War in Syria and the Middle East by Federico Manfredi Firmian explores how competing ideologies have shaped Syria and the wider Levant – from Ottoman and colonial rule through Cold War rivalries and the Arab Spring – producing cycles of upheaval, authoritarianism and war. The book is a compelling, historically rich analysis, though Burak Elmalı contends that its emphasis on ideology over institutional, economic and micro-political factors leaves conceptual gaps.
Federico Manfredi Firmian’s War in Syria and the Middle East: A Political and Economic History examines the key role of ideology in the broader political trajectory of the Middle East, using the Syrian case, whose rebirth we are witnessing today. The book traces Syria’s socio-political transformations from the Ottoman period to the colonial interventionism, from the ideological divides of the Cold War to the Arab Spring, from more than a decade of civil war to the present moment. The book engages both the history and the region’s turbulent political environment as a dynamic process shaped by competing ideologies. Accordingly, Firmian examines the Syrian case not merely as a post-2011 phenomenon, but within a longue durée perspective.
From imperial rule to Pan-Arab socialism
In the first chapter, Firmian introduces the historical trajectory of the Ottoman encounter with European capitalism and the subsequent imperial reorganisation of the Levant. This chapter’s emphasis on imperial legacy underlines the importance of history as a vital tool to understand the current trajectory of the region, demonstrating how the European penetration of the Ottoman economy in the 19th century and the violent Anglo-French reorganisation of the Levant after WW1 set the stage for the deep-seated polarisation and long-term conflicts persisting to this day. The proceeding chapters trace the ideological landscape of the region after the end of World War Two. Firmian argues that in the wake of European imperialism, the region sought viable alternatives to global capitalism, crystallising around Pan-Arab socialism and various strands of political Islam. The chapter details Pan-Arabism’s initial ascendance, exemplified by the Ba’th Party’s rise as a revolutionary, anti-imperialist force, followed by its ultimate failure, and the centralised dictatorships and profound socioeconomic setbacks it produced. These set the stage for subsequent cycles of conflict and the rise of other competing ideologies.
Post-Cold-War power shifts
Firmian then examines the post-Cold War context, analysing how the collapse of the Soviet Union created a vacuum that accelerated the region’s integration into the global capitalist order. He illustrates how Baʿthist regimes, notably Syria’s, abandoned socialist economics in favour of a crony, authoritarian form of capitalism, directly sowing the seeds of popular discontent. Simultaneously, the chapter traces the rise of political Islam, which positioned itself as the sole viable ideological opposition to both Western economic dominance and local despotic regimes.
The Arab Spring was society’s profound rejection of the crony capitalism and authoritarianism that had failed to deliver on its promise of a fairer social order. Examining this in Chapter Four, Firmian draws connections between prolonged drought, resource mismanagement, and mass internal displacement, linking environmental stress to social fragmentation and the subsequent civil war in Syria. Chapter Five looks at the war itself, charting the disintegration of state authority, the rise of extremist groups, and the full internationalisation of the Syrian War. Firmian frames the proxy conflict between the US, its allies and the Russia-Iran axis as a modern iteration of the Cold War struggle between competing worldviews. The analysis is particularly astute in distinguishing between the ideological motivations of local militias and the geopolitical interests of their external backers, asserting that the battle for Syria became a contest over the future model of state governance in the region.
The battle for Syria became a contest over the future model of state governance in the region.
The book then moves to examining the post-major-conflict landscape: the solidification of territorial control, the tragic humanitarian crisis, and the failure of international justice. Firmian chronicles the Assad regime’s partial victory through extreme brutality and external backing primarily provided by Russia and Iran. He concludes that Syria remains “shattered” despite the cessation of major front-line fighting, citing economic collapse and the refugee crisis.
Non-ideological factors shaping the Middle East
The book’s chapters and conclusion argue that the conflicts across the Middle East are not random events, but the predictable, tragic outcome of a two-century struggle between global capitalism and the countering ideologies that have sought to provide an alternative vision for the region. Firmian successfully synthesises the historical, economic, and political threads, demonstrating that the “shattered” states of the Levant are merely the latest arenas in this ongoing ideological and economic battle.
The US and Russia held talks concerning the systemic risk of a sudden collapse of the Assad regime, which would result in a power vacuum utilised by extremist factions.
That said, the book’s argumentative strength could have been improved by considering some additional points. Firstly, while Firmian excels at capturing the broad ideological shift in Chapter Three, he could have more explicitly detailed non-ideological factors, such as the role of the internet and satellite media in rapidly facilitating the transnational organisation of new Islamist movements. Similarly, Chapter Four’s insightful discussion of socioeconomic stress as one of the reasons behind the Arab Spring could have been strengthened by the inclusion of statistical data such youth unemployment and Gini coefficients indicating the unequal income distribution, thereby bolstering a quantitative foundation for the pre-Arab Spring setting. Moreover, Chapter Five’s framing of the Syrian case as a modern iteration of the Cold War antagonism risks oversimplifying the conflict’s relatively ambiguous trajectory. A 2019 congress testimony by former Pentagon official Andrew Exum revealed that the US and Russia held talks concerning the systemic risk of a sudden collapse of the Assad regime, which would result in a power vacuum utilised by extremist factions. Finally, Chapter Six’s geopolitical critique could be enhanced by including more direct critiques of the structural international mechanisms that failed to address the conflict, particularly exploring the UNSC’s paralysis. Since 2011, the Council has been unable to adopt major resolutions on ceasefires, civilian protection, or accountability because Russia, often with China, has vetoed over a dozen drafts. This persistent use of the veto has blocked meaningful collective action and underscored the structural limits of the post-Cold War multilateral system.
The limits of a narrative approach
While Firmian’s multi-layered narrative approach is commendable, it falls somewhat short when compared with other seminal works. Raymond Hinnebusch, for example, highlights the structural resilience of the Syrian state and its adaptive authoritarianism; by contrast, Firmian tends to foreground ideology and geopolitical symbolism over institutional survival mechanisms. Similarly, Joshua Landis’ analysis of local power brokers and regional patronage networks offers a granular reading of how militias and sub-state actors shaped conflict dynamics; an area where Firmian did not delve sufficiently. Lisa Wedeen’s analysis of Ba’athist rule and political symbolism reveals how social control fuelled regime durability; Firmian captured some aspects of this symbolic dimension but often treats identity politics at an ideological level rather than as a tool of authoritarian control. Meanwhile, Fawaz Gerges situates the conflict within the failures of international diplomacy and regional rivalries, whereas Firmian tends to compress these patterns into a binary ideological frame of Cold War competition.
The book is a valuable reference point for readers seeking to grasp not only what occurred in Syria but why the Middle East repeatedly finds itself at the intersection of ideological experiment and geopolitical confrontation.
These comparisons reveal several conceptual blind spots. Firmian intermittently underestimates the extent to which the Syrian conflict was shaped not only by ideological antagonism, but also by regime-survival logic, rentier economics, patron-client relationships, foreign sponsorship, and authoritarian survival practices. The result is an interpretive model that is rich in symbolic contrast but less attentive to the institutional, economic, and micro-political dimensions that other scholars featured as central to understanding the conflict.
Future work would benefit from integrating ideology with the institutional, economic, and community-level mechanisms that made the Syrian state both fragile and enduring. In this sense, Firmian’s book opens the conversation rather than concluding it, offering an all-encompassing interpretive map that other scholarly works can supplement. The book is a valuable reference point for readers seeking to grasp not only what occurred in Syria but why the Middle East repeatedly finds itself at the intersection of ideological experiment and geopolitical confrontation.
Note: This review gives the views of the author and not the position of the LSE Review of Books blog, nor of the London School of Economics and Political Science.
Main image: Mohammad Bash on Shutterstock.
Enjoyed this post? Subscribe to our newsletter for a round-up of the latest reviews sent straight to your inbox every other Tuesday.
The post Understanding war and political change in Syria and the Middle East first appeared on LSE Review of Books.
