The Syrian regime is not about to collapse
This is the corrected and updated version written by Nehad Ismail**
03/31/2006
Nehad Ismail's account of the bleak prospects of Syrian opposition explains why few are enthusiastic about regime change in Syria, despite the urgent need for reform.
There has been a plethora of headlines recently about the imminent collapse of the Syrian regime. To quote just a few: "Syrian opposition closes ranks" "Exiled Syrian opposition calls for regime change" "Syrian opposition forms alliance" "Syrian opposition unite against Assad" and "Syrian opposition unites to oust Assad". The brutal fact, however, is that the Syrian opposition is too weak to topple the Assad regime. It is fragmented and divided. It has no coherent strategy to achieve common objectives. There is no co-ordination and no workable program unifying the fractious factions.
There exist in Syria more than 20 political parties, groupings and coalitions of all sorts each with a different program and agenda. The disunity is emphasized by the conflicting and contradictory statements emanating periodically from various factions. The opposition suffers from fundamental shortcomings. They don't consult with each other. They don't see eye to eye on many issues. They accuse each other of treachery and reliance on foreign money. Some are accused of having links with Israel; others are Islamic fundamentalists. The Muslim Brotherhood has been accused of plotting to use the democratic process to seize power and turn the country into an Islamic caliphate state.
The common factor that unites them is opposition to the Assad regime. The problem is they don't know how to go about it. Many of them rely on fiery statements and slogans but nothing else. With the exception of one or two groupings which have a pragmatic workable program to rescue Syria and transform it into a democracy by peaceful means, the majority lack a coherent strategy and a workable program of action. The much vaunted Damascus Declaration was so full of contradictions that many parties refused to subscribe to it. A number of meetings and conferences were held in the USA and Europe with little or no noticeable impact. The regime ignored them and continued its crackdown against dissidents and Kurdish demonstrators.
The recent meeting in Brussels between the secular Abdul Halim Khaddam and the Islamist Ali Sadruddin Bayanouni, the Muslim Brotherhood leader, received more publicity than it deserved, as little was achieved apart from a vague statement. A closer look at the joint statement leaves the reader more confused and less convinced of the participants' ability to transform Syria from a dictatorship into a truly democratic and free state. Neither of these leaders have a popular base in Syria, and both are detested for different reasons. Abdul Halim Khaddam is detested for serving a corrupt dictatorial regime for 35 years then suddenly claiming to be a democrat. Bayanouni is associated with the wave of the Muslim Brotherhood violence that Swept Syria at the end of 1970s and early 1980s.
However in recent weeks Mr. Ali Sadruddin Bayanouni, Syrian leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood, former Syrian Vice President Abdul Halim Khaddam and others have set up a "National Salvation Front" in Belgium. Mr. Bayanouni insists that his movement is moderate and has no plans to turn Syria into a state governed by Sharia law, convinced though that it would be successful in case of elections. He also said in recent interviews "the Islamic tide is spreading and the secular movements have failed".
In their Brussels meeting, the representatives of the 17 Islamist, secular, Liberal, Communist and Kurdish movements, in exile for many years, have issued a "National Program for Change" that includes the creating of a transitional government in exile.
The other groupings is the Washington based Reform Party of Syria, led by Farid Ghadry, who has been described by Syrians as "the Syrian version of Ahmed Chalabi" in reference to Mr. Chalabi an Iraqi opposition figure who played a significant part in persuading the US Administration to invade Iraq. He is now in disfavor both in Iraq and the USA. Ghadry's group is looked upon with suspicion due to its links with the USA.
By far the biggest grouping is the United National Group headed by former Assad regime strong man Rifaat Al-Assad, the former Vice President, and brother of former President Hafez Al-Assad. Rifaat left Syria in 1984, apparently because of differences with his brother Hafez Al-Assad.. He now heads the United National Group (UNG)*, an umbrella organization that welcomes all opposition parties and groups that are interested in reforming Syria by non-violent means .The UNG introduced a program for reform and salvation of Syria with a simple message and objective; that is, to transform Syria from a dictatorship into a democracy by peaceful means, through a program of gradual reforms and change. This program is gaining momentum and support in Syria and outside. The UNG Web site, literature, and pronouncements indicate that Rifaat Al-Assad wishes to return to Syria and launch "The National Reconciliation Initiative".
Rifaat Assad is generally known as the first Arab leader to face Islamic extremism. He succeeded in defeating the Muslim Brotherhood.
A spokesman for Rifaat Assad chose to describe it this way:
"Dr. Rifaat Al-Assad was the first leader in the Arab World to face the serious threat of Islamic inspired terrorism. He bravely stood up to them and rooted them out. The decisive action against terror, helped maintain the cohesion of Syrian Society, the territorial integrity of Syria and keep the country united."
When asked about the Hama massacre, the spokesman said:
Certain mistakes were made by some officers, but Rifaat Al-Assad was not directly responsible, besides he was part of a Security Establishment comprising dozens of individuals who were collectively responsible for the security and protection of the country.
Many Syrians were indeed relieved to be rid of the violent depredations of the Muslim Brotherhood, and Rifaat's record in acting against them may be what earned him some American supporters as well.
Some change must occur in Syria. The regime is still refusing to heed the call for national dialogue. It continues interfering in Lebanon and meddling in Iraqi and Palestinian affairs. This behavior has alienated neighboring countries as well as the US and France. Internally, the repressive regime still acts as Saddam did in the years before the collapse of Baghdad exactly three years ago . Arbitrary arrests, abuse of human rights, torture, and corruption are rife in Syria.
This regime will not be saved by co-operation in the Hariri investigation and the tightening of the borders with Iraq. The only alternative for Syria is a comprehensive national reconciliation initiative, followed by a series of drastic reforms to allow the formation of political parties and free elections. Many of the provisions of the constitution are out of date and are not suitable for the 21st century. Emergency Law and martial courts need to be repealed. New laws allowing the free formation of political parties and election are urgently needed.
The Islamic threat still exists and the Jihadis might make a move when they feel the time has come, especially if there is no reform. Unfortunately the regime is not listening and it is playing politics with the future of the Syrian people. No one in Syria would like to see a repeat of the disastrous Iraqi experience. However, the regime's behavior is not serving the interests of the Syrian people who deserve freedom and democracy, but without the upheaval and the violence.
Nehad Ismail
*In recent years the UNG became known as the UNA (United National Alliance)
________________________________________
Nehad Ismail is a UK-based commentator on Middle East Affairs.
**This is the version approved by the writer.
This is the corrected and updated version written by Nehad Ismail**
03/31/2006
Nehad Ismail's account of the bleak prospects of Syrian opposition explains why few are enthusiastic about regime change in Syria, despite the urgent need for reform.
There has been a plethora of headlines recently about the imminent collapse of the Syrian regime. To quote just a few: "Syrian opposition closes ranks" "Exiled Syrian opposition calls for regime change" "Syrian opposition forms alliance" "Syrian opposition unite against Assad" and "Syrian opposition unites to oust Assad". The brutal fact, however, is that the Syrian opposition is too weak to topple the Assad regime. It is fragmented and divided. It has no coherent strategy to achieve common objectives. There is no co-ordination and no workable program unifying the fractious factions.
There exist in Syria more than 20 political parties, groupings and coalitions of all sorts each with a different program and agenda. The disunity is emphasized by the conflicting and contradictory statements emanating periodically from various factions. The opposition suffers from fundamental shortcomings. They don't consult with each other. They don't see eye to eye on many issues. They accuse each other of treachery and reliance on foreign money. Some are accused of having links with Israel; others are Islamic fundamentalists. The Muslim Brotherhood has been accused of plotting to use the democratic process to seize power and turn the country into an Islamic caliphate state.
The common factor that unites them is opposition to the Assad regime. The problem is they don't know how to go about it. Many of them rely on fiery statements and slogans but nothing else. With the exception of one or two groupings which have a pragmatic workable program to rescue Syria and transform it into a democracy by peaceful means, the majority lack a coherent strategy and a workable program of action. The much vaunted Damascus Declaration was so full of contradictions that many parties refused to subscribe to it. A number of meetings and conferences were held in the USA and Europe with little or no noticeable impact. The regime ignored them and continued its crackdown against dissidents and Kurdish demonstrators.
The recent meeting in Brussels between the secular Abdul Halim Khaddam and the Islamist Ali Sadruddin Bayanouni, the Muslim Brotherhood leader, received more publicity than it deserved, as little was achieved apart from a vague statement. A closer look at the joint statement leaves the reader more confused and less convinced of the participants' ability to transform Syria from a dictatorship into a truly democratic and free state. Neither of these leaders have a popular base in Syria, and both are detested for different reasons. Abdul Halim Khaddam is detested for serving a corrupt dictatorial regime for 35 years then suddenly claiming to be a democrat. Bayanouni is associated with the wave of the Muslim Brotherhood violence that Swept Syria at the end of 1970s and early 1980s.
However in recent weeks Mr. Ali Sadruddin Bayanouni, Syrian leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood, former Syrian Vice President Abdul Halim Khaddam and others have set up a "National Salvation Front" in Belgium. Mr. Bayanouni insists that his movement is moderate and has no plans to turn Syria into a state governed by Sharia law, convinced though that it would be successful in case of elections. He also said in recent interviews "the Islamic tide is spreading and the secular movements have failed".
In their Brussels meeting, the representatives of the 17 Islamist, secular, Liberal, Communist and Kurdish movements, in exile for many years, have issued a "National Program for Change" that includes the creating of a transitional government in exile.
The other groupings is the Washington based Reform Party of Syria, led by Farid Ghadry, who has been described by Syrians as "the Syrian version of Ahmed Chalabi" in reference to Mr. Chalabi an Iraqi opposition figure who played a significant part in persuading the US Administration to invade Iraq. He is now in disfavor both in Iraq and the USA. Ghadry's group is looked upon with suspicion due to its links with the USA.
By far the biggest grouping is the United National Group headed by former Assad regime strong man Rifaat Al-Assad, the former Vice President, and brother of former President Hafez Al-Assad. Rifaat left Syria in 1984, apparently because of differences with his brother Hafez Al-Assad.. He now heads the United National Group (UNG)*, an umbrella organization that welcomes all opposition parties and groups that are interested in reforming Syria by non-violent means .The UNG introduced a program for reform and salvation of Syria with a simple message and objective; that is, to transform Syria from a dictatorship into a democracy by peaceful means, through a program of gradual reforms and change. This program is gaining momentum and support in Syria and outside. The UNG Web site, literature, and pronouncements indicate that Rifaat Al-Assad wishes to return to Syria and launch "The National Reconciliation Initiative".
Rifaat Assad is generally known as the first Arab leader to face Islamic extremism. He succeeded in defeating the Muslim Brotherhood.
A spokesman for Rifaat Assad chose to describe it this way:
"Dr. Rifaat Al-Assad was the first leader in the Arab World to face the serious threat of Islamic inspired terrorism. He bravely stood up to them and rooted them out. The decisive action against terror, helped maintain the cohesion of Syrian Society, the territorial integrity of Syria and keep the country united."
When asked about the Hama massacre, the spokesman said:
Certain mistakes were made by some officers, but Rifaat Al-Assad was not directly responsible, besides he was part of a Security Establishment comprising dozens of individuals who were collectively responsible for the security and protection of the country.
Many Syrians were indeed relieved to be rid of the violent depredations of the Muslim Brotherhood, and Rifaat's record in acting against them may be what earned him some American supporters as well.
Some change must occur in Syria. The regime is still refusing to heed the call for national dialogue. It continues interfering in Lebanon and meddling in Iraqi and Palestinian affairs. This behavior has alienated neighboring countries as well as the US and France. Internally, the repressive regime still acts as Saddam did in the years before the collapse of Baghdad exactly three years ago . Arbitrary arrests, abuse of human rights, torture, and corruption are rife in Syria.
This regime will not be saved by co-operation in the Hariri investigation and the tightening of the borders with Iraq. The only alternative for Syria is a comprehensive national reconciliation initiative, followed by a series of drastic reforms to allow the formation of political parties and free elections. Many of the provisions of the constitution are out of date and are not suitable for the 21st century. Emergency Law and martial courts need to be repealed. New laws allowing the free formation of political parties and election are urgently needed.
The Islamic threat still exists and the Jihadis might make a move when they feel the time has come, especially if there is no reform. Unfortunately the regime is not listening and it is playing politics with the future of the Syrian people. No one in Syria would like to see a repeat of the disastrous Iraqi experience. However, the regime's behavior is not serving the interests of the Syrian people who deserve freedom and democracy, but without the upheaval and the violence.
Nehad Ismail
*In recent years the UNG became known as the UNA (United National Alliance)
________________________________________
Nehad Ismail is a UK-based commentator on Middle East Affairs.
**This is the version approved by the writer.
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق