It is impossible to imagine any system of government – no matter how autocratic – without a social, economic, political, and religious foundation that supports it, and from which its dedicated elements are derived and in turn benefit from the regime. In the autocratic Syrian regime, for example, a person or a group presents absolute loyalty to the dictator and, in exchange, the authorities disregard the enforcement of the law upon them, so they benefit by violating laws and by plundering the rights of the country and others; a crony system. Despite the degree to which the people acquiesced and remained subservient to the power of fear, the regime did not trust all of the cowardly beneficiaries who gathered around it, so it tied them to itself with bonds of dirty interests, bonds that quickly changed.
The outbreak of the revolution, or what is expected to be the fall of the regime, spontaneously fed the regime’s inner obsession with blood loyalty, expanding it regionally, then along sectarian lines. Unfortunately, the regime found among the Alawis many who accept involvement with it. The regime then found some among neighboring countries who adopted the regime as a sectarian alliance, linked to their broader sectarian organization (Shiism). So today, we seek to place the responsibility for all that has happened on one person [Bashar al-Assad], despite the fact that he personally is the least capable of carrying that responsibility, or even sharing it with his family.
The problem would not have reached this point without the prolonged conflict, the extent of the damage, and the number of victims. What has occurred is the result of a combination of many factors: the fabrication that failed mercenaries make up the revolutionary leadership, the fixation on religious sectarianism as the most prominent dynamic of the revolution, and the failure to exert enough pressure to force the regime to accept a peaceful solution. Other factors include: the failure to present sufficient support to the civil democratic opposition, providing support instead to groups loyal to outside interests and to extremists so that they could buy loyalty from the inside. Also contributing to the current state of affairs, Iranian and Russian support has weakened the effect of the sanctions.
As a result (and this is only so far): fifty thousand victims have lost their lives, and millions of displaced persons are wandering, crawling on their faces to escape shelling and fear of torture, massacre, and unprecedented brutality that has lasted a year and a half. After all of that, everyone wants to skip over justice and talk about a peaceful solution, tolerances, and assurances? Isn’t it strange?
How is it possible to imagine social peace without justice or retaliation? It is impossible to imagine that anyone can forget their suffering just because the opposition abroad has agreed to such a thing. This criticism also applies to the West, which has demonstrated a great deal of deficiency and shortcoming in understanding the reality on the ground and how to deal with it.
Today, they are suggesting that the organization that failed to form a small institution, the Syrian National Council, should form a government-in-exile and manage concerns of national size and importance. Alternatively, they suggest the formation of a national unity government led by one of the killers or their slaves in order to undertake the most difficult task of governing. All of these attempts, notwithstanding the fact that they are an entire year late in coming, will lead to chaos and diffusion of violence. They will open the door for further conflicts, not between the people and the regime, or between sects, but within each sect and in every neighborhood.
Some do not appreciate how accustomed to death our citizens have become, nor to what extent violence has become their only remaining instrument to achieve their desires and interests. They do not appreciate that after a year and a half of daily war, this population is entirely capable of perpetuating this war until they have retrieved their rights and dignity in their entirety.
How could the opposition agree to a government partnership headed by Assad regime cronies? On Monday, it signed a paper that guaranteed that in the event of the complete fall of the regime, its symbols, its courts, and the ancien regime figures will be respected, especially on the subject of building democracy. I believe that the opposition abroad must also be considered among the structures that are headed towards collapse.
Thus, the Syrian national contract has collapsed, and proven for history that the regional borders of artificial countries drawn by colonization are unable to organize viable national contracts, especially if these countries are governed by military regimes or religious totalitarian dictatorships. I don’t imagine it is possible to save the Syrian national contract, nor the Iraqi, nor the Lebanese, and not even the Jordanian or Yemeni. There is now an urgent need for regional, cooperative, unifying plans based on broader collective interests and social-political contracts that are not nationalistic, sectarian, or religious. For that matter, there is a need for an economic program to revive the region and open the horizon to regional cooperation established for unity, and not on ethnic, or denominational grounds, which have been established for never-ending chaos and conflict.
It is comforting to know that the collapse of the Syrian state and the Syrian national contract will complete the collapse of the Middle East region. This will open up the possibility of a different pattern of society and politics, as well as a different geographic-political map. In this new order, we see Turkish, Arab, Persian, Kurdish, Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Sunni, Shia, Druze, and Ismaili all dispersed throughout the provinces in all of their cultural distinctiveness, engaging together in a state of rights and laws and a unified economy of the long-awaited modern civil state, not modifying old, hated, worn-out patterns lingering over burying the dead.
We are with the revolution until the dismantling of the regime and the state is complete and has spread to neighboring countries. We will not be afraid to intervene in neighboring countries in the regional conflict because it will claim them all. For that reason, we are for a united, pluralistic, democratic state that resembles the United States or the European Union. This unity must be based on values and moral standards and not on violence and power. This is the message of the Arab Spring, so that the blood that has been shed and the sacrifices that have been made are priceless for the world and civilization, and commensurate with their purity and greatness.
The outbreak of the revolution, or what is expected to be the fall of the regime, spontaneously fed the regime’s inner obsession with blood loyalty, expanding it regionally, then along sectarian lines. Unfortunately, the regime found among the Alawis many who accept involvement with it. The regime then found some among neighboring countries who adopted the regime as a sectarian alliance, linked to their broader sectarian organization (Shiism). So today, we seek to place the responsibility for all that has happened on one person [Bashar al-Assad], despite the fact that he personally is the least capable of carrying that responsibility, or even sharing it with his family.
The problem would not have reached this point without the prolonged conflict, the extent of the damage, and the number of victims. What has occurred is the result of a combination of many factors: the fabrication that failed mercenaries make up the revolutionary leadership, the fixation on religious sectarianism as the most prominent dynamic of the revolution, and the failure to exert enough pressure to force the regime to accept a peaceful solution. Other factors include: the failure to present sufficient support to the civil democratic opposition, providing support instead to groups loyal to outside interests and to extremists so that they could buy loyalty from the inside. Also contributing to the current state of affairs, Iranian and Russian support has weakened the effect of the sanctions.
As a result (and this is only so far): fifty thousand victims have lost their lives, and millions of displaced persons are wandering, crawling on their faces to escape shelling and fear of torture, massacre, and unprecedented brutality that has lasted a year and a half. After all of that, everyone wants to skip over justice and talk about a peaceful solution, tolerances, and assurances? Isn’t it strange?
How is it possible to imagine social peace without justice or retaliation? It is impossible to imagine that anyone can forget their suffering just because the opposition abroad has agreed to such a thing. This criticism also applies to the West, which has demonstrated a great deal of deficiency and shortcoming in understanding the reality on the ground and how to deal with it.
Today, they are suggesting that the organization that failed to form a small institution, the Syrian National Council, should form a government-in-exile and manage concerns of national size and importance. Alternatively, they suggest the formation of a national unity government led by one of the killers or their slaves in order to undertake the most difficult task of governing. All of these attempts, notwithstanding the fact that they are an entire year late in coming, will lead to chaos and diffusion of violence. They will open the door for further conflicts, not between the people and the regime, or between sects, but within each sect and in every neighborhood.
Some do not appreciate how accustomed to death our citizens have become, nor to what extent violence has become their only remaining instrument to achieve their desires and interests. They do not appreciate that after a year and a half of daily war, this population is entirely capable of perpetuating this war until they have retrieved their rights and dignity in their entirety.
How could the opposition agree to a government partnership headed by Assad regime cronies? On Monday, it signed a paper that guaranteed that in the event of the complete fall of the regime, its symbols, its courts, and the ancien regime figures will be respected, especially on the subject of building democracy. I believe that the opposition abroad must also be considered among the structures that are headed towards collapse.
Thus, the Syrian national contract has collapsed, and proven for history that the regional borders of artificial countries drawn by colonization are unable to organize viable national contracts, especially if these countries are governed by military regimes or religious totalitarian dictatorships. I don’t imagine it is possible to save the Syrian national contract, nor the Iraqi, nor the Lebanese, and not even the Jordanian or Yemeni. There is now an urgent need for regional, cooperative, unifying plans based on broader collective interests and social-political contracts that are not nationalistic, sectarian, or religious. For that matter, there is a need for an economic program to revive the region and open the horizon to regional cooperation established for unity, and not on ethnic, or denominational grounds, which have been established for never-ending chaos and conflict.
It is comforting to know that the collapse of the Syrian state and the Syrian national contract will complete the collapse of the Middle East region. This will open up the possibility of a different pattern of society and politics, as well as a different geographic-political map. In this new order, we see Turkish, Arab, Persian, Kurdish, Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Sunni, Shia, Druze, and Ismaili all dispersed throughout the provinces in all of their cultural distinctiveness, engaging together in a state of rights and laws and a unified economy of the long-awaited modern civil state, not modifying old, hated, worn-out patterns lingering over burying the dead.
We are with the revolution until the dismantling of the regime and the state is complete and has spread to neighboring countries. We will not be afraid to intervene in neighboring countries in the regional conflict because it will claim them all. For that reason, we are for a united, pluralistic, democratic state that resembles the United States or the European Union. This unity must be based on values and moral standards and not on violence and power. This is the message of the Arab Spring, so that the blood that has been shed and the sacrifices that have been made are priceless for the world and civilization, and commensurate with their purity and greatness.
on this article