Why were most of the Arab spring revolutions followed by civil wars?

Why did the US and EU either sell weapons or give military support to the warring parties?

  • 7
    Not all. See Tunisia. A pluralistic republican democracy
    – James K
    Apr 24, 2020 at 6:27
  • @JamesK yes i know , but Tunisia has almost broken into a civil war in 2011-2012
    – Taher
    Apr 24, 2020 at 6:28
  • 10
    While Egypt had lots of civil unrest in the past 10 years including civil casualties in the hundreds and the Sinai insurgency still ongoing, I wouldn't really call the situation in Egypt a "civil war" on the same level as what happens in Libya or Syria.
    – Philipp
    Apr 24, 2020 at 11:34
  • 4
    Re "...giving them military support": civil wars have at least two sides. Please specify which side or sides the pronoun "them" refers to.
    – agc
    Apr 24, 2020 at 13:50
  • 6
    Because most revolutions are followed by civil wars? Apr 24, 2020 at 14:15

1 Answer 1


Foreign meddling (especially USA/CIA and NATO).

The uprisings which didn't end up in civil war originated from genuine causes.

BTW, all of the chaos in the Middle East and North Africa could be explained by US/Israeli/Saudi versus Iranian/Russian interest in the region.

Take for example Syria

Initially, Syria was divided between

  1. Kurds backed by the USA
  2. Bashar al Asad backed by Russia + Iran
  3. Syrian rebels backed by Turkey

Here were their objectives:

  1. USA’s objective was to oust Bashar al Asad to eliminate Syrian (+Iranian) threat against Israel (also)
  2. Russia’s objective was to establish a Russian military base in Syria by keeping Bashar in power
  3. Turkish objective was to eliminate Kurdish separatists, and also resolve the Syrian refugee crisis in Turkey by creating a 30km wide Safe Zone along the Turkish border so that refugees can return to Syria. As a relief, Turkey will provide them with food, healthcare, education, and so on.

Later, the equation changed when Turkey eliminated Kurds and cornered Bashar’s military.

  1. The USA abandoned its primary objective and resorted to supporting Turkey
  2. Russia continued to support Bashar’s force but trying to make them abide by the trilateral agreement made by Russia, Iran, and Turkey. Also, they saved Bashar's force by bombing Turkish positions.
  3. Turkey is bombing both Bashar’s forces and Iran-backed Hezbollah as they are opposing the Turkish plan.

The same kind of explanation could be given for Lybia and Iraq.

  • 1
    Can you develop more or give me some sources ?.
    – Taher
    Apr 24, 2020 at 3:15
  • for exemple what is the source of this 'USA’s objective was to oust Bashar al Asad to eliminate Syrian threat against Israel'
    – Taher
    Apr 24, 2020 at 4:01
  • 1
    @Taher, enough evidence added.
    – user25524
    Apr 24, 2020 at 15:41
  • What a tangled web they weave.
    – Steve
    May 3, 2020 at 19:55

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .