Local Genevas: Towards Hybrid Humanitarian Negotiations in Syria

Abstract: The need for a peaceful resolution to the conflict in Syria has never been greater. Yet while the UN focuses on brokering a nationwide solution to the conflict, humanitarian organisations are struggling to meet needs on the ground. The lack of a physical presence of international aid agencies outside Damascus is highlighting the role of what is commonly referred to as ‘the local response’, groups or organizations that do not fit within the traditional humanitarian sector, that are anecdotally having the best success in negotiating humanitarian access and associated ceasefires, leading the greatest provision of aid to vulnerable communities. Thus it is timely to investigate whether local, external or hybrid negotiations structures result in the most robust localised humanitarian outcomes.  Drawing on post-liberal theory this study argues that combining local and external conflict management processes into authentically hybrid negotiation structures leverages the strengths of both parties to best result in localised humanitarian outcomes. However a structured comparative case study investigation demonstrates that is in fact locally-managed and facilitated negotiations that result in the greatest humanitarian outcomes in Syria including the number of people provided with humanitarian aid as well as the implementation of associated ceasefire agreements.