Talk:Syrian civil war

CHANGE MAP NOW

THIS MAP IS ABSOLUTELY OUTDATED. IT IS A STUPID MAP. MAYBE THE EDITORS STILL LIVE IN 2024. SYRIA'S NEW GOVERNEMNT HAS FULL CONTROL OF ALL OF SYRIA NOW. ONLY SOME MINOR CLASHES DONT CONSTITUTE A WAR. DitorWiki (talk) 16:04, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

WP:CAPSMUCH 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 16:21, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

First, the map is always going to be slightly out of date and inaccurate due to the need for reliable sources, willing map makers, and agreement between editors. The map as it is now is pretty fair, in my opinion, because it lists the factions as being members of the new government in the legend but gives the reader a sense of actual control. If we lumped in all the factions that are under the new government, then Rojava would be included and that wouldn't be an honest portrayal as they are have yet to integrate their governance structures. Also, it is useful to see where Turkish and US proxy forces still are as they are still rather autonomous.

Second, if you can find reliable sources saying the war has ended, you can make a new topic about the war being over, otherwise just see the above debate. I agree that the hot war is over, but WP:RECENTISM is a concern that is often brought up as well as the need for sources saying the war is over. Sir Ross ★▀▀ (talk) 13:53, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

But, the map is completely inaccurate. Their are some places in map shown as no control (not know). Thats wrong. DitorWiki (talk) 15:39, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

well get some sources that agree with your claims first 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 15:43, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Absolutely. DitorWiki (talk) 15:58, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

The up-to-date conflict maps are helpful for visualizing conflicts, but you have to remember that they will most likely be wrong in hindsight.

Also, the map kinda went through a serious upset when the Assad regime fell. The way the maps are made has a bunch of nodes representing locations that have their control determined by reliable sources for the Module:Syrian Civil War detailed map. This data is then used to generate the Template:Syrian_Civil_War_detailed_map which is used by editors to make the pretty maps.

The problem is that a town could be marked as under Assad control from 2 years ago and no reliable source specifically states that the new government took control of that one town, but we know that it isn't in Assad's hands; however, no media outlet is going to just list out every town and village that changed hands, so a lot of the nodes are assumed to have changed by editors. The issue with this is that we know a lot of Syria is not controlled by Assad, but no sources have stated who now controls the land, so it has to be marked as unknown until clarification is made.

If you can find sources that show who controls what in the "no control" areas, that would help the map makers immensely. Sir Ross ★▀▀ (talk) 14:16, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

But their are many sources which say that all arms are being integrated into the new syrian army. The Kurds signed the deal. The SNA, SFA are also integrating. Overall sources say that Sharaa controls Syria. So that means that all of syria is controlled by Sharaa except some pockets of ressistance by pro assad militias. DitorWiki (talk) 11:14, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

you did not link to a single one of them plus that has nothing to do with the end of the war 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 12:07, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

This, but also nominal control is not the same as actual control. For example, in the Somali Civil War the Jubaland and Puntland governments and armies are part of the Federal Government of Somalia, but in reality they are independently operating.

Whereas I agree with the sentiment, but if I recall correctly the Kurds have agreed to work towards integration and it is expected to take over a year; in the meantime, having them shown as entirely part of Sharaa's government would effectively be the map pushing a political narrative and not reality. It seems you want the map to show de jure control but it is trying to show de facto control. Sir Ross ★▀▀ (talk) 13:46, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Also i would have edited the map. But i dont know how to edit map. DitorWiki (talk) 11:16, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Split the article into phases?

Since the fall of the Assad regime, it seems the current phase of the civil war is distinct enough from the prior phase to warrant a split. Many other civil wars have been split as to make articles shorter and to present information that is relevant to the current state of the wars so that information about previous phases won't confuse the reader. Examples are Yemeni civil war (2014–present), Myanmar civil war (2021–present), Somali Civil War (2009–present), Sudanese civil war (2023–present), and M23 campaign (2022–present). I propose that a new article be made called Syrian civil war (2024-present) or Syrian civil war (2025-present) (depending on if we count the part of December or not). Alternatively, there could be an article for Syrian civil war (2011-2024), but that may give the impression that consensus says it ended. Sir Ross ★▀▀ (talk) 13:55, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

It cant be called a civil war now. Its just the Assadist Insurgency. DitorWiki (talk) 16:23, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

I'm not trying to open up another discussion about the civil war being over. Based off of the lack of consensus in the closed discussion at the top of the page, I am suggesting this assuming there is to be no change in the status of the war being "ongoing". If you want to reopen that debate, then make a new topic. Sir Ross ★▀▀ (talk) 14:59, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

I disagree with this proposal; Those articles that you've listed (not including the Somali civil war article) aren't placing those dates in a way to mark a second phase of those wars, but are instead disambiguating those articles from other articles about previous civil wars that share the same name 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 15:03, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

The status of Syria’s civil war MUST be updated

With major international outlets having reported the end of Syria’s civil war, it is honestly baffling how the article still hasn’t been updated, despite the fact that Wikipedia is supposed to be a website that reflects the most recent and accurate information.

Here are a few articles that have reported Syria’s civil war as ended:

Syria’s Jihadist-Turned-President Seeks New Allies - The New York Times

“The fear of renewed turmoil in Syria is shared by global powers as the country emerges from a nearly 14-year civil war that sent millions of refugees abroad and enters a new chapter under Mr. al-Shara’s Islamist government.”

“It remains unclear what role, if any, Russia will play in postwar Syria. But Mr. al-Shara said Moscow had supplied the Syrian military for decades, implying that his country may need Russia or other nations’ support again in the future.”

The article is also categorized under “Syria After Civil War”.

With Assad gone and Syria's war over, the White Helmets have a new mission - NPR

“Now, with Syria's civil war over, the White Helmets are taking on a new challenge: Their founder, Raed Saleh, has been appointed to Syria's Cabinet as minister of emergencies and disaster management, and the force he started 12 years ago is expanding its services — for the first time — to the entire country.”

U.S. Toughens Demands on Syria’s New Islamist-Led Leadership - The Wall Street Journal

“The guidance reflects skepticism among administration officials of Syria’s government, which is led by former rebel commanders who ousted President Bashar al-Assad from power in December, ending the country’s 13-year-long civil war.”

The reluctant collaborator: surviving Syria’s brutal civil war – and its aftermath - The Guardian

“When the forces of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), the Islamist group that led the overthrow of Bashar al-Assad’s regime, swept into Damascus at the end of the war, they found a city that looked old and exhausted, worn out by years of violence and crippling sanctions, its Ottoman and Mamluk architecture blackened by the fumes of rattling old cars and buses.”

Erdoğan lambasts Israel for undermining stability in Syria - The Guardian

“Assad’s overthrow marked the end of over 50 years of dictatorial rule by his family, as well as a halt to a decade-long civil war that became a frozen proxy conflict.”

Syrians have more freedom after Assad, but could they lose it? - BBC

"The interim government is running out of funds, security forces are overstretched, poverty is deepening and insurgency is brewing at the periphery. Outsiders are meddling. Western sanctions deprive leaders of what they need to rebuild, while preventing fragmentation or a return to civil war."

Israel and Turkey begin talks to avoid conflict in Syria - The Financial Times

“Turkey, which long-backed the Syrian opposition, became the main foreign power in Syria after Islamist rebels toppled the regime of Bashar al-Assad in December, ending more than a decade of civil war.”

UN development arm plans for $1.3 billion in help for Syria, top official says - Reuters

“Abdallah Dardari told Reuters in Damascus that investing in Syria - hit hard by 14 years of conflict that ended when former leader Bashar al-Assad was ousted by a rebel offensive in December and fled the country - was seen as a "global public good."

“Since former Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad was toppled last year after a nearly 14-year civil war, his successors have called on the international community to lift sanctions imposed against the country during his rule.”

Israel courts the Middle East’s minorities - The Economist

“Some minorities may see benefits in allying with Israel today. Syria is now ruled by a former al-Qaeda leader. A recent massacre of minority Alawites on the country’s coast has left them crying for protection. Many Syrian manual workers, who are destitute after the civil war, are aware they could earn many times more in Israel.”

‘I thought I’d died.’ How land mines are continuing to claim lives in post-Assad Syria - AP News

“While the nearly 14-year Syrian civil war came to an end with the fall of Bashar Assad on Dec. 8, war remnants continue to kill and maim.”

As per the above, I see no justification whatsoever to not mark the end of the Syrian Civil War. All of the sources I have cited are highly reliable and meet Wikipedia’s standards, such as the New York Times, NPR, The Wall Street Journal, The Guardian, BBC, Reuters, The Financial Times, The Economist, and AP News.

I must add that not only do highly reliable sources classify the civil war as being ended - but I haven’t been able to find any major independent outlets that suggest that Syria’s civil war is ongoing. With the agreement with the SDF, the halt of fighting on the Tishreen Dam, and Assad’s overthrow, it seems that the consensus is that Syria’s war is actually over. Meaninglesscharacter (talk) 17:41, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

I have amended the first para to read:

The Syrian civil war was a civil war in Syria that began with the Syrian Revolution in March 2011 when popular discontent with the Ba'athist regime ruled by Bashar al-Assad triggered large-scale protests and pro-democracy rallies across Syria, as part of the wider Arab Spring protests in the region. The Assad regime responded to protests with lethal force, sparking a civil war that culminated in the fall of the Assad regime in December 2024. All revolutionary factions united into the Syrian caretaker government by 12 March 2025, and large-scale fighting ceased.

this seems very basic and neutral to me; if there are issues, please raise thwem here first. Johnbod (talk) 18:32, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

@Johnbod I have reverted you as we've had a long discussion on this here. We'll have to have more people participate in this discussion first 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 18:41, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

Excuse me, but I cited a diverse range of top-tier news outlets that are all considered reliable by WP:RS with explicit and consistent reporting and an emerging global consensus. We are not here to debate reality or restart an old discussion, and I did not post my comment with the intention to start a debate on whether or not the Syrian civil war has ended, as that determination is now being made by multiple reliable sources, and not just editors. The previous discussion you are referring to was concluded due to the lack of a consensus and reliable sources at the time - which has changed, since most of the articles I have cited were published within the past few days, and they all reflect a shift in media reporting and an emerging consensus on the conclusion of the civil war. Wikipedia policy is to reflect what reliable sources say, and not preserve a previous consensus after it has clearly changed. If other editors want to weigh in, that’s fine, but it should be about source quality and verifiability, and not editorial opinion or individual comfort level. We don’t just ignore reliable sources and overwhelming evidence because an editor isn’t ready to accept them. Meaninglesscharacter (talk) 19:39, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

My wording "and large-scale fighting ceased" reflected the debate above, which was actually without a clear conclusion. Please DON'T edit-war on this! Johnbod (talk) 21:17, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

@Johnbod self revert now. You broke the 1RR. RfCs don't need that banner to be considered one, and this is not a WP:BUREAUCRACY. There is no consensus on calling this war over. 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 07:46, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Proper Rfc's are advertised to the wider community, which this was not. The discussion above was begun in March, so we have had a further 2 months without major fighting. Sources were demanded above, and have been produced in abundance. If we must have a proper Rfc to settle this, then we should, & see what the wider community think. Johnbod (talk) 04:33, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Many of us who believe the war is over have provided multiple very reliable sources. Would love to see any sources claiming the war is still ongoing? If you strongly believe this or if any one else does, this should not be a difficult task to complete. 47.211.79.210 (talk) 06:54, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

found some news that states or implies the end of "civil" war in syria:

Assad gone and Syria's war over, the White Helmets have a new mission - NPR

first wheat shipment since al-Assad ouster points to recovery - Al Jazeera

seeks to sever last Iran-linked networks for smuggling arms and cash - The Washington Post (13-year Syrian civil war)

FM meets YPG leader in Irbil to discuss Syria situation - Daily Sabah (now says Syrian crisis after the overthrown of Assad)

the rest... i dont find any mention of end of syrian civil war Foxy Husky (talk) 01:59, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

The war isn't declared over because fighting is ongoing. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/clywl4nz2zjo 2404:4408:8A0B:2100:7314:F43E:EA4B:ED8C (talk) 01:42, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

Only like 3 days ago, fighting resumed as a new Druze faction supported by Israel started fighting the syrian army [1] [2] [3] 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 05:27, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

I see your point, but the three sources do not enlist a timeline other than reporting violence “after the fall of Assad” of when these “Druze groups” began fighting the new government. if this would extend back to December, the arguement that it is part of the Syrian Civil War would appear more credible. If the formal hostilities began within the past month or two, this would be a conflict occurring after the conclusion of the civil war, a consequence of the civil war to be more accurate. For example, after the Tigray War concluded in 2022, Amharan regionalists began attacking the Ethiopian government over grievances from the war. But since the violence erupted after the war in Tigray concluded, this was a separarte conflict, and is documented as such. GNorman1987 (talk) 05:51, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

I read through the BBC article you posted. It mostly highlighted ethnic tensions and sporadic religious violence which does not constitute war. Virtually every country on Earth harbors religious extremists who lash out against other groups, but we do not label those outbursts as civil wars. Regardless, the article never concludes the civil war is continuing and even states “ …shows the potential for Syria to slide back into conflict” and “ For now at least, the violence has abated…” in regard to the situation, therefore even the BBC declares there’s no current and/or consistent violence. That’s my opinion on the article at least. GNorman1987 (talk) 05:32, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

The war is ongoing, the factions are not united.

There has been constant fighting between multiple groups since the new "government" supposedly united the nation. With the Kurds, Alawites and now the Druze. It is not correct to say all factions united in the lead when many factions are fighting. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/clywl4nz2zjo 2404:4408:8A0B:2100:7314:F43E:EA4B:ED8C (talk) 01:41, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

Split article

Considering the previous discussions on this topic, it's fair to say the war in Syria has taken a completely different character now. I would advise it because split into a 2011-2024 article and a 2025-present article on continued instability, like with the Iraq War and Libyan conflict articles Fantastic Mr. Fox 13:00, 4 May 2025 (UTC)