When protest erupted in Syria on March 2011, there was considerable analysis seeking to explain the
initial display of collective action. While this initial showing of dissent caught some off-guard, what was
more remarkable is how the protest movement managed to endure, well over a year, despite policies of
severe repression, a lack of established opposition organizations, and a lack of regime defections. This
paper seeks to explore which factors have sustained the protest movement, as well as the role of these
factors at different stages in the ‘protest wave’ and the relationship these variables share with regionspecific
waves of protest. I hypothesize that more traditional approaches to understanding protest
longevity must be expanded in order to help explain contemporary events of protest, particularly in
authoritarian contexts. The time and space aspects, also, must be considered because protest must attain
a certain critical mass (in terms of participants, frequency, and dispersion) to present a unified front
against an incumbent regime. I utilize a qualitative analysis in which social movement theory is applied
to the Syrian case and also use panel data to test my hypotheses concerning the variables I believe to be
relevant in Syria, at different stages in the ‘protest wave’ and in different regions of the country. Both the
quantitative and qualitative approaches indicate that there have been several critical elements at play
which helped to compensate for the relative lack of resources and opportunities. These factors involve the
role of personal networks, collective identity, and the likelihood of success. Protest, however, cannot be
explained by simply looking at a movement because bystanders and government actors also matter. The
government’s policy of repression played a critical role insofar as it was relatively indiscriminate across
regions and among various demographics. This factor helped to facilitate a process in which more
Syrians came to identity and, consequently, sympathize with the fallen protesters, creating a multiplier
effect. In this way, repression is not simply a factor which may increase or decrease protest, but also a
critical opportunity which conveys information about the regime that may have otherwise remained
hidden.