Syria Roundtable at Dutch Parliament: Syriac Organizations Debate Self-Determination and Federalism in Syria’s Future Political Landscape 

THE HAGUE — The Second Chamber (Tweede Kamer) of the Dutch Parliament held a roundtable discussion on March 5 to gather information about the situation in Syria. Representatives of smaller population groups were invited to share their perspectives on the country’s current political, economic, and social landscape, which has been severely affected by years of civil war. The discussion was initiated by Syriac MP Isa Kahraman of New Social Contract (Nieuw Sociaal Contract, NSC), a member of the standing committee of the House of Representatives for Foreign Trade and Development Aid. Delegates from the GroenLinks-PvdA, ChristenUnie, and D66 also participated.

In the first round of discussions, representatives of the Syriac, Kurdish, and Alawite communities presented their views. The second round included insights from NRC journalist Melvyn Ingleby, former Dutch Ambassador and Special Envoy for Syria Koos van Dam and Syria researcher Carla Boulos.

Full Recognition of People and Language

The World Council of Arameans (Syriacs), represented by its president Johny Messo, presented a position paper containing policy recommendations for the future of Syria. Messo emphasized the importance of constitutional recognition for the Aramean (Syriac) people and their language to ensure their inclusion in the new Syria. He highlighted the need to protect smaller population groups in the constitution, establish an inclusive and non-sectarian government, and implement effective reconstruction plans to enable displaced Arameans (Syriacs) to return to their homes. Cities with significant Syriac populations, such as Beth Zalin (Qamishli), Malula (Maaloula), and Sadad, were specifically mentioned as areas requiring attention. Additionally, Messo stressed the importance of providing Syriacs in the diaspora with opportunities to participate in governance and elections.

Sanharib Mirza, representing the Assyrian Democratic Organization (ADO), which has been in opposition for a decade, echoed the need to fully guarantee the rights of Syria’s Suryoye-Assyrian population in the new constitution. Mirza expressed disappointment with the Syrian National Dialogue Conference held in late February, stating that while two ADO delegates attended, the final statement appeared predetermined and did not adequately consider or include the Suryoye-Assyrian perspective.

Metin Rhawi of the European Syriac Union (ESU) addressed the issue of terminology, noting that the terms Assyrian, Chaldean, and Syriac refer to the same people, despite differences of opinion regarding their preferred designation. Rhawi highlighted the historical roots of the Christian Syriac people, tracing their ancestry to ancient Mesopotamian civilizations such as the Akkadian, Babylonian, Assyrian, Chaldean, and Aramean cultures. He emphasized their longstanding presence in Syria, predating modern political entities. The ESU called for the full political inclusion and equal rights of Christian Syriac groups, along with official recognition as a distinct people and language. Rhawi also advocated for the inclusion of Christian Syriac representatives in the Syrian Transitional Government and the active participation of the Syriac Union Party (SUP) and other Christian political organizations in governance.

All three representatives stressed the urgent need for the Netherlands to play a stronger role internationally to prevent Syria from further sliding into extreme Islamism.

Federal Syria: Differing Views

Regarding the shape of governance in Syria, Mirza expressed his support for a decentralized form of public administration as a viable option for Syria. Mirza stated that his party recognizes the benefits of administrative decentralization, as it respects and accommodates differences at the local level. However, he clarified that the ADO does not support full autonomy:  

“We [ADO] have long been in favor of decentralized administration. That was and is a demand of ours. Think for example of North-East Syria and the south, which are currently de facto self-administrations. They regulate everything themselves. We also want to have that laid down in the new constitution, that it is possible … so that different areas can form their own government, as is now also the case in North-East Syria. We would also like the support of your parliament and country for that.”

The World Council of Arameans (Syriacs), on the other hand, emphasized in its position paper that the future of Syria should involve a “unified, inclusive, and sovereign government that preserves Syria’s territorial integrity.” The organization did not advocate for a federal system based on geographic, ethnic, or cultural divisions. While federalism has gained attention as a potential solution for Syria — given its ability to reflect the country’s religious, ethnic, and cultural diversity — the WCA(S) firmly supports a centralized governance structure that ensures national unity.

When NSC MP Diederik Boomsa asked whether regional autonomy would be preferable or if inclusion within a centralized governance structure in the new constitution would suffice, WCA(S) President Johny Messo responded:

“Of course, it would be very nice if we can create an autonomous area for certain groups, with the consent also of the central administration in Damascus. We are already seeing since 2012, for example, what a certain group of the Kurds is doing, which is creating an autonomous area. You see now since a few weeks a similar development in the south of Syria where the Druze live, who have the support of Israel. There are also a lot of thoughts among the Christians in Wadi Nasara (Valley of Christians), there is also talk of autonomy there.” 

“But of course that’s all very sensitive … we can start putting many things out there but if that has negative effects on our Aramean population there [as it was before under the Ba’ath regime] then you have to think carefully about what you say and how you convey it.” 

“Now, there is a new situation that brings new opportunities for everyone in Syria. We can create a new Syria together with the majorities and the minorities. A Syria that guarantees the security of all … If protection can be given to minorities under international supervision, then of course we could live with that [i.e. an autonomous structure]. But the question is who can give us that protection?” 

The ESU emphasizes the importance of security and protection within its own ranks. It argues that Christian Syriacs must organize politically and safeguard their communities to counter extremist threats and ensure long-term stability. The organization highlights the Syriac Military Council (Mawtbo Fulḥoyo Suryoyo, MFS) within the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) as a model of effective self-defense and governance. The ESU asserts that “if such a structure is feasible in one-third of Syria, it is possible throughout the entire country.”

In response to our questions via WhatsApp, Metin Rhawi stated that DAARNES could serve as an example of a decentralized model for a new Syria. For the smaller yet indigenous Syriac population, DAARNES has largely met their expectations for self-determination, despite the significant challenges posed by the civil war. Linguistically and educationally, Syriacs have been able to establish their own schools with a self-determined Syriac curriculum. Culturally, they have the freedom to celebrate their own holidays and commemorations. Additionally, there has been an opportunity to implement some form of self-governance in areas where Syriacs (Arameans–Assyrians–Chaldeans) form the majority.

According to Rhawi, the exact form of decentralization should be decided by the people of Syria and could be based on cantons, regions, languages, or sects. However, the ESU underscores the importance of ensuring that all population groups are treated equitably. Rhawi stressed the need to avoid a situation like Iraq’s, where the federal constitution has effectively benefited only Kurds and Arabs, leaving other groups marginalized.