In this post I will attempt to show how the Syrian regime of Bashar Al Assad has managed to gain so much support over the past couple of years, just bare with me for a couple of introductory paragraphs!
Social media has played a major role in the uprisings that have taken place across the Middle East and the North Africa region. It is without any doubt that such social media has been the instigator for people to continue their struggle; in the absence of such media those uprisings would have most probably ended in the favor of ruling regimes.
Not only are those social media websites driving and assisting people in their struggles against corrupt governments especially when acting as alternative sources of news and information, but more recently they are showing the consensus and the opinions of majorities in certain countries. For example, on facebook there is a new application that allows individuals to ask questions where other facebook users may select an answer from a number of different answers. One such question that came around a couple of days ago was:
هل انت مع توقيع سوريا لاتفاقية سلام مع اسرائيل؟؟
Do you think Syria should sign a peace treaty with Israel?
Having just checked the results so far those that said YES are 197 whereas those that said NO are 6003.
So how can this be related to the support the current regime gets from most of Syrians?
When it came to foreign policy the Syrian regime has stuck to its core principles of right to resist, righteousness of resistance movements, standing against imperialism and foreign intervention in the middle east region, and most importantly not accepting a peace treaty with Israel. Of course, those aren't simple issues and are discussed further below.
1) Right to Resist and Righteousness of resistance movements:
The Syrian regime has willingly and sometimes out of necessity, supported resistance movements in the region. As we all know they support Hizbullah of Lebanon, Hamas of Palestine and other Palestinian factions including the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and for a short while openly supported Iraqi resistance and then covertly supported that resistance after 2004-2005.
When government officials were interviewed by any news outlet and were asked about resistance movements in the middle east, the made it clear that the regime supports any righteous resistance that was fighting any oppressive regime wherever it may be.
Now any Syrian, in fact any person in the world would agree to that and in the eyes of most Syrians, any movement that is fighting the Zionists state is and will always be seen as a righteous movement fighting a righteous cause. However some skeptical Syrians would ask, how come we don't have any resistance on our borders? why isn't our regime, that supports resistance movements in Lebanon and Palestine not conducting its own resistance to the occupation of the Golan Heights. And that's the point the regime failed to address.
2) Imperialism and Foreign Intervention: Not much needs to be discussed except that the regime in Syria opposed any sort of foreign intervention in the middle east most notably the invasion of Iraq even though ties between the two countries haven't been good since the Iraq-Iran war.
3) Peace with Zionist Israel:
The policy that has been carried out by the current regime has been similar to that of Hafez Al Assad. His policy was that no peace will be signed with Israel unless it was a comprehensive peace agreement between Zionist Israel and Palestine, Lebanon and Syria, while at the same time maintaining full rights including return of all occupied lands up until 1967, sovereignty over all the returned lands and other rights related to Palestine.
Having taken the same stance by Bashar Al Assad very little people were against it. However indirect talks that were reveled to the public prior to the 2008 aggression on Gaza exhibited the flexibility of the Syrian regime towards this policy. Whereby the regime defended the indirect talks by pointing out the peace treaties signed between Egypt, Jordan and Israel and justified it by saying it was all part of the comprehensive peace process and that the regime is pragmatic (it does what it can given the circumstances). The indirect peace talks (moderated by Turkey) ended after the aggression on Gaza, as a sign of protest to that aggression.
Those are the three principle foreign policies that solidified the relationship between the people and the regime. There are however other major events that cemented that relationship even further which include:
- US sanctions on Syria
- Assassination of Rafik Harriri and the International Tribunal
- Collaboration of previous Egyptian regime and Saudi Arabia with other countries to topple Syrian Regime.
- Taking in refugees from both Iraq and Lebanon
- Anti Syrian sentiment in Lebanon
(The first Three events contributed heavily to the justification by the regime in current events for the presence of a conspiracy against Syrian regime and its people)
Having considered the foreign policies mentioned above and other events we can clearly see why the majority of Syrians stand by the current regime. When it comes to domestic policies, that is where most of us will find 180 degree shift of opinion. Very few Syrians will be against the foreign policies that were upheld by the previous regime (such questions on facebook reflect this where the current numbers to the earlier mentioned question is at 6950 for NO and 229 for YES - only 6 hours later), believing that the events currently happening in Syria are a continuation of that conspiracy against the Syrian regime by foreign countries and and other entities (mainly Lebanese parties and other figures in the Gulf region).
I do believe that foreign intervention has a minor role in what is happening however the major effects that caused the current uprising happening now in Syria is a result of failed domestic policies, injustice by the regime towards the people and corruption. Will be hopefully discussed later.
Social media has played a major role in the uprisings that have taken place across the Middle East and the North Africa region. It is without any doubt that such social media has been the instigator for people to continue their struggle; in the absence of such media those uprisings would have most probably ended in the favor of ruling regimes.
Not only are those social media websites driving and assisting people in their struggles against corrupt governments especially when acting as alternative sources of news and information, but more recently they are showing the consensus and the opinions of majorities in certain countries. For example, on facebook there is a new application that allows individuals to ask questions where other facebook users may select an answer from a number of different answers. One such question that came around a couple of days ago was:
هل انت مع توقيع سوريا لاتفاقية سلام مع اسرائيل؟؟
Do you think Syria should sign a peace treaty with Israel?
Having just checked the results so far those that said YES are 197 whereas those that said NO are 6003.
So how can this be related to the support the current regime gets from most of Syrians?
When it came to foreign policy the Syrian regime has stuck to its core principles of right to resist, righteousness of resistance movements, standing against imperialism and foreign intervention in the middle east region, and most importantly not accepting a peace treaty with Israel. Of course, those aren't simple issues and are discussed further below.
1) Right to Resist and Righteousness of resistance movements:
The Syrian regime has willingly and sometimes out of necessity, supported resistance movements in the region. As we all know they support Hizbullah of Lebanon, Hamas of Palestine and other Palestinian factions including the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and for a short while openly supported Iraqi resistance and then covertly supported that resistance after 2004-2005.
When government officials were interviewed by any news outlet and were asked about resistance movements in the middle east, the made it clear that the regime supports any righteous resistance that was fighting any oppressive regime wherever it may be.
Now any Syrian, in fact any person in the world would agree to that and in the eyes of most Syrians, any movement that is fighting the Zionists state is and will always be seen as a righteous movement fighting a righteous cause. However some skeptical Syrians would ask, how come we don't have any resistance on our borders? why isn't our regime, that supports resistance movements in Lebanon and Palestine not conducting its own resistance to the occupation of the Golan Heights. And that's the point the regime failed to address.
2) Imperialism and Foreign Intervention: Not much needs to be discussed except that the regime in Syria opposed any sort of foreign intervention in the middle east most notably the invasion of Iraq even though ties between the two countries haven't been good since the Iraq-Iran war.
3) Peace with Zionist Israel:
The policy that has been carried out by the current regime has been similar to that of Hafez Al Assad. His policy was that no peace will be signed with Israel unless it was a comprehensive peace agreement between Zionist Israel and Palestine, Lebanon and Syria, while at the same time maintaining full rights including return of all occupied lands up until 1967, sovereignty over all the returned lands and other rights related to Palestine.
Having taken the same stance by Bashar Al Assad very little people were against it. However indirect talks that were reveled to the public prior to the 2008 aggression on Gaza exhibited the flexibility of the Syrian regime towards this policy. Whereby the regime defended the indirect talks by pointing out the peace treaties signed between Egypt, Jordan and Israel and justified it by saying it was all part of the comprehensive peace process and that the regime is pragmatic (it does what it can given the circumstances). The indirect peace talks (moderated by Turkey) ended after the aggression on Gaza, as a sign of protest to that aggression.
Those are the three principle foreign policies that solidified the relationship between the people and the regime. There are however other major events that cemented that relationship even further which include:
- US sanctions on Syria
- Assassination of Rafik Harriri and the International Tribunal
- Collaboration of previous Egyptian regime and Saudi Arabia with other countries to topple Syrian Regime.
- Taking in refugees from both Iraq and Lebanon
- Anti Syrian sentiment in Lebanon
(The first Three events contributed heavily to the justification by the regime in current events for the presence of a conspiracy against Syrian regime and its people)
Having considered the foreign policies mentioned above and other events we can clearly see why the majority of Syrians stand by the current regime. When it comes to domestic policies, that is where most of us will find 180 degree shift of opinion. Very few Syrians will be against the foreign policies that were upheld by the previous regime (such questions on facebook reflect this where the current numbers to the earlier mentioned question is at 6950 for NO and 229 for YES - only 6 hours later), believing that the events currently happening in Syria are a continuation of that conspiracy against the Syrian regime by foreign countries and and other entities (mainly Lebanese parties and other figures in the Gulf region).
I do believe that foreign intervention has a minor role in what is happening however the major effects that caused the current uprising happening now in Syria is a result of failed domestic policies, injustice by the regime towards the people and corruption. Will be hopefully discussed later.
No comments:
Post a Comment