STUDY GUIDE

XIV MundoCMPA

Tension in the Syrian Civil War: HTS’ rise to power

Yasmin Prá
Lucas Merotto
Mariana Chaves
 Table of contents
1. Letter of the Directors................................................................................................... 2
2. Introduction....................................................................................................................3
3. About the Committee.....................................................................................................4
4. Syrian Civil War............................................................................................................ 5
4.1. Historical Context..................................................................................................5
4.2. Overview of the Current Political and Military Situation.................................8
4.3. Current Humanitarian Crisis and Human Rights Violations......................... 10
4.4. Past Actions..........................................................................................................12
4.5. Key International and Regional Actors.............................................................13
5. Key Questions...............................................................................................................15
6. Bloc Positions................................................................................................................16
6.1. Algeria.................................................................................................................. 16
6.2. China.....................................................................................................................16
6.3. Denmark...............................................................................................................17
6.4. France................................................................................................................... 17
6.5. Greece................................................................................................................... 17
6.6. Guyana................................................................................................................. 18
6.7. Pakistan................................................................................................................ 18
6.8. Panama................................................................................................................. 18
6.9. Republic of Korea................................................................................................19
6.10. Russian Federation............................................................................................19
6.11. Sierra Leone....................................................................................................... 19
6.12. Slovenia...............................................................................................................20
6.13. Somalia............................................................................................................... 20
6.14. United Kingdom................................................................................................ 21
6.15. United States of America.................................................................................. 21
7. References..................................................................................................................... 21
1.​ Letter of the Directors
​ Dear delegates, please be welcome to the United Nations Security Council of the
XIV MUNDOCMPA. We - Merotto, Mariana and Yasmin - couldn’t be more thrilled to
meet you all and have you aboard our committee. We hope, from the bottom of our
hearts, that you have a wonderful time during the conference, and that our precious
Mundompa, as we like to call it, can bring just as much joy, excitement and growth
opportunities as it brought to us.
​ No matter where you come from or how many MUN conferences you’ve taken
part in, we will try our very best so this committee can become a safe space for everyone
to speak and be heard, developing their delegate skills to the fullest potential. What we
ask from you is that you throw out any shyness and anxiety you have out the window.
Whether this is your first or thirtieth MUN conference, please don’t be afraid to speak out
your mind, show off your preparation for this committee, ask questions, have fun and,
most of all, meet new people.
​ If there’s one thing we can tell you it’s this: your MUN friends can, and will, last
for life. The magic only this kind of environment can provide is fertile ground for so
many interactions, and that’s what we would like for everyone keep in mind throughout
the weekend, no matter how stressed you are are about your position paper, or about a
tough crisis, or about getting a final resolution ready on time, because trust us, we’ve all
been there. With that in mind, we wish you a good time reading this study guide and
preparing for the upcoming sessions, and don’t forget you can always send us a question -
pretty much about anything - whenever you feel like it.

Best regards,
Lucas, Mariana and Yasmin.
2.​ Introduction
More than a decade after the eruption of the Syrian Civil War, the country finds
itself at a critical crossroads. The unexpected fall of President Bashar al-Assad’s regime
in late 2024 marked the end of an era—yet not the end of Syria’s long and painful
conflict. In its aftermath, the Islamist faction Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) has taken the
reins of a fragile transitional government, pledging democratic reforms and the drafting
of a new constitution. However, far from stabilizing the nation, this power shift has
sparked renewed tensions, especially in the already volatile northwest, where HTS now
clashes with rival jihadist groups and remnants of the former military establishment.

The rise of HTS—a group once considered a terrorist organization by several

international actors—has ignited global concern. While some regional and international
powers cautiously explore diplomatic engagement, others remain skeptical of HTS’
legitimacy and intentions. Meanwhile, the humanitarian crisis deepens: tens of thousands
of Syrians are displaced, infrastructure is collapsing, and basic human rights are
increasingly under threat.

In this context, the United Nations Security Council faces a critical mandate. As
the principal body responsible for the maintenance of international peace and security, the
UNSC must navigate the delicate task of responding to a rapidly evolving political
landscape while upholding the values of sovereignty, human rights, and international law.
Delegates must deliberate on key actions: whether to recognize or engage with the
transitional government; how to foster dialogue between warring factions; what
conditions, if any, should guide the easing of sanctions; and how to ensure the protection
and support of civilians on the ground.

3.​ About the Committee

Under the Charter of the United Nations, the Security Council has primary
responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. It calls upon the
parties of a dispute to settle it by peaceful means and recommends methods of adjustment
or terms of settlement, although, in some cases, the Security Council can resort to
imposing sanctions or even authorize the use of force to do so.

Historically, the Security Council has used its power to authorize collective action
in a variety of situations, including deployments and peacekeeping missions. UN
missions approved by the Security Council are able to call upon UN member states to
provide resources, in the form of personnel (civilian or military), financial aid or
logistical support. Here are some of the main contributors to those initiatives:

Arguably, the defining aspect of the Security Council is its structure, which has
remained unchanged since 1945. The Security Council is made up of five permanent
members (United States of America, China, Russia, France and United Kingdom), in
addition to ten non-permanent members that serve two year terms. Each year, five of
these non-permanent members are elected with seats based on region and confirmed by
the General Assembly. These regions are Africa and Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin America
and the Caribbean States, and Western Europe and Other States respectively. The five
permanent members have the power to veto any resolution drafted by the Security
Council. At the time of the UN’s foundation, what were then the world’s most powerful
states were then created as permanent members, with only two revisions since 1945.
 4.​ Syrian Civil War

4.1.​ Historical Context

Syria’s current political crisis cannot be fully understood without examining its complex
historical backdrop, shaped by colonial legacies, authoritarian rule, and repeated internal and
external conflicts. Following its independence from French mandate control in 1946, Syria’s
early years were marked by instability, characterized by a succession of weak governments and
frequent military coups. This period ended in 1963 when the Ba'ath Party, a pan-Arab nationalist
movement, seized power through a military coup. The Ba'athists promised modernization and
unity, but quickly established an authoritarian regime marked by repression and political purges
(Seale, 1988).

The consolidation of power reached a turning point in 1970 when Hafez al-Assad, an
Alawite military officer, took control through a bloodless coup within the Ba'ath Party ranks,
initiating a dynastic rule that continues today. Hafez al-Assad’s regime was characterized by
strong centralization, suppression of dissent, and heavy reliance on the intelligence and security
apparatus. He skillfully balanced internal sectarian tensions—Alawites, Sunnis, Christians,
Kurds—while maintaining close ties with Soviet allies during the Cold War (Phillips, 2016). One
defining moment under his rule was the brutal suppression of the 1982 Hama uprising, where
thousands of Sunni Islamist rebels and civilians were killed to crush the Muslim Brotherhood
insurgency (Amnesty International, 2013). This legacy of ruthless repression created deep-rooted
grievances, particularly within the Sunni majority.

The Assad regime’s stability was shaken in 2000 when Hafez al-Assad died, and his son
Bashar al-Assad unexpectedly succeeded him. Initially viewed as a potential reformer due to his
Western education and relative youth, Bashar’s early years raised hopes for political
liberalization known as the “Damascus Spring.” However, these hopes were short-lived. The
regime quickly reverted to authoritarianism, intensifying surveillance, imprisoning dissidents,
and clamping down on any political opposition (Lund, 2013). The failure to implement
meaningful reforms amid growing socioeconomic disparities fueled public discontent.
 Before the 2011 uprising, Syria had already experienced significant military engagements
that shaped its current political and social fabric. These included the 1967 and 1973 wars with
Israel, resulting in territorial losses and ongoing hostilities over the Golan Heights. Syria’s
involvement in Lebanon’s civil war (1975–1990) and its occupation of parts of Lebanon further
entrenched its role as a regional power broker, while simultaneously drawing it into complex
sectarian conflicts (Picard, 2002). Syria’s foreign policy was a balancing act between supporting
militant groups like Hezbollah and maintaining alliances with both regional and global powers.

Delegates should focus on how these past wars and regional dynamics have affected internal
cohesion and Syria’s international relations, especially with neighboring Turkey, Israel, Iran, and
Saudi Arabia. The sectarian makeup of Syria, dominated by a Sunni majority ruled by an
Alawite elite, was exacerbated by these conflicts and regime policies, setting the stage for deep
polarization.

The eruption of the Arab Spring in 2011 catalyzed this latent dissatisfaction into open
revolt. The initial protests, demanding democratic reforms and greater freedoms, were met with
violent repression by the Bashar al-Assad government. Human Rights Watch documented
systematic abuses including arrests, torture, and extrajudicial killings targeting peaceful
demonstrators (HRW, 2011). This response radicalized parts of the opposition, contributing to
the transformation of protests into armed rebellion.

It is crucial for the United Nations Security Council to focus on how the Assad regime’s
historical patterns of repression and sectarian favoritism contributed to the breakdown of
peaceful political processes. Understanding this historical continuity helps explain the regime’s
persistence despite international condemnation and sanctions.

Furthermore, the historical context highlights the role of foreign actors, who have long
viewed Syria as a strategic asset. Russia’s intervention in support of the Assad regime, Iran’s
backing of militias, and Turkey’s opposition to Kurdish forces all have roots in Syria’s complex
history of alliances and enmities.

According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR, 2024), the
ongoing conflict has displaced over 13 million Syrians, with millions seeking refuge in
neighboring countries and Europe, creating a regional humanitarian crisis. This mass
displacement is directly tied to the failure of political solutions and ongoing military
campaigns—both aspects deeply intertwined with Syria’s historical trajectory.

In sum, delegates must appreciate that the Syrian crisis is not simply a product of recent
events but the culmination of decades of authoritarian rule, sectarian divisions, and regional
power struggles. It is pivotal for countries to examine and recognize how external influences
throughout history nowadays complicate peace efforts and exacerbate the conflict. Therefore,
effective resolutions require addressing these root causes while navigating the entrenched
geopolitical interests involved.

4.2.​ Overview of the Current Political and Military Situation

Since the outbreak of civil war in 2011, Syria’s political and military landscape has
evolved into one of the most complex and protracted conflicts in recent history. The Assad
regime, with crucial backing from Russia and Iran, continues to maintain control over major
population centers and much of the country’s western territory, including Damascus, Aleppo, and
the coastal region. However, the government’s hold remains precarious, as ongoing skirmishes
and insurgencies persist, particularly in the northwest and southern parts of the country.

The year 2024 marked a significant phase in the conflict, with shifting frontlines and
renewed international attention. One of the most consequential developments was the intensified
military campaign launched by the Syrian government, with Russian air support, aimed at
consolidating control over Idlib province—the last major rebel stronghold. Despite heavy
bombardments and ground offensives, opposition forces, primarily composed of Hay’at Tahrir
al-Sham and allied factions, managed to resist advances, utilizing guerrilla tactics and exploiting
the rugged terrain. This stalemate prolonged the humanitarian crisis, with renewed displacement
of tens of thousands of civilians caught in the crossfire.

Meanwhile, the northeastern region remained under the control of the Syrian Democratic
Forces (SDF), a Kurdish-led coalition supported by the United States. However, 2024 saw
increased Turkish military operations targeting Kurdish positions along the border, purportedly
aimed at countering what Ankara labels as terrorist groups affiliated with the Kurdistan Workers'
Party (PKK). These incursions complicated coordination between the SDF and international
forces, raising the risk of broader regional escalation. The Security Council’s attention to these
cross-border tensions is vital to prevent spillover into neighboring countries (Reuters, 2025).

Iranian-backed militias continued to play a pivotal role on the ground, reinforcing Assad’s
military campaigns and securing strategic corridors linking Syria with Lebanon and Iraq. These
militias, including Hezbollah, maintained their presence in southern Syria and around Damascus,
contributing to regime offensives against insurgent pockets. Their entrenchment has not only
sustained the regime militarily but also deepened Syria’s alignment with Iranian regional
ambitions, further complicating diplomatic efforts.

On the political front, 2024 saw a renewed but fragile push for negotiations under UN
auspices, aimed at reviving the stalled Geneva process. Despite some engagement from
opposition representatives and regime officials, fundamental disagreements over power-sharing,
constitutional reforms, and the role of foreign forces hindered meaningful progress. The
persistence of military hostilities alongside diplomatic efforts underscores the challenge of
achieving a lasting settlement (United Nations, 2025).

Economic conditions worsened drastically during 2024, exacerbating the conflict’s human
cost. Syria’s economy remains devastated by years of war, sanctions, and corruption, resulting in
hyperinflation and widespread poverty. Basic services such as electricity, healthcare, and
education are severely compromised, especially in contested regions. The United Nations Office
for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) reported that over 6.7 million people
remained internally displaced by the end of 2024, with millions more reliant on humanitarian aid.

The humanitarian situation was further aggravated by a series of natural disasters, including
flooding in northern Syria, which displaced additional populations and damaged critical
infrastructure. Access for aid organizations remained highly restricted, often impeded by ongoing
military operations and bureaucratic obstacles imposed by various factions.

Despite the Assad regime’s territorial gains, pockets of resistance continue to destabilize the
country. Armed insurgents in southern Syria, near the Golan Heights, carried out frequent attacks
against regime forces and allied militias. These attacks highlight the enduring fragility of the
government’s control and the continued volatility of the security situation (The New York Times,
2025).

In light of these developments, it is essential for the United Nations Security Council to
prioritize addressing the multi-layered military dynamics at play, particularly foreign
interventions and proxy conflicts, which fuel the persistence of violence. The fragmentation of
opposition forces, combined with regional rivalries, impedes efforts toward political
reconciliation. A comprehensive approach that integrates ceasefire enforcement, humanitarian
access, and inclusive political dialogue is indispensable to move toward sustainable peace.

4.3.​ Current Humanitarian Crisis and Human Rights Violations

The Syrian conflict has precipitated one of the most severe humanitarian crises of the
21st century, with consequences that extend far beyond the country’s borders. Over a decade of
continuous warfare, displacement, and economic collapse have devastated the civilian
population. According to the United Nations, more than 13 million Syrians have been forcibly
displaced, including over 6.7 million internally displaced within Syria and nearly 6 million
refugees spread across neighboring countries and beyond. This massive displacement strains the
resources of host countries, destabilizes the region, and poses a global challenge for
humanitarian and security frameworks.

The humanitarian needs inside Syria remain critical. Basic infrastructure—healthcare

facilities, water systems, schools—has been destroyed or severely damaged in many areas,
particularly in contested regions like Idlib, Aleppo, and eastern Ghouta. Access to essential
services is limited by ongoing violence, sieges, and bureaucratic restrictions imposed by various
armed groups and the Syrian government. Malnutrition, preventable diseases, and lack of clean
water continue to affect vulnerable populations, especially children. Humanitarian organizations
report that millions of Syrians live below the poverty line, with limited access to food, medicine,
and shelter.
 Compounding the crisis is the use of siege warfare and blockade tactics by multiple parties
in the conflict. Areas under opposition control have faced prolonged sieges, restricting the
movement of goods, people, and aid. These tactics have led to severe shortages of food and
medical supplies, further deepening civilian suffering. The United Nations has repeatedly called
for the lifting of sieges and unrestricted humanitarian access, yet compliance remains
inconsistent and often ignored by combatants.

Human rights violations have been a tragic hallmark of the Syrian conflict, committed by all
parties involved but predominantly by the Assad regime and its allied forces. Systematic attacks
on civilians, including barrel bombings, chemical weapons usage, and indiscriminate shelling,
have been well documented by international watchdogs and the UN Independent International
Commission of Inquiry on Syria. These violations constitute serious breaches of international
humanitarian law and may amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Chemical attacks have had a particularly chilling effect on the conflict. Despite international
prohibitions and multiple UN Security Council resolutions condemning their use, reports indicate
that the Syrian government has repeatedly deployed chemical agents against civilian populations
and opposition-held areas. These attacks have caused mass casualties and instilled widespread
fear, further eroding the prospects for peace and reconciliation.

Detentions, torture, and enforced disappearances remain rampant in government-controlled

areas. Human rights organizations have documented thousands of cases of arbitrary arrest and
detention of political opponents, activists, and civilians suspected of dissent. Prison conditions
are reportedly horrific, with detainees subjected to torture, starvation, and extrajudicial killings.
These practices have fueled cycles of fear and repression that extend well beyond the battlefield.

Opposition groups and extremist factions have also been responsible for human rights
abuses, including kidnappings, summary executions, and use of child soldiers. Such violations
undermine the moral legitimacy of opposition forces and complicate international efforts to
support a peaceful resolution. Civilians often find themselves caught between these competing
forces, with limited protection or recourse.
 Women and children bear a disproportionate share of the suffering. The breakdown of social
structures and prolonged conflict have increased risks of gender-based violence, exploitation, and
recruitment of children into armed groups. Education for millions of children has been disrupted,
threatening a lost generation and long-term destabilization of Syrian society.

The international community’s response, while substantial in humanitarian aid, has

struggled to keep pace with the scale of needs. Funding shortfalls, access restrictions, and
security risks hinder effective delivery of assistance. Cross-border aid deliveries remain
politically contentious, with some Security Council members opposing extensions of mandates
for operations into opposition-held areas, thereby limiting aid reach.

Given the scale and persistence of the crisis, it is vital for the Security Council to prioritize
humanitarian access and accountability mechanisms. Ensuring protection of civilians, monitoring
human rights abuses, and facilitating unhindered delivery of aid are essential steps. Without
addressing these humanitarian dimensions, political solutions risk collapsing under the weight of
ongoing suffering and instability.

4.4.​ Past Actions

Since the Syrian conflict erupted in 2011, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC)
has taken multiple steps to address the escalating crisis, though with limited success in halting
violence or achieving lasting peace. Early in the conflict, the Council issued several resolutions
condemning violence and calling for ceasefires, but these efforts were often undermined by
vetoes from permanent members with vested interests, notably Russia and China.

One of the earliest significant UNSC interventions was Resolution 2042, adopted in April
2012, which authorized the deployment of unarmed observers to monitor a ceasefire brokered
under the Annan peace plan. However, the ceasefire quickly collapsed amid renewed fighting.
Subsequently, Resolution 2043 established the United Nations Supervision Mission in Syria
(UNSMIS), yet this mission was suspended by mid-2012 due to escalating violence, highlighting
the limitations of traditional peacekeeping in the face of an active civil war.
 In 2013, following the widely reported use of chemical weapons in Ghouta, the Security
Council passed Resolution 2118. This resolution mandated the destruction of Syria’s chemical
weapons arsenal under international supervision, marking a rare moment of consensus. Despite
the symbolic importance, subsequent chemical attacks and ongoing violations signaled the
failure of this measure to deter the regime or halt the use of banned weapons.

The Council has also passed multiple resolutions addressing humanitarian access.
Resolution 2139 in 2014 demanded unrestricted aid delivery and cessation of sieges. Later
resolutions, such as 2165, authorized cross-border humanitarian assistance from Turkey into
opposition-held areas without Syrian government consent, an unprecedented move reflecting the
urgency of the crisis. However, these mandates have faced repeated renewals, political pushback,
and operational challenges, limiting their overall impact.

Efforts to impose targeted sanctions have been ongoing since 2011, focusing on key regime
figures, military officials, and entities linked to the conflict. These sanctions aim to pressure the
Assad government to engage in meaningful negotiations and cease hostilities. While sanctions
have affected the regime’s economic capacity, their effectiveness is debated, as they often
exacerbate humanitarian suffering and have not compelled political compromise.

Diplomatic initiatives, including the Geneva peace talks and the Astana process, have been
endorsed by the Council but largely remain stalled or fragmented due to fundamental
disagreements among stakeholders. The failure to implement resolutions related to ceasefires and
political transitions highlights the persistent deadlock within the Council and among Syrian
parties.

Despite these challenges, the UNSC’s involvement has established a framework for
monitoring, accountability, and aid delivery that remains critical. It is indispensable for the
Council to build on these past actions by pushing for stronger enforcement mechanisms,
supporting inclusive political dialogue, and ensuring protection for civilians.
 4.5.​ Key International and Regional Actors

The Syrian conflict is deeply shaped by the involvement of multiple international and
regional actors, whose interests, alliances, and interventions have profoundly influenced the
course of the war. Understanding these key players is essential for comprehending the
complexities faced by the Security Council in addressing the crisis.

Russia stands as the Assad regime’s most significant external backer, providing military,
diplomatic, and economic support since 2015. Its intervention has been decisive in reversing
rebel gains through airstrikes, intelligence, and ground coordination. Russia’s strategic interests
include maintaining influence in the Middle East, preserving its naval facility in Tartus, and
countering Western influence. Moscow’s permanent seat on the Security Council allows it to
shield the regime from punitive measures, often vetoing resolutions critical of Damascus.

Iran plays a similarly critical role, backing the Assad government through financial aid,
weapons supply, and deployment of allied militias, including Hezbollah fighters from Lebanon.
Iran’s involvement aims to secure a land corridor connecting Tehran to its proxies in Lebanon
and to bolster its regional influence. This alliance has transformed Syria into a proxy
battleground for broader Middle Eastern rivalries, complicating peace efforts and fueling
sectarian tensions.

Turkey, sharing a long border with Syria, has taken a multifaceted and often contradictory
role. It supports certain opposition groups and opposes Kurdish autonomy along its border,
which it associates with domestic security threats. Turkey has conducted military operations in
northern Syria to push back Kurdish-led forces and establish a buffer zone. Ankara also manages
the humanitarian impact of millions of Syrian refugees, adding another layer of complexity to its
involvement.

The United States has pursued a shifting policy, combining support for Kurdish-led forces
in the fight against ISIS with diplomatic pressure against the Assad regime. Washington’s
priorities include counterterrorism, containing Iranian influence, and advocating for a political
transition. Despite reduced military presence compared to previous years, the U.S. remains a key
player through sanctions, aid, and regional partnerships.
 Regional actors such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar have historically supported various
opposition factions, motivated by strategic competition with Iran and ideological alignments.
Their involvement has included financial and logistical backing, though both have reduced direct
engagement in recent years amid shifting regional dynamics.

On the ground, non-state actors like the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) and various rebel
groups continue to influence the military and political landscape. The SDF, predominantly
Kurdish-led, controls significant territory in northeastern Syria and has been a vital ally in
counter-ISIS operations, supported primarily by the U.S. Rebel groups are fragmented and vary
ideologically, ranging from moderate opposition to extremist factions, complicating any unified
negotiation framework.

The United Nations itself, including its agencies and peacekeeping missions, remains
engaged but constrained by political divisions within the Security Council and the challenging
security environment on the ground.

A clear grasp of these actors’ roles and motivations is indispensable for any meaningful
resolution effort. The Security Council must consider the delicate balance of power, competing
interests, and ongoing interventions while crafting strategies to stabilize Syria and foster political
dialogue.

5.​ Key Questions

5.1.​ Should the United Nations Security Council recognize or formally engage with
the HTS-led transitional government, and if so, under what political and
humanitarian conditions?
5.2.​ What mechanisms should the Security Council implement to ensure humanitarian
access, protect civilians, and prevent a renewed escalation of violence during
Syria’s fragile political transition?
5.3.​ How can the United Nations Security Council guarantee diverse (women,
different religions, regional groups) political participation in the Syrian transition
process?
 5.4.​ What are the impacts of the Syrian Civil War in other countries of the
international community, especially those receiving refugees? How should the
United Nations deal with these impacts?
5.5.​ How should the United Nations Security Council address the role and withdrawal
(or continued presence) of foreign military forces and militias in Syria to support
a stable, sovereign transition?
5.6.​ What accountability mechanisms can the Security Council create or strengthen to
investigate and prosecute war crimes and human rights violations committed by
all sides during the conflict?

6.​ Bloc Positions

6.1.​ Algeria
Algeria consistently defends Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, rooted in its
doctrine of non-interference. The Algerian delegate shall take a pragmatic stance, promoting
Security Council–coordinated humanitarian corridors and supporting UN cross-line aid convoys
to reach affected areas beyond government control. Algeria has participated in regional
diplomatic initiatives—such as the Arab League’s decision to readmit Syria in 2023—and
supports gradual normalization to stabilize governance and prevent extremist resurgence. It
emphasizes that engagement with the HTS-led transitional government must remain strictly
conditional on credible commitments to protect civilians, guarantee religious freedom, and
uphold national unity.

6.2.​ China
China frames Syria’s stabilization around reconstruction and economic recovery, viewing
these as tools to reduce radicalization and refugee flows. The Chinese delegate shall oppose
broad-based economic sanctions, arguing they deepen civilian suffering and hinder rebuilding
critical infrastructure like hospitals and water networks—projects Beijing has already helped
fund in government-held provinces. China supports a phased dialogue with the transitional
authorities, provided they firmly reject extremist ideology and commit to nationwide
reconciliation. At the same time, it insists the Security Council must reject external military
interventions and back Syrian-led solutions that respect sovereignty and territorial integrity.

6.3.​ Denmark
​ Denmark emphasizes accountability and strong human-rights conditionality. The Danish
delegate shall advocate for expanding EU restrictive measures (sanctions) targeting individuals
obstructing the political process, while fully backing the UN’s cross-border humanitarian
operations (e.g., via Bab al-Hawa). Denmark co-funded the International, Impartial and
Independent Mechanism (IIIM) to investigate war crimes and argues this tool should now be
strengthened to include recent abuses from all actors, including HTS forces. Copenhagen insists
that any diplomatic contact with the transitional authorities hinge on demonstrable democratic
reforms and robust civilian oversight, especially to protect religious and ethnic minorities.

6.4.​ France
France links political engagement to concrete counterterrorism measures and human
rights benchmarks. The French delegate shall push for maintaining sanctions under the EU
framework, specifically Council Regulation 36/2012, targeting chemical weapons use and
atrocities against civilians. France also backs extending the UN cross-border aid mandate and
increasing support to Syrian civil society groups facilitating local governance. While cautious
about recognition, Paris believes conditional dialogue with the HTS-led transitional government
could pressure them to dismantle jihadist networks, disarm extremist units, and commit to an
inclusive transitional roadmap drafted under UN supervision.

6.5.​ Greece
Greece combines humanitarian pragmatism with security concerns stemming from its
role on the EU’s external border. The Greek delegate shall advocate reinforcing funding to
UNHCR and WFP programs for Syrian refugees, alongside maintaining EU’s Common
Position 2001/931 on terrorist designations to limit extremist financing. Athens emphasizes the
need for maritime and border cooperation to prevent new refugee surges while arguing the
Security Council should condition engagement with the transitional government on credible
constitutional reform and protection of minorities, especially Christians. Greece also supports
reopening talks on safe, voluntary refugee returns under international supervision.

6.6.​ Guyana
Guyana emphasizes a robust humanitarian and multilateral approach to the Syrian crisis.
It advocates for Security Council–mandated ceasefires and expanded humanitarian corridors,
highlighting that over 70 percent of Syrians—especially women and children—are in need of
assistance amid rising displacement and conflict. Guyana underscores the necessity of
restoring Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, citing its consistent A3+ coalition stance
against external interference—such as Israeli airstrikes—while calling for adherence to
constitutional processes and the convening of the UN-sponsored Constitutional Committee.
Any engagement with the HTS-led transitional government, Guyana argues, must be conditional
on strict human-rights benchmarks, democratic oversight, and clear steps towards returning
displaced populations and reinstating civil services.

6.7.​ Pakistan
Pakistan maintains a posture of cautious neutrality, emphasizing the principles of state
sovereignty and non-intervention that have underpinned its foreign policy since the height of
Syria’s conflict. Pakistan supports a Syria-led transitional framework and inclusive dialogue but
resists premature legitimization of HTS without clear evidence of ideological moderation and
institutional reform. Islamabad warns that hasty recognition could embolden splinter jihadist
factions or fuel sectarian outbreaks, especially amid ongoing Israeli strikes in southern
Syria—actions Pakistan and several UN members have deemed violations of international law
requiring condemnation . Pakistan also underscores the importance of avoiding humanitarian and
economic fallout from overly aggressive sanctions or lack of access to aid.

6.8.​ Panama
As a regional middle power, Panama situates its position at the intersection of democracy,
human rights, and humanitarian accountability. It advocates for UN observer missions to
safeguard transparent constitutional processes and future elections, emphasizing protections for
minority communities—including Kurds, Alawites, Druze, and Christians—against reprisals.
Panama supports a phased, incentive-based lifting of sanctions linked to verifiable milestones:
press freedoms, minority rights, refugee repatriation, and transparent governance. While open to
engaging HTS as the de facto authority, Panama underscores that meaningful legitimacy stems
only from democratic endorsement, inclusivity, and institutional safeguards.

6.9.​ Republic of Korea

South Korea has taken a proactive, engagement-driven stance. On April 10, 2025, Seoul
formalized diplomatic ties with Syria’s transitional government—becoming, alongside Cuba, one
of the first to extend recognition—signaling an openness to reconstruction assistance and
economic reconciliation. Seoul aims to leverage its developmental expertise in infrastructure
rebuilding and humanitarian aid while insisting that reconstruction be contingent upon inclusive
governance, minority rights protections, counterterrorism vetting, and the elimination of
chemical weapons. South Korea frames its move as strategic diplomacy: diversifying
partnerships and reinforcing its global presence, especially as it is now diplomatically connected
with 190 of 191 UN member states.

6.10.​ Russian Federation

Russia maintains a pragmatic, stabilizing stance toward the HTS-led transitional
government, positioning itself as a guarantor of Syria’s territorial integrity and a key power
broker in constitutional negotiations. Moscow actively advocates for a gradual easing of
Western sanctions, arguing that economic engagement is essential for reconstruction and refugee
return—mirroring Washington and London’s proposals to use sanctions relief as leverage for
compliance with UN Resolution 2254. Russia emphasizes protecting minority communities and
ensuring foreign-state access to military and logistical infrastructure, reinforcing its long-term
strategic foothold in Syria.
 6.11.​ Sierra Leone
​ Sierra Leone, as an African country, has a strong background of colonialism, being a
colony of the British Empire till 1961. That way, the main point defended by the country
regarding the Syrian Civil War is a Syrian-led approach, always respecting the nation's right of
sovereignty. Also, the country tends to be very neutral in UN resolutions in general, following
the consensus and the position of the African Union members.
​ Finally, it is important to highlight that Sierra Leone actually hosted a peacekeeping
mission in its own country from 1999 to 2006. This mission was humanitarian, but also political,
helping the country establish new elections, an approach that may be also supported by the
nation within UNSC, due to its success.

6.12.​ Slovenia
​ As mentioned in a 2024 statement, Slovenia is deeply concerned about the scalition of
the Syrian conflict to other countries in the Middle East, a position that may result in efforts to
avoid involving new actors in the civil war. In sequence, Slovenia proposes three measures
regarding Syria. The first, to focus on political resolutions instead of military ones, with a
Syrian-led approach including the participation of women. Secondly, to provide humanitarian
support with “food, safe water, health, nutritional services and access to schools, as well as
protection of the vulnerable population, especially women and children” (Slovenia, 2024).
Finally, to guarantee refugees can voluntarily come back to their country, or at least define
measures to support host countries next to Syria, avoiding detention, torture, and forced
deportations

6.13.​ Somalia
​ Syria and Somalia established diplomatic relations in 1964, keeping them active till
present. Somalia, however, follows a very neutral position within the UN, prioritizing diplomatic
resolutions instead of interventionism, due to the country's colonial background.
​ In the committee, Somalia may bring the perspective of a host country for Syrian
refugees. Currently, the country welcomes an undefined number of immigrants (thousands).
However, the nation has many challenges to overcome internally, such as terrorism, humanitarian
crises and crime. Then, many questions arise about how the international community can support
Somalia and other host countries and how can the UNSC guarantee Syrians can go back to their
home country, a desire of many of them.

6.14.​ United Kingdom

​ Firstly, it is important to highlight that the United Kingdom was against the Bashar Al
Assad regime, due to systematic human rights abuses. So, when this government ended, in 2024,
the country identified an opportunity to guarantee a political transition in Syria. Unlike many UN
members, the United Kingdom actively engaged with HTS.
​ In the same month of Bashar Al Assad’s ousting, a British delegation visited Syria; a step
closer to having direct Western influence in the country’s recovery process. After the meeting,
the UK is reconsidering HTS’ description as a “terrorist group”, although it is still waiting for the
United Nations position on the matter. Finally, in the same period, the UK announced a 50
million euros humanitarian aid package for Syrians, to be delivered in partnership with UN and
national NGOs.

6.15.​ United States of America

​ The United States of America, together with the United Kingdom, has been one of the
leaders in the Syrian political transition. More than that, the country has strongly opposed the
previous regime since 2011, imposing financial sanctions, investing in paramilitary groups
against Al Assad, and directly deploying forces.​
​ In 2024, however, there was a shift in the position. The current president defends a
no-interference approach, proposing reducing the number of troops in Syria and letting the
country solve its issues internally. However, the US is still divided on whether to engage or not
with HTS. On June 25, the country signed an historic Executive Order, terminating the Syria
sanctions program and starting a process of reviewing HTS classification as a terrorist group.
 7.​ References
[Link]
f9552e36cf98296d6
[Link]
[Link]
[Link]
ngs-turkey-to-the-fore
[Link]
[Link]
[Link]
[Link]
[Link]
and-open-ended-instability
[Link]
ges-it-begins-post-assad-era
[Link]
a_en
[Link]
[Link]
[Link]
[Link]
ter-ousting-of-assad-13275406?utm_source=.com
[Link]
=.com
[Link]
or-the-revocation-of-syria-sanctions/
[Link]
on/
[Link]
ddle-east-footprint/
[Link]
chemical-weapons-