Migrating authoritarianism

Early in 2011 thousands of Syrians took to the streets to demand change and dignity from the authoritarian Syrian regime. The regime responded harshly and soon a bloody conflict took hold of large parts of the country. Millions of Syrians fled the violence and sought refuge in neighbouring countries like Lebanon and Turkey. There they struggle to sustain meaningful lives, while they wait to return to Syria or to find another viable path.

Based on 14 months of ethnographic fieldwork conducted in 2014 and 2015, the thesis “Migrating authoritarianism” investigates how Syrian authoritarianism, understood as both a form of government and a corresponding set of political logics among citizens, migrates, stands reproduced but is also reshaped among Syrians, who now live in refuge in Lebanon and Turkey. The thesis thus conceptualises authoritarianism as a specific kind of state-citizen relationship and examines how this relationship is reworked as Syrians migrate to neighbouring countries.

The thesis shows that while Syrians in both Lebanon and Turkey are still to a large extent living within a shared political matrix in which Syrian authoritarianism is a vector in their lives, the routes through which Syrians migrate can significantly alter the shape of authoritarianism. While Syrian authoritarianism still structures social relationships among Syrians in Lebanon, Syrians in Turkey are more free to refashion themselves as political actors in relation to Syria. This argument contributes to debates on authoritarianism and the constitution of the state the notion that authoritarianism and the state are partially (re-)constituted by the diverse political terrains through which state-citizen relationships migrate.

The thesis moreover argues that Syrian authoritarianism is reproduced also as a political logic among Syrian citizens in Lebanon and Turkey that posit the authoritarian regime and its apparatus of state as legitimate and/or a model for proper statecraft. These perceptions of the regime are founded in and simultaneously foundational of specific conceptualisations of the ‘good’ life. The thesis examines how the sense that the regime was instrumental in delivering forms of life that were desirable especially because they allowed Syrians to forge themselves as responsible family members makes intelligible both persistent perceptions of the regime as legitimate and the doubts some Syrians experience about their support for the uprising.

I begyndelsen af 2011 gik tusindvis af syrere på gaden for at kræve, at det autoritære syriske regime skabte forandring og sikrede borgerne værdighed. Regimet slog hårdt ned på demonstranterne og opstanden forvandlede sig snart til en blodig konflikt, som sendte millioner af syrere på flugt ud af landet. Mange rejste til Libanon eller Tyrkiet, hvor de kæmper for at opretholde et meningsfuldt liv, mens de venter på at vende hjem til Syrien eller finde en anden farbar vej.

Baseret på 14 måneders etnografisk feltarbejde i 2014-2015 undersøger afhandlingen ”Migrating authoritarianism”, hvordan syrisk autoritarisme, forstået som både en styreform og et sæt korresponderende politiske logikker blandt borgerne, migrerer, reproduceres blandt og også omformes af syrere, som nu lever i Libanon og Tyrkiet. Afhandlingen definerer således autoritarisme som et særligt forhold mellem staten og borgerne og undersøger hvordan det forhold omformes, når syrere migrerer til nabolande.

Afhandlingen viser, at syrere i både Libanon og Tyrkiet fortsat lever i et fælles politisk matrix, hvori syrisk autoritarisme er en vektor i deres liv. Samtidig omformer de specifikke politiske terræner, syrere bevæger sig igennem, forholdet mellem stat og borgere i betydelig grad. Mens syrisk autoritarisme stadig strukturerer sociale relationer mellem syrere i Libanon, er syrere i Tyrkiet langt mere frit stillet til at genpositionere sig selv socialt og som politiske aktører. Afhandlingen bidrager til debatter om både autoritarisme og stat-borger forhold ved at vise, at begge dele delvist formes af de politiske terræner borgerne bevæger sig igennem.

Derudover argumenterer afhandlingen for, at syrisk autoritarisme også reproduceres som en politisk logik blandt syriske borgere i Libanon og Tyrkiet, som opfatter regimet i Syrien og dets statsapparat som legitimt og/eller som en model for hensigtsmæssig statsførelse. Disse forståelser af regimet er funderet i og samtidig grundlæggende for specifikke opfattelser af ’det gode liv’. Afhandlingen undersøger, hvordan ideen om, at regimet var instrumentelt især i forhold til at muliggøre liv, hvor den enkelte kunne forme sig selv som et ansvarligt familiemedlem, hjælper os til at forstå både opfattelsen af regimet som legitimt og den tvivl nogle syrere føler angående deres støtte til oprøret.