Quest for civil administration in Idlib
The birth of local councils in Syria and İdlib
When the conflic process, which started right after the revolutionary demonstration, reached it’s peak in 2012 it was realized that the root of problems were not military. The real source of problem was lack of governmental tolls in the regions which were seized from Assad regime.
After the opposition forces seized many cities including Aleppo and Homs, they faced the problem of protecting and regulating the public sphere and local services (because of the very fragmented situation among the opposing forces.)
The process that the revolutionaries were going through paved the way for local coordination committees which were against the Assad regime. These committees were initially responsible for media works and medical response than they turned into local councils.(1)

These organizations were declared successively and spread around in the form councils until the opponents faced the ISIS problem. In one sense, these organizations, taking on the obligation to discharge public services as regional administrative councils, were seen as rival by anti-regime armed opposition groups that occasionally acquired military sovereignty.
Formations that emerged as media committees during the protests in 2011 (2) and then turned into coordination committees in areas, where the regime attacks began to spread in Aleppo, Homs, Deraa and Hama. (3) While 14 regional committees were found in early 2012, approximately 405 local assemblies, including Raqqa and Suwayda, were trying satisfy a need local services in April 2014.
In March 2015, İdlib province was transformed into a region where local councils and Syrian military opposition were serving intensively. Following the capture of Idlib from Assad’s regime, 156 local councils were established throughout the province. 9% were urban councils, 30% were district councils and 61% were municipal councils.(4)

Unfortunately, despite its physical integrity in terms of Syrian opposition Idlib province maintained a very fragmented situation in terms of military and civilian. This split between the opposition forces also led to problems in terms of military and political representation in the international system.
Undoubtedly, in this case, the military groups had also have influence on the local councils and they are still effective. Because if you had military sovereignty over those who know urban life in the Idlib region you would have to meet social needs at the same time. Thus, civilian areas as well as military areas also implied a total rebel area, but they could not form an integrity in its essence and caused a fragmentation like the feudal period of the Europe.
When all this confusing fragmentation is examined, there were some obstacles on the establishment of integrity of civilian administrations: First, it can be said that the text of an integrated contract, that is, lack of common law. Second, even if a compromise text for civilian administrations is realized, the struggle of between military groups is one of the biggest obstacles to a central civilian administration to be established from local assemblies.
Possibility of centralized civilian administration in opposition areas
Opponents were stalemated into north of Lattakia, Idlib province, West Aleppo and North Hama, in the north of Syria, the main area of the revolution.(5) Because of the general anxiety that emanates from the failure of military solutions, the problems were grounded on the separation between armed groups. This social terrain led to proliferation idea of “necessity of merger”. However, the initiatives in the Aleppo siege process were a bad experience for this idea.
In this way, the siege and evacuation in Aleppo pushed the residents of Idlib region and their groups into a new debate, due to the war that lasted six years. The idea of a military union spread in opposition areas has begun to feel itself in civilian space with the effect of recent developments.
With the recent internal conflicts Tahrir Al-Sham took over military superiority. After the agreement with Ahrar Al Sham, the civil administration claim waw put forward by Tahrir Al Sham and interpreted in various forms.
Western-based comments: Jabhat Fateh Sham from the Hayyat Tahrir Al Sham components was founded on the ancient Nusra Front. For this reason, Western-based commentaries have treated Tahrir Al Sham’s civil administration claim as an emirate claim.
Syrian-based comments: While the Western-backed theses are partly supported, the majority of Syrians are pleased with the idea of civilian government, hoping that the cities of Assad and Russia will stop the bombing.
Comments based on Iraqi experience: Unlike Western-centred thesis, although they consider the situation as a path to emirate, they resemble developments that destroy common combat conditions in Iraq. Commentators on Iraqi experience, compares Tahrir Al-Sham’s civilian administration claim with that of the Mujahedeen Shura Council in Iraq.
Despite all the handicaps, the first semi-official statement was made by Tahrir Al Sham leader Abu Jabir two days ago. (6) Abu Jabir said that were ready to cancellation themselves if all the groups in the northern part of Syria agreed to join the unity army under a supreme headquarters.
Abu Jabir requested that the three basic conditions for merger and cancellation be fulfilled. Abu Jabir’s terms; a) All the armed groups will be withdrawn from the settlements b) Settlements will be left entirely to local civilian administrations (without armed group members) c) The police will provide security with power.
-Conclusion
In sum, the situation in Idlib, opposition led to the idea of the necessity of unification for an ideological and military integrity. Nevertheless, it has been seen many times that the existing reality and the proposed ideological thesis do not match.
In addition to financial and physical inadequacies, the lack of a compromise of consensus for the centralization of local assemblies that will lead to civil administration in Idlib is one of the problems facing oppositions.
Of course, it is not enough to just overcome the financial and physical obstacles in front of the local councils. The fact that the armed opposition exists as a legislator, law enforcement officer and judge in civilian areas is also a separate issue.
As a result, for possible solutions to civilian administration, oppositions must initiate a compromising debate process under minimum conditions and reach a military-politically co-operative text.
Footnotes
[1] Local Administration Structures in opposition-held areas in Syria, Research Report April 2014
[2] http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/01/world/middleeast/01syria.html?_r=2&pagewanted=all
[3] Local Administration Structures in opposition-held areas in Syria, Research Report April 2014
[4] The Role of Jihadi Movements in Syrian Local Governance, p.2, Omran for Strategic Studies, Ayman Al Dassouky, July 14, 2017,
[5] Syria latest situation map: http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/suriyede-son-durum_163391#8/35.967/38.826
