There are a number of issues related to the civil war in Syria that I’d like to address.
First, one of the blog’s commenters has suggested that there was an armed insurrection against the Syrian regime from the start of the uprising in March of this year. I categorically reject this notion. There is armed resistance to the regime now, definitely, but this wasn’t always the case. From the inception of the protest movement, the Assad regime has condemned it as a “foreign conspiracy” (Do these dictatorships read from the same playbook? Authorities in Tunisia, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Bahrain, and Iran have all blamed their uprisings on foreigners!). There are two main reasons why all these regime’s brand their respective uprisings as foreign conspiracies: 1. To discredit the protesters as foreign stooges and attempt to rob them of any legitimacy in order to prevent others from joining them; 2. To justify the crackdown of the movements.
Thus, in the case of Syria, after months of a seemingly endless crackdown, the allegations that it is a foreign conspiracy swarming with “armed gangs,” has become a self-fulfilling prophecy in terms of the movement becoming armed. This is an especially growing phenomenon since so many soldiers are now defecting to defend the people.
The second point I want to address is that although the Syrian armed forces are largely Alawis, the minority off-shoot of Shi’ism that constitutes the ruling class in Syria, Alawis are not a monolithic bunch and not all of them support the regime. This should be especially evident with the defection of Alawi soldiers.
Third, there is a tendency to criticize the movement for turning to arms. Although it is important to note that the movement by and large is still non-violent, many are resorting to weapons and the question I have to such critics is this: What are they supposed to do? The latest UN report notes that more than 4,000 Syrians have been killed in the past 9 months. Another 500 or so casualties, which will surely come unfortunately, and the death toll will equal that of all the American casualties in 8 years of war in Iraq! So I reiterate, what are these protesters supposed to do?
Finally, many of my Shi’ite friends, who championed the uprisings in Egypt and Bahrain, have been criticizing the movement in Syria because if the Assad regime falls, it would be a foreign policy disaster for Iran, the quintessential Shi’ite state. Many of these people expressed solidarity with the struggle in Egypt because Egypt under Mubarak was very much in the pro-US and anti-Iran camp. And these same people condemned the Bahraini government because it’s a Sunni dictatorship ruling over a Shi’ite majority island. I think it’s important to be consistent, avoid sectarianism, and not employ the cold logic that states utilize when assessing global politics. Only a state approaches human lives with such heartless calculations, i.e. “friendly” dictators that crush non-violent movements are acceptable while “enemy” dictators must respect the rule of law and abide by the wishes of its people.
With every one act of violence, whether committed in countries friendly to yours or whether it happens at UC Berkeley with campus police hitting non-violent student protesters, whether lethal or otherwise, the state or authorities chip away at their own legitimacy. In the case of Syria, long before the death toll there reached 4,000, the regime lost every ounce of legitimacy, regardless with whom the state is allied.
Are you seriously trying to assert that the protests taking place in Syria are 100% organic? Are you claiming the west has no hand in the events taking place in Syria right now?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFDGy4-DDH4 (the ambulance guy smashes the window with his own arm, rather than any bullet doing it, plus when they take him out he doesn’t look too injured)
http://vimeo.com/27689008 (a bunch of guys supposedly killed by security forces, but they don’t look dead or injured at all to me, all seem to be moving!)
There is also the recent case of Sari Saoud of Homs, which aljazeera reported on– they claimed he was killed by the army. But later on when journalists spoke to the mother, it seems he was in fact killed by armed thugs (which, it is claimed, are anti-government) when the army wasn’t deployed in homs. This is shown in
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVlgn3uW608 and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viF_LG32pgI
Finally, a rational analysis of the Syrian situation (and that it comes from an Iranian breathes new hope in me). What bothers me is the fact that nearly 50 years of uncompromising dictatorship wasn’t enough to convince people of the Assad dynasty’s illegitimacy; it took a brutal crackdown that claimed the lives of at least 3,000 Syrians.
Supporters of the regime follow a similar line: “The Syrian people can’t be free until Israel–the external enemy–is defeated.” I should qualify this statement to say that it only applies to people who acknowledge that Syrians have some of their freedoms restricted; there is still a minority that believes everything in Syria has always been fine and dandy.
The “Assad is our last remaining hope to fight Israel” fallacy is problematic because it fails to take into account the Syrian perspective. What benefit do the Syrians gain from Hezbollah? After all, this has been the extent of Assad’s resistance: to fight until the last drop of Lebanese and Palestinian blood (not Syrian) to free every inch of Lebanese and Palestinian land (not Syrian). Sure, Assad provides important logistical support to Hezbollah, but he is the President of Syria, not Lebanon. Why do he and his supporters think they can hold the Syrian people hostage for the sake of a Lebanese organization (nearly 50 years of emergency law in a police state). This is coming from someone who has a favorable view of Hezbollah as a Lebanese resistance organization. The answer is that support for Hezbollah gives Assad the credentials of a “resistance-fighter,” which he then uses as a pretext to deprive his people of political rights and economic prosperity, all for the sake of keeping his regime in power.
To say “the west had a hand” in this uprising is giving Assad too much credit. Is he really that big an enemy of the west? If anything, Assad ensures Israel a calm Syrian-Israeli border and overall stability in the region. This is why Rami Makhlouf, the cousin of Bashar Al-Assad and Syria’s wealthiest businessman, said to the New York Times: “If there is no stability here, there’s no way there will be stability in Israel.” The way the Israelis sees it, they can deal with a few rockets from Hezbollah and Hamas, so long as it gets to keep the precious Golan Heights, which Assad has proven he won’t make a fuss about.
If Assad is for the resistance, he would have made more than a whimper about the Golan by now. Instead, he exploits the blood of brave Lebanese fighters for his own popularity. Last I checked, it was Lebanese mothers who sacrificed their sons for the cause of justice. They should be getting the credit–not this crooked dictator.
I’ll leave with this excerpt from an article:
“At a strategic-dialogue meeting this week among senior officials, Israel laid out for the United States three scenarios if Bashar Assad is toppled: chaos, an Islamist regime or another strongman from Assad’s minority Alawite sect. Israel fears all those options, saying Assad provides a measure of stability.”
IPouya
I am disappointed with your response, it is below your level of intellect. I feel that my following statements will only shed light on the obvious which I am certain you are aware of. Therefore, my comments are more like a reminder than anything informative to you:
1-Syrian has a strategic reason to support Hezbollah. It is not for Lebanese territory, rather it is called the 60 plus years of occupation of the GOLAN. Yes, he is using regional powers that be for Syria’s advantage, that includes Hezbollah and even Iran.
2-“Is he really that big of an enemy of the west?” Yes and no. Yes, because he opposes Israeli occupation of Syrian Territory and, like Turkey, cannot ignore the Palestinian plight. No, because this is not so much about Syria as it is about Iran. Therefore, Syria is a big deal because it gives a major blow to Iran and strengthens the hands of Saudi/Israeli/US axis.
3-You are totally right in that one cannot simply look at Syria in the context of regional balance of power. The Syrian people deserve a better government. And not all the protesters are armed. In fact most are innocent and have a right to demand change. But what is missing from your analysis is you lack of recognition that this legitimate protest is being used for violent regime change by outside forces who care nothing about the protesters future.
4-Why is it that the human rights commission has an investigator on Iran and Syria, but not on Egypt (12 thousand imprisoned this year and still there, and over 900 killed compared to Iran’s 23 killing in 2009 and only 100 remain in prison), Yemen or Bahrain? Why armed insurgency in Syria and no where else? Why demands for regime change by any means possible and no where else? This includes the drumbeats against Iran.
But you already know all the about. Just a friendly reminder and conversational engagement from fellow Iranian.
CORRECTION-MAJOR ONE
my comments were directed toward BILAL B. Still respectfully disagree.
For some reason I assumed those comments were written by iPouya.
apologies!!!!!
PB:
It seems we both agree that Assad is unfit to lead Syria. So what exactly is your point?
My criticism of Bashar al-Assad doesn’t equate to a validation of the U.S./Israel/Saudi axis. It is possible to condemn western imperialism and an Arab dictatorship at the same time.
Whether this honest uprising is “being used for violent regime change by outside forces” doesn’t change the fact that Assad must go, and if these outside forces try to subject the Syrian people, one can only hope that the brave people of Dar’aa, Homs, Hama, Idlib, Douma, Banyas, Al-Qamishli, and Latakia will rise again.
Besides, this attempt at “violent regime change” was a last resort; if you remember, the people of Dar’aa on March 15, 2011 were not calling for the downfall of the regime (although I’m sure it’s what they’ve wanted for decades); they chanted against the secret police and called for the lifting of emergency law and economic reform. Instead of hearing these honest cries, Bashar sent his brother Maher and an entire brigade to Dar’aa to quell the protests. From then, the violent crackdown spread across Syria until the people were left with no option but to take up arms.
You make a good point, though, about the human rights inspectors; there is definitely some hypocrisy there.
Bilal B.
Yes we agree.
The question is, and I think it is a difficult one, what do you do when an honest uprising becomes part of a regional power play? Particularly when the Egyptian uprising has been successfully quelled and they will be ruled by the military subserviant to US/Israeli/Saudi axis. Furthermore, what brings it all into context is that the downfall of Assad is likely to lead to a lebanese conflict to clear the path to Iran, the grand prize.
This is difficult one. I can’t say I know where I stand at this time.
I am a bit disappointed in your stance about the Syrian ‘uprising’
Something I think you’d find interesting….
Part 1
http://www.maskofzion.com/2011/07/kiss-of-democratic-death-israels-plot.html
Part 2
http://www.maskofzion.com/2011/07/syria-zionist-mobilization-kicks-into.html