Abstract
This dissertation investigates the central question: Why did the Syrian negotiations between 2014 and 2018 fail to produce a meaningful political settlement? It examines the complex interplay of factors that shaped these negotiations, including the influence of international actors, the dynamics of military factions, and the difficulties faced by the Syrian opposition in maintaining unity and coherent strategies.
To explore this question, the research adopts a mixed-methods approach, combining qualitative analysis of primary documents, in-depth interviews with negotiation stakeholders, and theoretical insights from conflict resolution literature. A dedicated section examines strategic decision-making, drawing on the researcher’s direct engagement with both conflict parties and participation in the negotiation processes.
The findings suggest that the negotiations faltered due to a lack of sustained political will, disunity within the opposition—especially among military factions—and the Syrian regime’s reliance on zero-sum approaches. Despite these challenges, the study identifies potential avenues for constructive compromise, emphasizing the importance of external mediation, internal cohesion, and adaptive negotiation strategies in enhancing the prospects for agreement.
By drawing on qualitative evidence from stakeholder interviews and primary document analysis alongside theoretical perspectives, the dissertation aims to contribute to international relations and conflict resolution scholarship by offering a framework for understanding negotiation dynamics and suggesting insights that may help improve outcomes in similarly complex political conflicts.