Op-Ed: Civil peace and transitional justice intertwined paths in Syria

A bloody page in Syria’s history was turned with the overthrow of the Assad regime on December 8, 2024, but real peace remains elusive. 

The war ended, yes, but its traces are still visible in corners of the country: in broken souls and destroyed cities, in bodies exhausted by detention and torture, in a collective memory heavy with violations and tragedies. 

As Syrians—government and people—try to rebuild what has been destroyed, a central question rises to the surface: How can Syria move from a state of “no war” to a real and lasting peace?

With the end of the war, Syrians face a new struggle—no less fierce or dangerous for the country—with the aftermath of 14 years of armed conflict, widespread and horrific human rights violations and the legacy of a repressive regime that ruled for more than half a century. All this is happening under threat of foreign interference, partition and a suffocating economic crisis. 

Facing this struggle requires restoring stability and halting the violence, while dealing with complex grievances, seeking accountability for past atrocities and promoting reconciliation among a deeply divided population. Civil peace and transitional justice are two crucial—but not identical—frameworks for doing so.

Transitional justice enables societies to face their past, bandage the wounds of the victims and rebuild trust—between individuals and the state, and between components of society.

Achieving peace means more than silencing guns and ending violence. Often, we see that societies win the war and lose the peace. Recent experiences in Iraq and Lebanon prove that the absence of fighting does not mean the fight is over. Armed conflict ceases, but deep wounds of injustices remain untreated, sowing the seeds of future conflicts and turning the country into a failed state, hostage to foreign interventions and endless cycles of violence and internal division.

Here lies the fundamental role of transitional justice, shifting the focus from the battle of arms to battles of the pen, rationality and wisdom. Transitional justice enables societies to face their past, bandage victims’ wounds and rebuild trust—between individuals and the state, and between different components of society. 

Complementary paths

In Syria, it appears the civil peace that the state is working for seeks to end the current violence in a phased manner, separate from the path of transitional justice. Meanwhile, the transitional justice a wide segment of the people demands focuses on how to address the painful past and build a more just and peaceful future, civil peace coming after transitional justice, and as a result of it. These two approaches are not contradictory, but complementary. 

When civil peace efforts to end violence and ensure peaceful coexistence are combined with transitional justice processes to address the root causes of the conflict, a path towards sustainable civil peace becomes possible. This path protects the foundations of state-building, with its political, social and economic aspects. 

This complementarity, properly balanced, is what can transform the current “no war” situation in Syria into a real and just peace that wards off future conflicts. 

Laying the foundation

Civil peace refers to a state of nonviolence and stability within society; that is, the absence of civil war or large-scale conflict. It also refers to a social situation in which disputes are resolved by peaceful means and state institutions work seriously and effectively to manage tensions and provide people with basic security. 

Civil peace does not only mean the absence of internal armed conflict, but also a degree of social cohesion, mutual trust and recognition of shared citizenship that allows for collective progress. Often, achieving it requires political settlements, disarmament processes and cementing the rule of law.  

Sustainable civil peace is the cornerstone of any society that wants stability and progress. It is the failsafe that prevents internal conflicts and spares the country from the scourge of wars and destructive violence. Achieving it is not the absence of conflict, but the presence of coexistence, understanding and mutual respect between individuals, components and the state. 

But superficial civil peace, achieved only through political trade-offs or armed force, is likely to be fragile if underlying grievances persist alongside injustice that has not been addressed and suffering that has not been recognized. 

Transitional justice is a comprehensive framework for the processes and mechanisms societies use after suffering massive violations of human rights, periods of authoritarian rule or internal wars, which are combined in the Syrian case. 

The ultimate goal of the transitional justice process is to address the legacy of past violations, ensure accountability, provide redress to the victims, promote reconciliation and prevent such atrocities from recurring. It should not rely on “victor’s justice,” but rather pave the way towards a more just and peaceful future. 

Superficial civil peace, achieved only through political trade-offs or armed force, is likely to be fragile if underlying grievances persist alongside injustice that has not been addressed.

Civil peace and transitional justice

The relationship between civil peace and transitional justice is complementary, and essential for long-term stability. Immediate civil peace is a condition for starting the transitional justice process, which itself is the basis for sustainable civil peace. 

Civil peace provides the environment for transitional justice, which cannot be achieved in chaos. It requires a minimum level of political stability and security to be carried out effectively, and to be credible to the local and international community. 

Transitional justice mechanisms can only work effectively in an environment with a minimum level of peace and stability. The absence of violence allows state institutions—including truth commissions and courts—to function properly. Amid ongoing conflict or severe insecurity, transitional justice mechanisms are difficult to implement, and initiating them may worsen existing tensions, rather than resolve them. The stability civil peace provides opens the space needed for these sensitive and often painful processes. 

Transitional justice is the foundation of sustainable civil peace. Lasting peace cannot be built atop grievances that have not been addressed and suffering that has not been recognized. By confronting the past through truth, accountability and reparations, transitional justice helps heal wounds and rebuild trust, removing the underlying causes of any potential future conflict. Without addressing past grievances, the seeds of discord can continue to fester, threatening any fragile civil peace. 

 Amid ongoing conflict or severe insecurity, transitional justice mechanisms are difficult to implement, and initiating them may worsen existing tensions, rather than resolve them.

Civil peace and transitional justice are not just two possible options. They are essential, interconnected components of any successful post-conflict transition. Civil peace provides immediate calm, and is the ground upon which the transitional justice process can begin to address past grievances. This includes achieving justice, recognizing the truth, promoting reconciliation and, ultimately, sustainable civil peace. 

A comprehensive approach that combines civil peace initiatives with strong transitional justice mechanisms offers the most successful path for societies to transition from cycles of violence to lasting stability, social cohesion and respect for human rights. 

The state must abandon the policies of “we brought you the country,” “trust us,” and secret work, and stop wasting time we do not have. Rather, it must work transparently, hand in hand with civil society and international experts, to design a clear, practical and realistic program to achieve immediate civil peace, and a transitional justice process to reach a just and lasting peace. 

Civil society also has a fundamental role to play in monitoring and confronting these challenges. Civil society should be both critical and constructive—not only criticizing without offering solutions, but engaging with the state to present, discuss and design practical proposals and effective initiatives. 

What Syria needs today is not to reinvent the wheel, but to adopt a clear approach that benefits from the experiences of other countries and takes the specificity of Syria’s situation into account. 

The Civil Peace Committee can pave the way for beginning the path of transitional justice by working with the Transitional Justice Commission—provided that civil society is an active partner at all stages, not merely an external observer or critic—to ensure that victims’ personal rights are not disregarded, nor grievances covered over, becoming landmines buried beneath the foundation of the state.

This article was originally published in Arabic and translated into English by Mateo Nelson.