Truth be told, that was more hope than insight, and an optimistic
bet that the fires of the Arab Spring would not be quelled in Syria. Today, no more
than 18 months since the start of the Syrian uprising it has potentially
reached a second point of no return. This prediction however, is the product of
fear and a gut-wrenching pessimism, rather than hope. The revolt in Syria is
going to triumph, to be sure and the regime will, sooner or later, fall. The
question is what comes next. Judging by the current situation, the outlook is
far from rosy. It is rather crimson: the color of blood. Many areas in Syria
today are in a veritable state of civil war. Encounters with many Syrians
living in Lebanon reveal tales that are eerily familiar. Neighbors with whom
one shared one’s life, are suddenly turning into mortal enemies simply because
they are of a different sect. The burning of houses and the killing of innocent
civilians is going on in Syria at two levels: the horrendous atrocities
committed almost daily by the regime, and the “spontaneous” attacks among the
population on the basis of sectarian and ethnic differences. This does not bode
well for the post-Baathist era and the long term future of Syria, as a chilling
New
York Times report from a Syrian refugee camp reveals. We would argue that a
sectarian civil war is in fact a greater danger to the Syrian revolt, than the
power of the regime’s security forces.
There is, however, a second, equally profound, threat to the Syrian
revolution: its lack of unity. Every popular revolt is made of an alliance of
different factions. This is inevitable, and not necessarily a threat in and of
itself. However, if the different factions do not resolve their disagreements
through a political, ideally non-violent, mechanism, the consequences can be
dire. It can be argued that the Tunisian and Egyptian revolutions, although
they brought to power the Islamist parties that were certainly not among the
leaders of the revolution, did so by institutionalized mechanisms (elections)
that can be in turn used to unseat them from power. This is a highly advanced
achievement, that should be recognized as such, but one that is in fact rare in
the history of revolts. The norm for revolutions is that they devour their
children. The violent struggle after the French revolution (arguably the mother
of all modern revolutions!) brought a period of oppression and dictatorship
that resolved only slowly and over a significant amount of time. Closer to home
– literally – the Iranian revolution resulted in the violent oppression of
liberal Islamic and leftist parties that initiated the revolution, and the
establishment of a veritable theocratic dictatorship of fundamentalist
Islamists. That is precisely what the Syrian revolution is at risk of.
It is no secret that the Syrian rebels are currently a collection of
factions with little in common other than the immediate goal of the fall of the
Asad regime. The rise in sectarian tensions is strengthening the hand of the islamists,
particularly the more virulent fundamentalists among them, as is the active
involvement of Saudi and Qatari money and Turkish logistical support. Although
much of the resistance to the regime stems from the heroic fighting of local,
self-organized citizen militias, it is easily imaginable that the islamists
with foreign financial and military support will grab the reigns of power,
particularly if the fall of the regime brings with it a widened sectarian civil
war. It is very unlikely that their rule will be any less violent and
oppressive than that of the Iranian clergy. The repercussions for neighboring
Lebanon and the region at large could be dire.
No comments:
Post a Comment