A couple of weeks ago experts asserted that the “democratic wave” running through the Arab world won’t affect Syria, as there are no reasons for mass protest or revolution there. The opposition did not succeed in their attempts to use Facebook to gather malcontents for street protests. The economic situation of Syrians is much better than that of Egyptians or Tunisians: they did not implement such reforms that would aggravate social inequality to the same level. In line with the precepts of “Arab socialism,” the state sector there plays a leading role in the economy, whereas the President Bashar al-Assad has been gradually giving enterprises and foreign capital greater freedoms in the course of his 11-year rule without cutting social programs. His own popularity has never caused doubts. The only governing Party of the Arab Socialist Revival (Baath) never faced any serious competitors and was never threatened with losing its monopoly, as few Syrians are members of other parties, just like in other countries of the region.
This lack of reasons for unrest upset those who don’t sympathize with Damascus because of its role in the Middle East, and particularly for its refusal to reconcile with Israel without returning the occupied Golan Heights, its support for the Palestinians and the national-patriotic forces in Lebanon, as well as its alliance with Iran.
On March 17, in the southern town of Daraa, the police arrested a group of teenagers writing revolutionary slogans on the walls. It should be noted that the teenagers were absolutely apolitical; they were just mimicking what they saw in broadcasts from Egypt and Tunisia. Daraa is a tribal town. The arrest of the students provoked the indignation of local clans, and people went out into the streets. The indignation provoked by the arrests collided with the discontent with the local authorities and their failure in addressing local problems. This southern region has been suffering from droughts for several years; many peasants have become refugees or joined the ranks of the unemployed. Moreover, this is a border region with the corresponding inconveniences: for example, construction requires various types of permission, encouraging corruption… Thus, the police tried to stop the march and opened fire. Four people were killed.
It should be noted that Damascus took the tragedy very seriously: the president sent officials to Daraa, who met the families of those killed, presented their condolences, wrote down a list of grievances and promised to hold a full inquiry and bring those responsible to justice. The local governor was quickly fired. However, this produced a snowball effect: a new march followed by more funerals, in turn leading to the burning of government buildings and police offices…
Western press agencies and the famous Al-Jazeera didn’t hide their sympathy for the protesters “who demanded more freedom,” and reported dozens of killed each day, referring to anonymous witnesses. They ignored the large manifestations supporting President Al-Assad. The Syrian media claimed in turn that the police were ordered to open fire under no circumstances, though “armed bands” appeared in Daraa and Latakia and shot at the crowds and the policemen. The television showed interviews with the injured and captured hideouts with stocks of firearms. The American Syria expert Joshua M. Landis reported in detail, with reference to his trusted correspondents on the ground, on the people’s mood in the rebellious town: the people were scared of the disorder; a significant part of the protesters were jobless youth that considered the events as a “holiday of disobedience,” some actively spread rumors about future religious conflicts, that the Alawis [ruling religious minority in Syria – Ed.] are heading to the town to punish the Sunnis for the riot, and the Sunnis are going to smash the Alawis and Christians supporting the president. What is more, some people in the crowd chanted: “We want one who fears God!” This is the old slogan of the clandestine Muslim Brotherhood in Syria, which was engaged in a terrorist struggle in the 1970s, resulting in real war in the town of Hama and claiming thousands of people’s lives. The government promoted the concept of national unity during the whole of the republic’s history. The example of neighboring Lebanon, with its self-destruct civil war that was ended by Syria, is an eloquent warning…
On March 24 the president’s political and media adviser Bouthaina Shaaban met journalists and informed them about a series of future reforms, adopted by the governing party headed by the president: the state of emergency will be cancelled, they will prepare new laws on the parties and media, responsibility for corruption will be reinforced, a reform will prevent groundless arrests. The right to hold peaceful gatherings was confirmed, and the next day 260 convicted Islamists were released. This step is probationary: two months ago the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood announced the resumption of hostilities.
Shaaban said that “Syria has become a target for foreign attempts to destroy its security and its position, which involves resisting Zionist and American projects.” This is no exaggeration. George W. Bush previously claimed that the country belonged to the notorious “axis of evil,” and many predicted that it would share Iraq’s fate. The same day when Damascus began working on its reform program, the Israeli Minister of Foreign Affairs Avigdor Lieberman, during his visit to Paris, complimented France on its stance on Libya and asked them “to do the same in Iran and Syria.” Back in 2007 The Wall Street Journal reported on an agreement to coordinate the efforts of the State Department, the US Council for National Security and the new opposition National Salvation Front in Syria, headed by Abdul Halim Khaddam, the country’s former vice-president. Their purpose was allegedly to “democratize Syria.” Two years earlier the old activist of the Baath party Khaddam had resigned, claiming it was time to make room for the younger gene-ration and citing plans to write a book in France. However, a month later in Paris he made a loud statement that was very convenient for Washington, about President Al-Assad’s complicity in the murder of the Lebanese former Prime Minister Hariri (later this version, widely advertised by the investigators of the international tribunal, was abandoned). A month later he became the head of the abovementioned Front. It’s interesting that the Front was joined by the Muslim Brotherhood, whose leaders had also visited Washington. There’s a puzzle: the Syrian “brothers,” who were supposed to support the Palestinian Hamas, shared Washington’s interest in dethroning Al-Assad, who had granted asylum to the Hamas leader Khaled Mashal…
At first Washington harshly criticized the Syrian government “for using force against peaceful protesters,” but on Sunday Hillary Clinton promised not to interfere in Syrian domestic affairs as the situation in the country was absolutely different from the one in Libya. Besides, the secretary of state referred to Congress and remarked that “the both parties consider Al-Assad to be a reformer.” However, it’s hard to believe that this unexpected compliment is sincere: a couple of days before the Senate passed a letter to President Obama requiring to establish contact with the opposition. There are also reports that Saudi Arabia asked Washington to stay aside, and the latter can’t ignore the Saudis given the current circumstances. So there are several versions. The US is involved in a military campaign in Libya supporting one of the sides in the civil war, whose duration and result are unknown. Syria failed in its attempt to organize “liberation protests.” Moreover, the army supports the president, precluding any military invasion. Yet it is the involvement of allied Iran and the Lebanese Hezbollah that are the most worrying factors.
