همپوشانی و تعارض منافع اعضای شورای امنیت ملل متحد در بحران سوریه (2023-2011)

The United Nations Security Council, as the pillar responsible for international peace and security, after more than a decade and until the beginning of 2023, has not yet managed to end the Syrian crisis or find a lasting solution to it, which has been on its agenda since 2011. In this regard, the performance of the Security Council has been clearly affected by internal and external factors; During this period, the Council, contrary to the existing organizational obstacles, including the conflict of interests of the permanent members, specifically on the one hand Russia and China and on the other hand the United States, England, France and other non-permanent members of the Council, has tried to use the means at its disposal, inter alia, issuing a resolution, to find a solution for this crisis. Nevertheless, the Council has not achieved comprehensive success in this regard. In this article, the main question is answered, why and how the Security Council failed to end this crisis due to the actions of its members? In order to answer this question, while examining the interests of the members of the Security Council in this crisis, the overlap and differences between these interests are evaluated.

Introduction

With the beginning of the unrest in Syria in 2011 and the intensification of this tense atmosphere and subsequently spreading its effects to the international environment, the UN Security Council put this situation on its agenda; After 12 years have passed since the beginning of this crisis, which is caused by political, economic and social challenges in Syria, the UN Security Council, as the pillar responsible for international peace and security, has not succeeded in finding a sustainable solution until the beginning of 2023. This situation has a direct relationship with the performance of the council, which has always been influenced by several factors, including internal and external factors. The purpose of this research is to explain how the differences of interests of the permanent members of the Security Council affect the end of the Syrian crisis.
2.Theoretical Framework
For analyizing the confilict of interests for termination of the Syrian crisis, two theoretical frameworks might be used which include realism and structrulism. In the realistic theoretical framework, the emphasis is on direct and concrete factors that lead to confilict of interests. The economic, political, and military characteristics of each member state, and the role of these factors are important in determining the concerns of the Council's negotiations in dealing with the Syrian crisis. On the other hand, the structuralist theoretical framework emphasizes the role of structure and the international system, especially the international security system as an organizational variable. This framework can help to examine the role of the international system in the formation of disputes and its effects on the decisions of the permanent members of the Council regarding the Syrian crisis. In the light of this framework, factors such as power structure, balance of interests, and power imbalance between members are discussed. In this article, an attempt is made to find interaction between these two frameworks in justifying and explaining more precisely the issue of conflict of interest and cooperation of the permanent members of the Security Council to solve the Syrian crisis.

3. Methodology

This research is a qualitative-quantitative type of research, in terms of purpose is fundamental-applicative and in terms of method is descriptive-analytical. In this research, the information has been prepared and analyzed using the library method and using the tools of books, articles, theses, reports of organizations and news.
4.Results & Discussion
Considering that the issue of the Syrian crisis is one of the most important international issues on the agenda of the UN Security Council, the decision on this issue is very complicated and may be delayed due to the conflict of interests among the members. This conflict of interest can still cause the failure of decision-making in the Security Council and as a result lead to the postponement of tasks and the increase of crisis in different regions of the world. In the case of Syria, there is a conflict of interests between the permanent members of the Security Council. The common thread of interests of the permanent members of the Security Council can be said to be the fight against terrorism; Although there is a common opinion in this field, the interpretations for the definition of terrorism by each one are different. Another area where interests overlap is the fight against chemical weapons in Syria; However, Russia, which until 2017 supported the draft resolutions on the condemnation of the use of chemical weapons, has since opposed the adoption of such drafts. Another area that shows the difference between the fronts in the council is related to the presence of Bashar al-Assad in the Syrian government structure; In this regard, until 2023, although the importance of this issue has decreased in the years leading up to 2023, Russia and China, on the one hand, want to keep Bashar al-Assad in power, and on the other hand, the Western bloc has demanded the removal of Assad. Another issue on which the Western bloc has agreed with each other is the referral of the situation in Syria to the International Criminal Court, but the draft containing this idea was vetoed. The last area in which at least two members of the Security Council, Britain and France, have a common interest is related to curbing the refugee crisis, prioritizing the human rights situation and justifying their legitimacy to be in the Security Council as permanent members. Finally, it can be said that each of these members has interests that they pursue unilaterally; The United States wants to protect Israel's security and interests; In this case, China has two main goals, including strengthening relations with Russia and maintaining the stability of the Middle East market; Russia, by being active in this case, pursues several goals, among which we can point out the international deisolation, strengthening military superiority in the region, testing and selling weapons, and maintaining the integrity of Syria. These interests have caused a demarcation between the members of the council, after which the conflict of interests between them can be analyzed in various issues.
5.Conclusions & Suggestions
In the end, it should be emphasized that in order to overcome this conflict between interests, it is necessary for all the members of the Security Council to take responsibility for the general international interests. In order to reach a compatible and efficient solution to the Syrian crisis, it is necessary for all members of the Security Council to act in such a way that the general interests of the international community are also provided. The lack of agreement among the council members about Syria shows the conflict between their interests in various issues; Of course, a basic question that needs to be answered in the framework of other researches is whether the members of the Security Council in the world of political realities see their interests in ending or continuing the Syrian crisis? However, it is necessary that the members of the Council cooperate with each other and try to reach a compatible and efficient agreement to end the Syrian crisis with their different views