Syria: Two bits of a bystander
This is not a progressive government defending humanist politics. This is a ruthless ruling clique.
The subject of US intervention in Syria is being hotly debated by journalists, analysts and human rights activists. A common position taken by a fair number of commentators is as follows: the revolution represents a battle between the secularists and the evil (radical and fundamentalist) forces of rebellion. Bashar al Assad must be supported, they say, against US imperialism and religious fundamentalism.
The willingness of the US to conduct strikes in the country is seen, by many, as just another aspect of a Saudi-US nexus working against a progressive regime. What is lacking in these knee-jerk situations is an in-depth study of the situation in Syria, including a critique of Baathism, the history of the Syrian people and the rise of the movement against the present regime. Whether or not the Syrian government used chemical weapons is the subject of another debate, but the fact remains that a pluralistic movement for democracy is being crushed brutally. This is not a progressive government defending humanist politics. This is a ruthless ruling clique, which is desperately clinging to power by pandering to the false binary of extremists versus secularists.
Tunisia’s Ben Ali stepped down after three weeks and six days in the face of popular revolt. Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak stepped down after two weeks and three days. It has been over two years since the revolt started in Syria and the violence is getting increasingly horrifying. The common factor uniting all these countries is the process of a revolution — the struggle of the oppressed against the oppressor. But the difference between these revolutions is that Assad’s regime understands only the language of force. The US will not hesitate in supporting the most unsavoury elements among the rebels, nor will it back down from bombing Syria to achieve what it considers to be its strategic goals. But the fact of greatest significance right now is this: the US is not launching artillery barrages on opposition strongholds in residential areas. Assad is.
In such a situation, just how much can one fault elements within the Syrian opposition, if they feel a foreign intervention might save them? There will be many things the Syrians will wish did not happen, in retrospect. Perhaps, the intervention will be one of them. But for now, the butcher of Damascus needs to bow to the will of his people.
Published in The Express Tribune, September 9th, 2013.
The willingness of the US to conduct strikes in the country is seen, by many, as just another aspect of a Saudi-US nexus working against a progressive regime. What is lacking in these knee-jerk situations is an in-depth study of the situation in Syria, including a critique of Baathism, the history of the Syrian people and the rise of the movement against the present regime. Whether or not the Syrian government used chemical weapons is the subject of another debate, but the fact remains that a pluralistic movement for democracy is being crushed brutally. This is not a progressive government defending humanist politics. This is a ruthless ruling clique, which is desperately clinging to power by pandering to the false binary of extremists versus secularists.
Tunisia’s Ben Ali stepped down after three weeks and six days in the face of popular revolt. Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak stepped down after two weeks and three days. It has been over two years since the revolt started in Syria and the violence is getting increasingly horrifying. The common factor uniting all these countries is the process of a revolution — the struggle of the oppressed against the oppressor. But the difference between these revolutions is that Assad’s regime understands only the language of force. The US will not hesitate in supporting the most unsavoury elements among the rebels, nor will it back down from bombing Syria to achieve what it considers to be its strategic goals. But the fact of greatest significance right now is this: the US is not launching artillery barrages on opposition strongholds in residential areas. Assad is.
In such a situation, just how much can one fault elements within the Syrian opposition, if they feel a foreign intervention might save them? There will be many things the Syrians will wish did not happen, in retrospect. Perhaps, the intervention will be one of them. But for now, the butcher of Damascus needs to bow to the will of his people.
Published in The Express Tribune, September 9th, 2013.