Set-up and responsibilities
This report was prepared jointly by the European Institute of Peace (the Institute), a Brussels-based conflict resolution organisation, and the Rights Defense Initiative (RDI), a Qamishli-based human rights organisation.
Field research was conducted by RDI, which assembled eight teams to collect individual testimonies and host collective meetings. All team members underwent detailed training on all relevant aspects of the work. Each team was led by a team leader and staffed with three community testimony officers as well as a psychosocial support facilitator to provide direct support to the victims sharing their testimonies. RDI’s secretariat was responsible for initial data entry and processing. Initial data coding was conducted by RDI team leaders and its chief of staff, after which rough data was shared with the Institute for further analysis.
The Institute provided technical advice and support to RDI on a variety of issues, including methodological design, testimony collection, the development of questionnaires, ethical guidelines, and outreach and communication. The Institute then conducted data analysis and, while the editorial process was collaborative between both organisations, held responsibility for the overall editing of the report and its formatting, translation, and publication.
Scope and selection
The main chapters in this report are organised along both geographical and thematic lines.
In Part 2 of the report, geographical chapters describe the story of ISIS’ takeover, its abuses, and its defeat in specific geographical areas of northeast Syria. After extensive deliberations between the Institute and RDI, a decision was taken to focus on six geographical areas: Kobane, Hasakeh, Manbij, Tabqa, Raqqa and Deir Ezzor. These areas were selected due to their strategic, demographic, and symbolic significance in understanding the diverse impacts and suffering that ISIS wrought across northeast Syria. They present a rich diversity of ethnicities and religions, allowing for a comprehensive examination of how different communities were affected by ISIS rule. Additionally, the selection of these areas allowed for a comparative analysis of the different methods and logics of violence that ISIS employed in different contexts—whether between urban and rural areas or between the various sectarian, religious, and ethnic communities found in the region. As the research progressed, it became increasingly apparent that there was significant variation in how ISIS impacted each area. The selection of such a limited number of geographical areas naturally meant that many others were left out. This is reflective of limited time and resources and in no way indicates a disregard for the suffering endured in other areas of northeast Syria.
In Part 3 of the report, thematic chapters attempt to understand the synoptic similarities of ISIS rule repeated across northeast Syria. Focusing on four thematic areas—economy, gender, education and public healthcare and psycho-social health—allowed for a deeper analysis of the specific impact on these sectors, which a limited geographic focus would be unlikely to capture in full. The four themes were selected for their critical significance in understanding not only ISIS’ ideology but also the contours of the group’s violence and governance model in northeast Syria.
Sampling and outreach
The research teams employed a method of purposive sampling, a form of non-probability sampling where interviewees were chosen because of their unique characteristics, for example, because they suffered directly or witnessed abuses committed by ISIS. Victims were identified through local networks via RDI and the research teams themselves, including through a form of “snowball sampling”, where victims or community members would either identify relevant interviewees or reach out to the research teams following initial communication about the research project. An outreach plan was developed by the Institute and RDI to facilitate the participation of victims and other interviewees, manage expectations at the community level, and anticipate questions and misperceptions to avoid hampering data collection.
Individual interviews and collective meetings
Testimonies were collected through a combination of individual and group meetings, and all interviews started with informed consent procedures.[1]
Between March and May 2023, a total of 425 testimonies were collected, of which 165, or 39%, were conducted with women. In total, 581 people attended collective focus group meetings.
Individual interviews allowed for detailed testimony by victims and survivors, collecting details and memories of their individualised experiences of ISIS violence.
The primary aim of communal focus group meetings—consisting of groups of between 15 and 25 people—was to establish the community-level impacts of ISIS rule within a certain location. Researchers aimed to document the overall “story” of a certain geographic location by detailing life before the outbreak of the conflict, the initial stages of the conflict and ISIS’ arrival, the effects on local communities, and the anti-ISIS conflict and its aftermath.
Individual and collective focus group sessions both revealed distinct regional variations in terms of victims’ experiences but also how comfortably victims actively engaged and expressed themselves in group sessions—whether because of local security dynamics or the socio-economic, educational, and geographic backgrounds of the participants themselves.
Psychological care
Based in Qamishli and with staff drawn from across northeast Syria, RDI has a deep knowledge of the conflict. This ensured the organisation and affiliated research teams were immediately sensitive to the context from the outset of the project, and there was a recognition that the deep psychological traumas inflicted by ISIS and the anti-ISIS conflict needed to be approached with extreme care and delicacy. Because of this, the Institute and RDI invested extensive resources during the project’s preparatory phase to ensure all staff members received adequate training in best practices in trauma-sensitive interviewing.
Furthermore, with support from the Institute, RDI ensured compliance with best practices in trauma sensitive interviewing.[2] This is a method of sensitive, professional interviewing aimed at empowering victims and other witnesses and giving them a sense of agency and control. It applies protocols for avoiding re-traumatising victims and witnesses and placing them at additional risk, which can also affect the quality and reliability of information provided and distort victims’ and witnesses’ memory of the event(s). Enumerators were issued with clear guidance and trained on identifying signs of trauma. Protocols were put in place to interrupt the interview and provide psychological support when the interviewees seemed distressed or otherwise in discomfort.
Security
As ISIS cells still operate and conduct attacks across northeast Syria, the research team drafted a risk assessment and security protocol to assess and manage risks related to the conduct of the research in a high-risk environment. This risk protocol, drafted by the Institute and adapted to the local context by RDI, outlined security responsibilities, threat identification and assessment, risks, security protocols, contingency planning, and ensured consent from team leaders for the adopted protocols. RDI’s director and security officers were responsible for the review of all individual risk assessments.
While there were no major security incidents during the research and data collection, would-be interviewees were sensitive to the presence of ISIS cells in Manbij, Raqqa and Deir Ezzor (and particularly so in rural areas around cities in these locations). People were fearful of repercussions from ISIS cells if they shared their stories. To address this, the research teams adopted a flexible approach and expended considerable effort to build trust with people. Nevertheless, RDI ensured that the quality of statements remained high during testimony collection when utilising appropriately flexible methods.
Data processing
Each individual testimony or participant in focus group meetings was assigned a unique identification number, which allowed the data to be anonymized for privacy and security purposes. In accordance with GDPR regulations, interviewees specifically consented to the use of their data. The data were transmitted to the RDI secretariat before being recorded and then stored securely by RDI. RDI’s chief of staff was responsible for making a pre-selection of relevant testimonies, which were translated from Arabic into English and then shared with the Institute.
[1] All enumerators ensured the informed consent of all interviewee participants. They explained their role in the project (either as staff members or volunteers), the purpose of the interview and the fact that it would be confidential and, unless interviewees specifically agreed, that no personal identifiers such as one’s name, age, or place of origin would be used. Participants were informed that their participation was voluntary and that there would be no monetary reward for participating and that there was no obligation to answer any question. Interviewees were also told they could withdraw at any point without giving any justification. Data could also be destroyed, if any participant requested this.
[2] S.F. Ribeiro and Danaé van der Straten Ponthoz,International Protocol on the Documentation and Investigation of Sexual Violence in Conflict Best Practice on the Documentation of Sexual Violence as a Crime or Violation of International Law (United Nations, 2017) <https://www.un.org/sexualviolenceinconflict/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/report/international-protocol-on-the-documentation-and-investigation-of-sexual-violence-in-conflict/International_Protocol_2017_2nd_Edition.pdf>