgling “Arab Spring” has been another seminal event whose prospective effect
on the region should not be underestimated.
Starting from late 1947 the European region (& occupied Germany)
made rapid progress, enabled by a vision of shared prosperity & security
and institutional arrangements (Marshall plan, NATO & European
communities). One of the features of the success of Mr. Yew (Singapore) and
Sultan Qaboos (Oman) has been their commitment to institutions of
governance. Despite 70 years of
independence Syria (like many developing countries) have not yet built adequate
institutions or have degraded them. The
thoughts of Daniel Acemoglu on the importance of institutions in his work in
“Why Nations Fail” are illustrative.
In 2008, President Obama came to office with the
expressed intention of not getting involved in overseas conflicts and gradually
pulling back from existing commitments. The reality now is different & the
chorus is growing within the region for increased commitment. The choices &
actions of leaders are dictated by imperatives, constraints & capabilities.
Intentions can change quickly, while capabilities change over the long-term.
These long-term imperatives are elaborated by George Friedman in his work in
“The Next Decade”.
An
underreported problem in Syria has been the impact of water (& food)
challenges. By 2030-2035, the global demand for water may exceed freshwater
supply by 40%. Brahma Chellaney in his work has highlighted the risk of
conflict driven by water shortages.
“Global warming” could thus lead to more instability in various parts of
the world, giving urgency to efforts related to climate change.
As businesses
face a “vuca” environment, countries face an anarchic (implying lack of
hierarchy) world. The observations of Ian Bremmer on this in “G-zero World” are
illustrative. The international system
is based on the Westphalia “sovereign-state” since ~1680 AD, and the break-down
of the nation-state system in the middle-east is one of the major changes
unfolding. Asia is celebrating the dawn of the Asian century in 2014, like
Europe in 1914. As Asia heads into the
2020s potentially serious political turmoil, despite economic growth, will test
its political leaders. It may be useful for its citizens to keep some of the
above lessons in mind.
About The Author:
Vivek Joshi (TR RID D-9706-2016) is
an Advisor to A-Joshi Strategy Consultants Pvt Ltd based in Mumbai, India. He has international experience in in various
sectors, and is an expert in Strategy, Innovation, Venture Capital, Knowledge
Management and General Management. Vivek
is an invited speaker and contributes to knowledge in Strategy, Venture
Capital, Economics, Challenges of the 21st Century and Geopolitics.
Cite This Article:
Joshi, Vivek "OPINION | Syria : Lessons for Asia" IndraStra Global 002 No: 03 (2016) 0025, http://www.indrastra.com/2016/03/OPINION-Syria-Lessons-for-Asia-002-03-2016-0025.html | ISSN 2381-3652
