Research questions
The three secondary questions behind the food-security headline
The primary question is the food-security impact. Three secondary questions interrogate the attribution and geography of the damage. Each is kept proportionate to its evidence, with confidence labelled, not implied.
RQ1 — Flood attribution
Source split HIGH · Natural vs managed release LOW
How much of the 2026 flood is rainfall-driven versus upstream (transboundary) discharge, and was the discharge natural or a managed dam release? The damaging June Euphrates flood is upstream-sourced water in a rainless dry season; Hasakah’s June “flood” has no water source and is flagged as a likely radar artifact. Natural versus managed release is not resolvable from the available reanalysis data.
→ Read RQ1
RQ2 — Fire attribution
Method (2025 demo) HIGH · 2026 conflict linkage DATA GAP
Are the 2026 crop fires concentrated along conflict frontlines? The 2026 conflict overlay cannot be computed (ACLED coverage ends 2025-06-13), and there is no active armed conflict in the 2026 window. On the 2025 demonstration year, crop fires sit no closer to fighting than ordinary farmland is — agricultural and seasonal, not a frontline signal.
→ Read RQ2
RQ3 — Damage relative to area of control
Damage-vs-control framing DESCRIPTIVE ONLY
Where does the validated 2026 cropland damage fall relative to indicative areas of control? This is a descriptive overlay only (DEC-005): it maps where damage falls and makes no claim that either administration fared better, worse, or caused anything. It is deliberately presented as a table, not a comparison chart.
→ Read RQ3