Through Syrian Eyes (Part I)

Through Syrian Eyes (Part I)

Syria is a fascinating country, and I do not say that just because I am Syrian (although I am admittedly biased). As a tiny country of roughly 23 million in a perhaps unenviable location of geostrategic importance, it is amazingly diverse. Cities that are a few dozen miles apart will have entirely distinct accents and different cuisines. An hour drive will take you from the lush mountains of the Mediterranean coast, through the infinitely rolling hills of olive trees of Idlib, and into the unforgiving, unyielding stones of the semi-desert. 

It has welcomed wave upon wave of immigrants regardless of religion or ethnicity, from Muslim Circassians escaping Russian massacres to Christian Armenians fleeing a Turkish genocide. When the French occupation ended in 1946, there were furious calls warning of the ensuing onslaught that would be unleashed upon the Syrian Christians who were unjustly favored by the French. Instead the Syrian people responded by electing the Christian Faris al-Khoury into the highest offices of Speaker of Parliament and Prime Minister (none of our neighbors were as fortunate). Syria is not Lebanon, it is not Iraq, and it surely is neither Somalia nor Afghanistan. I’m not saying Syria is “better” (the concept in itself is naïve), but it is definitely different. Unfortunately many prefer overly simplistic comparisons, and choose to draw the wrong lessons from the various conflicts. When policy makers at the highest levels hold such amateurish views, the results are disastrous.

I watched the fire of the Arab Spring spread throughout the region with insurmountable excitement. The core problem of the region, I always felt, did not lie within the tangible signs of overwhelming poverty, but the intangible sense of crushing despair. The Arab Spring was that spark of hope. More important than any economic factor was one word, dignity. But I never thought it would reach my home country. The level of brutality of the Syrian regime was all too known, especially after the massacres of Hama in 1982 where an uprising was put down by leveling entire portions of the city and butchering the population into obedience. After 11 years in power, Bashar Assad was somehow still viewed as a young reformer trying to change the country, and the only Arab leader standing up to Israel and what was seen as US imperialist interests in Iraq and region at large. Between these two factors I did not think people would dare to rise, but never in my wildest dreams did I expect the Syrian regime to be as brutal and murderous as it turned out to be. It is this exact incomprehensible viciousness that turned events from small, localized demonstrations calling for reform, to a full-blown revolution in every part of the country, to an armed rebellion. From day one the regime has been its own worst enemy.

I personally was vehemently opposed to the arming of the revolution, until the regime left me no excuses. The revolution was peaceful for six months and thousands of martyrs, but people are bound to pick up arms when faced with such levels of force and brutality. 

Demonstrations were gunned down and even shelled. Peaceful activists were rounded up and disappeared into the labyrinth of torture chambers throughout the country, while criminals and Islamist extremists in custody were released onto the streets to wreak havoc. I fully realize that the current scenario of violence and chaos is exactly what the regime was pushing towards to ensure its survival in a form of brute political calculation that would put Machiavelli to shame, yet I also realize that the violent reaction was unavoidable. The regime is incapable of compromise or negotiation; they call it “Assad’s Syria” and genuinely believe and act like it is, and has been for the past 40 years. Their slogan from the first days was “Assad or we will burn the country” (it rhymes in Arabic: “al Assad aw nuhrik al balad”). We are where we are now, an unorganized diverse armed uprising against a vicious sectarian dictator that has repressed his people and destabilized the region. The Islamist extremist factions that were virtually nonexistent only a year ago have a prominent role now due to the vacuum that was left; although nothing close to what the media is exaggerating it up to be (they are estimated to number in the few thousands in an uprising of a hundred thousand). But the powerful secular voices calling from a democratic Syria have for the most part been murdered, arrested, or forced into exile. The humanitarian situation is beyond tragic; over 80,000 innocent people murdered, more than a quarter of the population displaced, entire cities leveled, infrastructure devastated, and ancient artifacts that have survived millennia of conflict reduced to rubble. But I don’t expect the international community to interfere for such “trivial” matters; I do expect countries like the US to take an active role for realist, pressing reasons.

Which brings us to the enigma called American foreign policy and decision making… (Part II coming later this week)