This chapter explores whether the arguments in this book can extend to the third type of strategic displacement – depopulation – and not just forced relocation. To do so, it examines the use of displacement by pro-government forces during the civil war in Syria. This chapter analyzes quantitative and qualitative data from a range of sources, including media reports, human rights records, data on violence and displacement collected by nongovernmental organizations, and interviews with activists, journalists, combatants, and regime defectors that were conducted in Syria, Turkey, and Lebanon. The findings question the common characterization of state-induced displacement in Syria as ethno-sectarian cleansing and challenge the notion that these tactics have been intended solely, or even primarily, to achieve demographic change. The regime induced displacement to separate and differentiate the loyal from the disloyal, improve the “legibility” of local communities, and extract much-needed revenues, military recruits, and symbolic benefits from the population – showing that strategies of depopulation can also exhibit the sorting logic of strategic displacement, similar to strategies of forced relocation.

When we turned to Aleppo, we discovered a cityscape that was more complicated than those of Raqqa, Saraqeb, and Darayya. Its battle lines crisscrossed the city, continually shifting during our period of study, making each neighborhood its own unique nucleus in an atomized space. Aleppo is the oldest and second largest Syrian city. Known for its mercantile past and modern industrial present, the city had approximately 3 million residents before the conflict began. The first wave of protests began in 2011, and the city council came into being in March 2013 and was staffed by over 550 personnel by 2016.1

This chapter explores the foreign policy discourse of the old Anglosphere coalition during the first phase of the crisis and civil war in Syria, from early 2011 to mid 2012. First, the chapter considers the Anglosphere response to the Arab Uprisings, as protests spread to Syria. Second, it analyses the evolution of Anglosphere foreign policy discourse, as Assad’s crackdowns intensified. Third, it analyses calls for regime change and support for regional allies, amidst a policy of not intervening militarily. In all three cases, the USA is shown to lead, within a nevertheless intimately interconnected old Anglosphere coalition. This analysis sets the ground for shifting Anglosphere foreign policy from August 2012, as chemical weapons concerns rapidly overtook a policy of democracy promotion at a distance.