The intra-competitive international environment: how lack of cohesion among international donors bolsters authoritarian survival

This work explores the critical role of cohesion among external actors and its consequent leverage in shaping domestic political outcomes in target countries, using Syria as a complex case study. The country has faced a harsh domestic confrontation between opposition forces and regime since the outbreak of mobilizations in 2011, descending into a civil conflict with international connotations in which various external actors have acted deliberately to change its trajectory. The external actors have mobilized on all fronts: those in favor of the regime on the one hand to maintain the status quo and allow it to survive vis-à-vis the domestic mobilizations; those in favor of different sections of the opposition, on the other hand, for a regime change with different connotations according to their specific interests. In this framework, it is necessary to look at how cohesion between external agents played a key role in the long run to add an explanatory element and unpack the process of regime survival. Hence, this study introduces a novel approach by expanding its application to include the “agency” factor to the study of international actors that exert influence on target countries. By redirecting attention from structural methodologies, such as the mere presence of external "linkages," to agency-based factors, such as cohesion and its "leverage" effect, this study emphasizes the strategic importance of cohesion among external sponsors in interfering in domestic political processes abroad. In the case under scrutiny, the importance of cohesive strategies could add an explanatory dimension regarding the regime survival that has been affected by the presence of external actors. In fact, both the regime and opposition groups received external backing aimed at shaping the political outcome in Syria after the outbreak of the 2011 mobilization. The analysis shows that the decisive factor in such confrontations is the strategic cohesion among external actors on the regime side, rather than different ideological or strategic alignment which eventually prompted this intra-competitive international environment on the opposition side. The present study adds to the ongoing discussions on authoritarianism by illustrating that autocratic governments do not consistently implement the same governance models abroad, thus highlighting the intricate and heterogenous approach of authoritarian states’ behavior in times of crisis (Von Soest, 2015). It also fosters a novel perspective that opens opportunities for future research, wherein various non-democratic entities compete to affect the domestic dynamics of regime survival or transformation in target countries, diverging from the traditional notion of an innate, normative conflict between democratic and authoritarian regimes.