Talk:Federalization of Syria

Untitled

@Zoupan: Why did you remove the sources? Partition of Syria is definitely a consequence of the ongoing civil war.--Opdire657 (talk) 23:05, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

@Opdire657: I have not removed any sources, I moved a citation to external links. All sources, added earlier by me, supports the lead. It is unnecessary to remove facts and then add a cite to that sentence, and then edit war (you). As I explained, The war is ongoing, and the partition is not a factual consequence. Isn't it quite clear that the definition of the word "consequence" is wrong in this respect?--Zoupan 23:13, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

@Zoupan: Yes, you did remove the sources. The source I provided should be in the references section not with external links. Both the Syrian government and the opposition are against the partition of Syria, so it is a consequence and not part of the war itself.--Opdire657 (talk) 23:17, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

No. I have now added all sources that were there before your edits to the first sentence, as you wanted (despite WP:BLUE). The Syrian government (Assad) does not rule it out. Kurds support it. For it to be a consequence (please read the definition of the word), it has to be factual. It is a idea or scenario (please read the definition of these words as well). --Zoupan 14:54, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Some suggestions

I believe the 1922 French Mandate map could be applicable to the page. It's here; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:French_Mandate_for_Syria_and_the_Lebanon_map_en.svg

Also I know that I've read on several occasions that partition is the perceived outcome of the Israeli government. I'll post 'em here if and when I run across them again. Doyna Yar (talk) 16:10, 20 March 2016 (UTC) Found it here http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-israel-idUSKCN0VN0C2 also this from CIA Chief Brennan http://edition.cnn.com/2016/09/07/politics/cia-brennan-syria-iraq-terrorism/ Doyna Yar (talk) 15:57, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Don't see the map applicable. A link to French Mandate for Syria and the Lebanon in external links could be added though.--Zoupan 16:16, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Ara News

Ara News is a propaganda tool and is not a reliable source of information. Any info added with this ref needs to be reevaluated as unworthy of inclusion in Wikipedia. Constellation2023 (talk) 07:54, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

This is nonsense. ARA News is considered a highly accurate/reliable source in factual reporting by independent monitors. -- 2A1ZA (talk) 10:27, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Badly out of date

Given that Rojava is already at its third decentalised constitution (2014; 2016; 2023), and that all three versions see Rojava as part of Syria, this article has now become extremely out-of-date: federalisation is a reality in a major part of Syria. We don't know what the results of negotiations between the central government, the Suwaida region and Rojava will be, but some sort of federalism is clearly one of the things being negotiated. US and Turkish attempts to prevent internal Syrian democracy are attracting media attention but are only one component of the overall sociopolitical process - which needs to be properly sourced, of course. Boud (talk) 05:19, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Updated  Done. Boud (talk) 20:09, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

References

Historical antecedents - off-topic?

I don't understand the relevance of the Historical antecedents section. It seemed to be part of the thesis that federalisation in reality means splitting up into independent states rather than splitting into areas that have quite a bit of independence from one another but still closely coordinate. But under the French mandate, there was a colonial manager of the various regions - while federation means that groups accept to lose some of their autonomy by cooperating with one another, not by accepting an overlord to tell the groups how to cooperate with one another. Divide and conquer is quite the opposite of federation. Do we have any sources saying that these regions coordinated horizontally as a de facto federation, more or less independently of the French administration?

Also, jumping from the 1930s/1940s to the 2010s and 2020s is a big historical leap that also leaves out the huge geopolitical mess of the Sykes–Picot Agreement and its century of aftermath.

I propose to remove the Historical antecedents section. Any objections? Boud (talk) 20:22, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

Looking at the map, I admit that apart from Lebanon, the way that things are evolving looks as though a federalised Syria might actually rather resemble the French mandate map, with a significantly reduced Aleppo/Rojava region and an expanded Damascus region. But that feels like WP:OR + WP:CRYSTAL, which do not justify keeping the section. Boud (talk) 20:28, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

Since the possible federalisation seems likely to rather resemble the French mandate map - where the French State of Aleppo would very roughly correspond to the current officially tri-lingual DAANES (Arabic + Kurdish (Kurmanji) + Syriac), the Alawite State, Jabal al-Druze State, and State of Damascus would correspond to central/west Syria, Suwayda, and the al-Sharaa government (apparently officially mono-lingual Arabic-only now), respectively, and Lebanon would remain separate, this does seem valid in this article. I shifted it earlier to make it more of a "background" section. Boud (talk) 21:18, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

References