Conclusion: The Future of State–Society Relations

Summary

The undermining of ‘non-democratic’ systems of government does not necessarily lead to the rise of democratic ones. Similarly, the undermining of hierarchical state systems does not automatically lead to the rise of egalitarian systems. Systemic change depends upon institutional transformations. The military outcome of the conflict in Syria favours the Assad rule and the country's circumstances will inevitably evolve towards conflict abatement. As military contests transition towards low-intensity cycles of violence, the institutional ecology of war is likely to be increasingly formalised. Institutional arrangements after 2021 are a direct extension of what preceded them. In other words, the decline in the incidences of violence in Syria marks the end of open conflict but also indicates the continuation of war through other means.

Distinctions between periods of active armed conflict and post-conflict circumstances are premised on a presumed point of rupture or transition in patterns of conflict and violence. What could be commonly considered to be an imminent post-conflict phase in Syria is, in fact, characterised by patterns of continuity in relation to dynamics of war prior to military abatement. The question of whether any form of national unity will be restored is uncertain as militarisation can still manifest through geographically limited relapse to territorial contests, insurgency movements, expanded involvement of regionally active state-actors and military forces. What is certain, however, is that processes and efforts of power consolidation incentivise the avoidance of high-intensity cycles of violence and a relapse to open conflict, especially when resources and support run low. This encourages the formalisation of emergent hierarchies.

The Future of the State

Institutional transformations between 2011 and 2021 reveal a great deal about the role of the state going forward, specifically in relation to the public domain. The public functions of the state have been continuously undermined. This decline in public functions is in fact a decline in the regulatory functions of the state towards other domains – sometimes due to compromised regulatory capacity during conditions of war and sometimes by design on behalf of the ruling establishment. The public domain stands for the domain controlled by the state, but remaining at the general service of a given population.