Diasporas are considered an important global actor, but their influence in conflicts continues to be a source of debate (Shain 2002, Mohamoud 2006, Smith and Stares 2007, Pirkkalainen and abdile 2009, Spilimbergo 2009, Koinova 2011, Beyene 2015, Docquier et al. 2016, Barsbai et al. 2017). A decade following the start of the Arab Spring and the ensuing Syrian conflict, many questions around diaspora involvement, mobilization, and influence in the region remain unexamined (Qayyum 2011, Baeza and Pinto 2016, Moss 2019, Carpi and Fiddian-Qasmiyeh 2020). This is particularly problematic since many communities around the world view the Middle East as their “ancestral homeland” and can therefore be reasonably expected to concern themselves with the social and political transformations taking place throughout the region. This paper seeks to contribute to this literature by examining the political activation and mobilization of the Syrian diaspora in the U.S., Canada, Argentina, and Chile. I argue that diaspora involvement is fragmented, multifaceted, and, oftentimes, contradictory. It is shaped and influenced by both outreach by the Syrian regime and various opposition groups, as well as the political positioning of the Syrian diaspora in their “host” societies. As the conflict became increasingly sectarianized, divisions among the diaspora deepened and cemented—and the mobilization strategies and tactics that diaspora members pursued both reflected and heightened these divisions. This analysis draws from political ethnography, an interdisciplinary research strategy that seeks to generate contextual knowledge claims by engaging in reasoning from within social practice (Wadeen 2010, Schatz 2013). I rely on 22 semi-structured interviews with diaspora leaders and members, participant observation data I collected while conducing fieldwork and attending events, rallies, and fundraisers related to the conflict, and archival analysis. This data was collected between 2014-2019. All the data collected was transcribed and coded using Nvivo. One of the main findings of this research is that questions of identity, narrative, and belonging are central to understanding not only the Syrian conflict, but also the various and shifting patterns of diaspora engagement toward it. Further, this analysis demonstrates that the often-highlighted distinction between pro and anti-regime mobilization is not only simplistic, but also occludes the multiple ways in which individuals interpret and reinterpret the conflict and thus mobilize in response.