#Syria The fear-filled minority sect that keeps Syria’s struggling dictatorship alive
syrian troops backing AssadView larger picture
Syrian troops show their support for Bashar al-Assad, who is widely reported to struggle for influence in the presidential palace. Photograph: AFP/Getty Images (click on the picture for a graphic detailing Syria’s religious communities)

By Martin Chulov

They live in a sliver of land about 30 miles wide, trace their ancestry back to the Canaanites and swear allegiance to a totalitarian state, which serves as their protector. And, after more than 16 months of revolt in Syria, the country’s Alawite sect remains firmly at the heart of the regime’s fight to see off its challengers.

Fuelled by a belief that the events in Syria pose an existential threat to them, and coloured by a long history of persecution and prejudice, the Alawites are showing few signs of drifting away from the regime. Rather, the longer the uprising has continued, the more intransigent their support has become.

“That seems to be the way it is for the core group of supporters among the Alawites,” said a British diplomat in Beirut. “There has been messaging directed at them to let them know that their futures aren’t tied to Assad [president] and his gang. But it would be fair to say that a large majority of them still see themselves indelibly linked to the ruling clan.”

With the international community increasingly perplexed about how to manage the violence in Syria – an escalating crisis with serious implications for the region – attention has at times focused on how the Alawites could be tempted away from the regime. Such a move would rapidly lead to the fall of Damascus.

“It’s wishful thinking by the west,” said the head of the Alawite community in Lebanon, Rifaat al-Eid. “They have been coming to us for many months, all of the embassies, and gone away disappointed. We will fight for the Assads until the end.”

The diplomat agreed: “They are not part of the solution at this point. They fear they have far too much to lose.”

In the past 42 years, the Alawites of Syria have taken centre stage in national affairs, largely due to the access afforded them by the country’s modern-day godfather, former president Hafez al-Assad, who seized power in 1970.

Soon after becoming president, Assad, himself an Alawite, announced a “corrective revolution”, then went about creating the Middle East’s most efficient police state. Less than a decade after Hafez al-Assad took power, members of his sect, and especially his clan, were established in virtually all senior positions of the military and security establishment and the most meaningful positions in other state institutions.

Though accounting for only 12% of Syria’s population, the sect comprises the core of the establishment, the power of which has been almost absolute throughout 42 years of strongman rule. This has always been a sore point with some members of Syria’s Sunni majority, which comprises 75% (Christians, Druze and Kurds make up most of the rest).

But the resentment runs deeper in some quarters. Some Sunnis have also seen Alawites as heretics, a view that has shored up a belief among members of this small, mystical sect with tenuous links to Shia Islam that they would be wiped out by sectarian foes if the regime fell.

Playing on these fears has been a key strategy of Syria’s current ruler,Bashar al-Assad, 45, who inherited his father’s legacy and has done nothing to change it. Hafez’s inner court was passed on intact to his son and remains entrenched today.

The Alawites have become so bound up in everything the regime has become that extracting themselves would be a very tricky process, even if they wanted to.

“The system [Hafez al-Assad] created was modelled on the Stasi of East Germany,” said Dr Mousab Azzawi, a Syrian exile who runs the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. “He took officers from the villages, not the cities, and this was the principle of Abdul Nasser. It was also a vision of the Maoist ideology. In Syria the sectarianism it created became a leaking fissure.”

Azzawi, a physician from the Syrian coastal city of Latakia, an Alawite stronghold, said the security establishment, and by proxy Alawite society, under both Assads have been infused with the ideology that they are a “resistance and defence axis”.

“It was all about Israel, the super- capitalist power of the United States, the regional powers, and it was crowned when [Iran’s revolutionary rulers] took power in 1979,” said Azzawi, who claims a network of 241 verifiers who are chronicling the daily violence in Syria.

Several years before Iran’s Islamic Revolution, a Lebanese Shia cleric, Mousa al-Sadr, who later vanished in Lebanon, gave a contentious religious direction aligning the Alawites to Shia Islam. Shia theologians, including the two main clerics, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in Tehran and Ayatollah Ali Sistani, are not known to have revisited the subject since.

In any case, Iran, the Syrian regime and the Shia militia Hezbollah have maintained a security pact since 1982, which remains at the heart of the regime’s fightback, as well as the sect, which backs it to maintain its supremacy. Iran’s attempt to bolster Damascus is perhaps even more robust than the attempts by Russia to consolidate the future of its cold war ally. Their chief conduits in Damascus have been leading members of the Assad clan, but not necessarily Bashar al-Assad himself.

Although Assad is known to attend regular meetings with the security forces, he is widely reported to struggle for influence on important decisions, especially against the formidable weight of his younger brother Maher, brother-in-law Assef Shawkat, who survived an attempt to poison him in Damascus last month, and cousins Hafez and Rami Makhlouf. “These are the power players in the regime,” said Tawfik Donia, an Alawite member of the executive committee of the Syrian National Council. “Even in the villages, only one or two people are allowed to speak to the security establishment directly. It is very hierarchical.”

Whether or not Assad has room to manoeuvre as president or is a virtual prisoner of the presidential palace remains an issue that even those who have dealt with him regularly find difficult to answer.

“I know the man, and I know he betrays everyone who gets close to him,” said one prominent Lebanese politician. “But I still don’t know whether that’s because of weakness, or because he is truly one of them.” Pressed on the issue, he said: “I suspect it’s the latter.”

The Sunni-dominated National Council, which has been beset by infighting, has been criticised for not reaching out to minority groups and for giving them little reason to think that they would not be persecuted in a post-Assad vacuum in a manner likely to be worse than that they experienced under the Ottoman Turks.

Donia claims that messages are getting through. But he acknowledges that the Alawites have a lot to lose by jumping ship. “Realistically, the majority of the Alawites in this period are silent,” he says. “Some of the elders are saying, ‘Where is [Assad] taking us?’ It is not in their interests that this regime stays on. They want to express it, but there is a media blackout.

“The regime institutionalises the fear factor to bind them. They were peasants and he brought them to power. He used Alawites as tools, giving them crumbs of money and positions in police and army. The Assad regime has used us to strategically divide communities.”

Exiled Alawites say that one issue which has terrified members of their community still in their home towns and villages in the heartland of the country is the feared Shabiha militia, which has been at the vanguard of the regime’s crackdown. Drawn largely from the poor villages of the Alawite sect around Homs, Hama and Aleppo, the Shabiha have been widely accused of massacring civilians.

“The majority are not biased towards a child-killing regime,” said Donia. “The ones committing massacres are not representing the Alawite sect. We don’t justify any of the violent acts committed by these faceless beasts.”

With nothing moving diplomatically and the regime steadfast in its line that it is combating a foreign-backed jihadist plot, the status quo of a grinding war that crosses sectarian lines seems likely to be dominant during the summer at least.

Assad’s predictions that last summer the uprising, which he casts as a plot, will reach the Alawite mountain communities seems to be self-fulfilling. If that continues to happen, it seems likely to further harden the sect’s resolve, rather than weaken it.

“Separating them from the regime at this point is like trying to put toothpaste back into a tube,” said the Lebanese politician. “What you are seeing now is the fruits of Hafez’s sinister work. To dismantle this regime would require a full war that would ruin the region. Who has the appetite for it?”

The Syrian Shabiha and Their State #Syria
By Yassin al-Haj Salih

Syrian regime thugs, more commonly know as ‘shabiha’ mirror the structure and goals of the Assad regime which relies on raw force to accumulate personal wealth and ensure its own survival at all costs. In this article, Yassin al-Haj Saleh, dissects the functioning, motivations, funding and ideology of the shabiha, from their appearance in the 1970s until their reemmergence during the revolution. Saleh shows their central role in maintaining a regime in power that has long lost touch with people’s interests, morality and reality.

Read rest of article here

Syria’s sealed-off rebels #Syria

In this Saturday April 21, 2012 photo, a Syrian man leaves his home carriying a suitcase as he walks in a destroyed alley damaged from Syrian army forces shelling, at Bab Sbaa neighborhood in Homs province, central Syria.(Credit: AP)

A GlobalPost journalist whose name has been withheld for security reasons, reported this story from Baba Amr, Syria. Hugh Macleod and Annasofie Flamand contributed reporting and wrote the story from Beirut, Lebanon. This article originally appeared on GlobalPost.

BABA AMR, Syria — For Syrians on both sides of the concrete wall that now surrounds this neighborhood, the comparisons to the region’s longest running conflict are unavoidable.

Global Post

“When my wife described the wall to me I immediately thought of the wall built by the Israelis to isolate Palestinian villages and towns in the West Bank,” said Abu Annas, formerly a resident of Homs’ devastated Baba Amr district.

“I can understand that Israel built a wall to protect Israeli settlers from Palestinians. But I cannot understand how a national government builds a wall to separate its citizens from each other.”

Since forcing the retreat of rebel fighters from Baba Amr after a brutal month-long bombardment in February, government forces have constructed a massive concrete wall to seal off the former opposition stronghold.

A reporter for GlobalPost recently visited Baba Amr and the wall, describing it as up to 10-feet high and made of cement. It’s still so new there is no graffiti. Since most residents have long fled, the neighborhood behind the wall has become “a dead land for cats and dogs,” as one former resident described it.

Soldiers and secret police guard the few narrow passages through the wall, arresting any male aged between 13 and 60, said Annas, whose wife and young daughter recently went to check on what remained of their home inside Baba Amr.

“They spent half an hour arguing with the security officer who said his men would have to check them before they passed through,” he said. “She came back crying, saying, ‘There is no Baba Amr.’”

Those houses not destroyed in February’s siege have been taken over by soldiers, Annas said. Electricity and phone lines have been cut for months and now cars cannot enter, nor delivery trucks, meaning shops are almost all closed.

Activists in the area said the neighborhood — once home to some 28,000 people — has now been all but abandoned, with only about 1,000 still living inside the wall.

In other Sunni-majority opposition neighborhoods throughout Homs, such as Karm al-Zeitoune, where whole families were killed in recent sectarian massacres, and Deir Balbah and Qarabes, the majority of residents have also fled.

With the UN-Arab League ceasefire plan in tatters — at least 462 people have been killed since April 16 when the UN resolved to send ceasefire monitors, according to the opposition Local Coordination Committees — and veto-wielding Russia blaming the armed opposition for the majority of attacks, the Assad regime appears to be taking steps to re-exert long-term security control and collectively punish rebellious communities.

On Saturday, Abu Bakr Saleh, a spokesman for the Baba Amr media center who lived through the bombardment, said other security measures were preventing residents from traveling between Baba Amr and neighboring Joubar neighborhood, to the far southwest of the city.

Last week, GlobalPost witnessed continued shelling in Khaldiyeh and Bayada, Sunni-majority neighborhoods in north Homs that support the opposition and lie adjacent to Zahara, a neighborhood of mainly Allawites, an offshoot of Shiite Islam, to which the ruling Assad family and a majority of government elites belong.

Cairo Street, which leads from north Homs into Zahara in the east of the city, has been renamed “Death Street” by locals after the deadly snipers deployed to rooftops, presumably to protect the pro-regime neighborhood.

On their first visit to Homs on April 21, members of the advance team of UN observers, the first of 300 due to be deployed to monitor violations of the ceasefire agreement, were forced to take cover after shots rang out as they walked down Cairo Street from Bayada.

“The regime will not adhere to the Annan plan and the near future will prove that,” said Omar, a 24-year-old member of the rebel Free Syrian Army, told GlobalPost in an interview at his home in Homs’ Deir Balba.

“The regime is preparing for the post-Annan cease-fire by building walls around Sunni districts to block our movement and is digging a long trench around Homs two meters wide.”

Reports of Assad’s forces digging trenches around the south and west of Homs, where Baba Amr is located, first emerged last November. A video journalist working with GlobalPost witnessed the trench during a visit to Homs this February. The purpose of the trench remains unclear, but it appears to be a another military tactic to hinder access to rebellious neighborhoods.

In Daraa, the first city to rise up against the regime and suffer a sustained military assault, GlobalPost recently witnessed a labyrinth of checkpoints and deployment of tanks, troops and snipers, effectively sealing off the population from surrounding areas and the capital.

The regime blames “armed terrorist groups” for the breakdown in the ceasefire agreement. Information Minister Adnan Mahmoud told state-run Syrian Arab News Agency last week that the “terrorists” had committed more than 1,300 violations.

Russia last week echoed a similar line. Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich accused the opposition of shifting “to tactics of terror on a regional scale,” claiming Western governments were arming the rebel fighters.

Rather, it appears post-revolutionary Libya, which strongly supports Syria’s opposition, has made the first serious effort to arm the rebels. On Saturday Lebanese authorities announced they had discovered guns and rocket propelled grenades aboard a ship attempting to dock in north Lebanon’s Tripoli, a Sunni-majority city also widely supportive of Syria’s opposition.

Omar, the young rebel fighter from Homs, said the FSA was now restructuring after suffering a strategic defeat in Baba Amr.

“We will adopt guerilla tactics,” he said. “We are fighting in small groups and moving from one district to another so we don’t let the regime block this district and kill us. The FSA leaders made a big mistake when they tried to hold Baba Amr.”

As the rebels seek new strategies for their armed struggle, the Assad regime has made its contempt of the international diplomatic effort clear. Assad himself revealed his scorn for last December’s Arab League monitoring mission in an email, first obtained and verified by the Guardian.

Writing to Hadeel Ali, his young media consultant, the president forwarded a YouTube video ridiculing the mission’s inability to spot hidden Syrian tanks, to which she responded, “Hahahahahahaha, OMG!!!”

That same contempt appeared to be on display more recently as Kofi Annan, the Arab League envoy, briefed the Security Council on a letter received from Syrian Foreign Minister Waleed Mualem on April 21. The letter stated that the government had now withdrawn all heavy armor and troops from population centers, the first step in Annan’s cease-fire plan.

But daily videos of smoke billowing above Homs and troops opening fire in urban protest centers have told a very different story.

Syrian officials see Annan’s plan as “a license for the regime to do more of the same,” the respected International Crisis Group, one of the only international think tanks able to still interview Syrian officials, wrote in its April 10 report.

“As the regime sees it, Annan’s mission, far from presenting a threat, can be a way to drag the process on and shift the focus from regime change to regime concessions,” ICG reported, “granting humanitarian access, agreeing to a ceasefire and beginning a vaguely defined political dialogue, all of which can be endlessly negotiated and renegotiated.”

As that process unfolds, the wall in Baba Amr stands as a physical symbol of the deep-seeded sectarian hatred that a year of relentless violence in Syria has engendered in former neighbors.

“The Sunni districts are hosting terrorists and armed gangs so the government should close them off by all means. If this needs a high wall, why not?” Haidar, a 35-year-old Allawite from Homs’ Zahara neighborhood, told GlobalPost.

A member of the Popular Committees, the official name for armed civilian militias fighting for the regime, Haidar said the possible collapse of the regime would mean no future for three million Allawites in Syria’s big cities. “We would return to our villages in the mountains,” he said.

“We have been occupying senior positions in the army, security agencies and government in Syria for four decades and we will keep the power in our hands, whatever this costs us.”

Assad Family Values #Syria

How the Son Learned to Quash a Rebellion From His Father

Despite Bold Talk on #Syria, Turkey Sees Limits of Its Power
Bulent Kilic/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Syrian refugees arrived by truck near the border between Syria and Turkey at Reyhanli in Antakya on Thursday.

Published: March 16, 2012
ISTANBUL — As the lethal crackdown by the Syrian government intensifies, Turkey has been struggling in the face of a spiraling crisis on its doorstep that is exposing the limits of its leadership in the region.

In the year since the conflict in Syria began, the Turkish government has sought to play a leading role in stemming the crisis, engaging in aggressive diplomacy at the Arab League and, more recently, calling for the establishment of humanitarian corridors in Syria to help protect civilians. Turkey’s foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, has likened President Bashar al-Assad of Syria to Slobodan Milosevic, the Serbian strongman who plunged his country into an ethnically driven civil war.

But for all of its bluster and stated resolve, Turkey has been stymied in its ability to follow through with anything concrete. Officials and analysts say Turkey is extremely wary of engaging in any unilateral military action, mindful of the perils of igniting a sectarian conflict on its own border, alienating public opinion in the Arab world or, worse, inadvertently instigating regional war.

The conflict in Syria has presented Turkey with an opportunity, both perilous and promising.

“The stakes are very high for Turkey in Syria,” said Soli Ozel, a columnist for Haberturk, a leading Turkish newspaper. “If Turkey proves to be ineffectual in resolving the Syrian conflict, then all of the claims of its regional prowess will take a big hit.”

Turkish officials say they have not ruled out having their military participate in an international plan to create a buffer zone in the event that Mr. Assad continues to kill his own people and an even larger influx of refugees ensues. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan raised the possibility again on Friday, telling reporters in the capital, Ankara, that “a buffer zone, a security zone, are things being studied.” But that idea has been discussed since the early days of the conflict with no concrete steps taken by Turkey or other nations toward carrying it out.

What has accelerated, though, has been the exodus of refugees despite the presence of Syrian forces along the border with Turkey. On Thursday, Turkish officials said more than 1,000 Syrians had crossed over in the past 24 hours, with more than 14,700 Syrians now sheltered in five camps in Hatay, a Turkish province on the border.

Turkish officials said the country was making contingency plans in the event of a large inflow of refugees, as Syrians demonstrate a willingness to brave an area that has been mined and military forces willing to shoot unarmed civilians. Turkey is to open a refugee camp near the southern town of Kilis next month to host 10,000 more Syrians. Another camp is being built at Ceylanpinar, near the eastern end of the border, for up to 20,000 people, officials said.

Yet that is as far as Turkey is willing to go in terms of unilateral action, analysts say. It will not act alone to impose a buffer zone in Syria because, they say, Russia and Iran are backing Syria, and Turkey does not want to risk a confrontation. They say Turkey also fears that boots on the ground could undermine its popularity in a region where memories of Ottoman rule still run deep.

Despite its limited room to maneuver, Turkey has been jockeying to position itself to have influence in a post-Assad Syria. It is hosting the Syrian opposition, including the Syrian National Council, and the rebel Free Syrian Army, about 10,000 soldiers that are beinghoused in an army camp in Turkey near the Syrian border. Neither group has proved to be cohesive or effective enough to present a viable challenge to the power of the Syrian government.

As Mr. Assad continues to cling to power, and divisions in the fractured Syrian opposition intensify, Turkey risks finding itself the patron of weak opposition forces.

Turkey has been playing a leading role in marshaling a coalition to put international pressure on Syria. At the same time, American and Turkish officials say, the Syrian crisis has made Mr. Erdogan an indispensable ally to President Obama, helping to overcome some of the tensions caused by a break between Turkey and Israel.

Yet the conflict has also laid bare the limits of Turkey’s power in the region. Before the Syrian conflict erupted, Turkey was emerging as one of Syria’s closest allies, with the two countries holding joint cabinet sessions and Mr. Erdogan and Mr. Assad even vacationing together. Turkey’s 500-mile border with Syria is its longest, and trade between the countries more than tripled to $2.5 billion in 2010.

But despite years of diplomatic engagement and economic investment, Turkey could not persuade Mr. Assad to cease the violence and move ahead with political reform. The conflict in Syria is seen as a crucial test for Turkey as it struggles to carry out its newly muscular foreign policy in the region. Turkey’s aspirations to join the European Union are all but dormant. The conflict with Cyprus appears as intractable as ever. Efforts to reach a solution over Armenia are at an impasse. Diplomatic ties with Israel are frozen over an Israeli commando raid in May 2010 on a vessel that tried to reach Gaza from Turkey. Iran remains deeply suspicious of Turkey’s agreement to host a NATO missile shield.

Bordered by Syria, Iraq and Iran, Turkey, a majority Sunni country of 79 million, risks becoming mired by the sectarian divisions convulsing its neighbors. While Syria is tipping toward civil war, Iraq is once again buffeted by sectarian strife while Iran has aligned itself firmly behind the Assad government.

Sami Kohen, a foreign affairs columnist at Milliyet, a leading newspaper, noted that Turkey has a significant population of Alevis, a Muslim sect that shares certain beliefs with Mr. Assad’s Alawite sect, some of whom are sympathetic to Mr. Assad and could become politicized.

At the same time, Turkish officials express concern that Syria, backed by Iran, could seek to embolden the militant Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or P.K.K., as a means to punish Turkey for supporting the Syrian opposition.

While Turkey would clearly benefit if Mr. Assad were overthrown, analysts note that Arab countries would be loath to see Turkey exert too much influence. “Arab countries don’t want Turkey to be the kingmaker in Syria,” said Mr. Ozel, the columnist for Haberturk. “Arabs are Arabs, and Turks are Turks.”

Alan George: The Assad regime’s only purpose is to stay in power #Syria


There will be much hand-wringing in the West at China and Russia’s refusal yesterday to endorse a robust censure of the Syrian regime. But even if Moscow’s position had been different, little would have changed. The beleaguered regime of Bashar al-Assad is simply not amenable to diplomatic pressure. It is interested only in clinging to power, at whatever cost to the Syrian people and regardless of the consequences.

Already, somewhere between 5,500 and 7,500 people have been killed, and perhaps 35,000 seriously wounded. Tens of thousands have been imprisoned and thousands have simply disappeared. Torture is rife. There are some 20,000 refugees, mainly in neighbouring Turkey and Lebanon. There’s every reason to believe that it can only get worse.

Many of the Syrian protesters have been clamouring for outside intervention to protect them from their government’s ruthless onslaught. But the reality is that there is little the outside world can do, short of intervening militarily. After Libya, that’s not on the cards. The Arab League has tried and failed to mediate a solution. Neighbouring Turkey supports the opposition, but not to the extent of invading Syria on its behalf. Economic sanctions have had a serious effect, but not enough to bring down the regime. Bashar al-Assad and his family know that the most they have to fear from the UN – even if the Russians drop their protective veto – are toothless resolutions.

The Ba’athists seized power in a military coup in March 1963. In the initial period of Ba’athist rule, politics still existed. The party had military and civilian wings; there were leftists and rightists. In November 1970, Bashar al-Assad’s father Hafez, Syria’s defence minister, staged a coup. The military and security establishments were massively expanded, with an influx of officers from the new president’s Alawi sect. Syria became a police state ruled with an iron fist. Political activity degenerated into a personality cult centred on the president.

When Hafez al-Assad died in mid-2000, his son, Bashar, a British-educated ophthalmologist, succeeded him. There followed a short-lived Damascus Spring. Criticism of the regime became possible, even in the state-run media. After six months, the spring turned into a winter. Like his father, Bashar has stayed in power largely thanks to his security agencies terrorising the population.

This is a regime that has no purpose other than to stay in power. There’s no real ideology: just an empty rhetoric of vacuous slogans. That the broadly based protest movement should be denounced as nothing more than “armed gangs” acting as “agents” for outside powers is entirely par for the course.

It’s very much a family affair, however. Bashar al-Assad rules largely as a figurehead, with the consent of a tight coterie of relatives. His younger brother Maher, who heads the Republican Guard and commands the army’s 4th Mechanised Division, has been especially active in the attempts to suppress the uprising. Bashar’s brother-in-law, Assef Shawkat, was formerly head of military intelligence and is now deputy chief of staff of the armed forces. A cousin, Hafez Makhlouf, heads the Damascus branch of the feared General Intelligence Directorate. While the President and his English-born wife Asma show no particular appetite for ostentatious consumption, other members of this mafia-like ruling family have wholeheartedly embraced the material benefits of power.

Central to the regime’s narrative is that well-worn excuse of all dictators – that it alone can preserve stability. Yet if there were free and fair elections in Syria tomorrow, it would be out on its ears. It knows that any meaningful concessions to a real democratic process would be political suicide. It also knows that the opposition stands alone, and will probably continue to stand alone, even if the Russians change their tune at the UN.

Initially, the protesters called only for reform. Then, faced with violence and a refusal to negotiate, they started demanding the regime’s downfall and began to take up arms to defend themselves. The middle of last year saw the formation of a Free Syrian Army (FSA), which is growing fast and is likely to become a key determinant of the eventual outcome of this struggle. It may be that the only factors that now really matter are the rate of defections from the security forces and the ability of the cash-strapped regime to pay its soldiers.

In the Middle East, crystal-ball gazing is always risky. But my guess is that this regime cannot last. Very probably, its demise is now only a matter of time. In February last year the President’s wife infamously revealed in an interview with Paris Vogue that her household was run on what the magazine described as “wildly democratic principles”. “We all vote on what we want, and where,” she disclosed. Hopefully, it won’t be too long before the people are able to exercise a similar degree of democracy.

Dr Alan George is a senior associate member of St Antony’s College, Oxford. He is the author of Syria: Neither Bread Nor Freedom (Zed Books, London 2003
)

U.N. Tentatively Backs a Plan for #Syria

UNITED NATIONS — Security Council ambassadors reached a wobbly consensus on Thursday backing an Arab League plan for political change in Syria, after they dropped a specific reference to President Bashar al-Assad’s ceding of power.

The resolution’s passage is far from assured, and it still must be approved by the governments of the 15 member states, including Russia, which rejected a previous resolution in October.

In hopes of persuading the Russians and other skeptics, Western and Arab ambassadors also jettisoned calls for a voluntary arms embargo and sanctions.

Although diplomats acknowledged that those changes diluted the pressure being brought to bear on Damascus, they said they wanted to concentrate on supporting the Arab League in pushing Syria toward democratic transition.

It was unclear whether the changes would be enough to persuade Russia, Syria’s ally and its major weapons supplier, to back the resolution. But the ambassadors said they planned to send the resolution overnight to their governments to see if they would move it toward a vote.

“What the Arab League is seeking from the Security Council is strong support, and that is what we concluded,” Mohammed Loulichki, the permanent representative of Morocco, which drafted the resolution, said in a brief interview. “In the negotiations, of course, we could not translate all the elements, but they are well known by everybody.”

Emerging grimly from four hours of negotiations, the ambassadors all repeated the same line, which some acknowledged they had agreed to tell the news media. They avoided saying they had reached an agreement, instead emphasizing that there was a consensus document that they were sending to their governments for approval.

“There are some still-complicated issues that our capitals will have to deliberate on and provide each of us with instructions on,” said Susan E. Rice, the American ambassador.

Over the past two days, the toughest arguments have surrounded a paragraph that defines the Council’s support for political change in Syria.

The draft being sent to the various capitals, a copy of which was obtained by The New York Times, said that the Council “fully supports” the Arab League plan. Three clauses that endorsed specific aspects of the plan — including that Mr. Assad delegate his authority to his vice president to speed a transition to democracy — were removed.

But Arab and Western diplomats said the essential idea remained, even if it was not spelled out. In addition, the words “Syrian-led” were inserted to denote that outsiders should not interfere in the political transition.

The arguments about that paragraph went back and forth all afternoon, with Ambassador Vitaly I. Churkin of Russia describing the negotiations as a “roller coaster.”

Asked if Russia could live with the “fully supports” language, Mr. Churkin sidestepped the question. “The end result is that we do have a text which we are going to report to our capitals, and we will see what the outcome will be,” he told reporters. “I will be happy if we have a process that will be successful.”

Russia had vowed to veto any resolution that supported removing the Assad government or that might lead to outside military intervention.

The Arab League plan calls for Mr. Assad to delegate his authority to his vice president, paving the way for a national unity government formed with the opposition within two weeks that would lead to a new constitution and new elections.

Diplomats said overcoming that apparent contradiction required a certain constructive ambiguity, without leaving the resolution open to wide interpretation.

The disagreements on Thursday centered on whether the Council was actually endorsing the political transition sought by the Arab League, or whether it was merely agreeing to support the Arab League’s work in carrying out the plan. The wording had to bolster the League’s efforts in seeking a democratic transition without seeming to demand that the government be removed, the diplomats said.

“I hope people will not interpret it in a different way,” Mr. Loulichki said, meaning anything other than support for the League’s plan.

The agreement reached was nothing if not fragile. Winning over Russia was a key step because it is one of the five permanent members of the Council with veto power, but other envoys, like those of India and South Africa, were not present when the consensus was reached.

“Nobody is really sure it is going to hold,” said one diplomat involved in the negotiations. “It is right on the margin.”

The Council has failed to pass any resolution regarding the situation in Syria since March, when the government in Damascus began the violent suppression of protests against Mr. Assad’s rule. Russia and China vetoed the last such attempt in October, even after United Nations ambassadors had reached an agreement.

The new resolution condemns the violence on both sides, but it also would adopt wholesale the steps to end the spiraling bloodshed that the Arab League has been demanding since November. Those steps include ending all violence; releasing detained protesters, who are believed to number in the thousands; withdrawing all Syrian forces from civilian areas; and guaranteeing the right to peaceful demonstrations.

While the Assad government had previously agreed to these measures, it has virtually ignored them, and whether their repetition in a Security Council resolution will stem the escalating violence is uncertain.

Brothers In Arms #Syria

Vladimir Putin’s stubborn support for the Syrian regime is intended to shore up his faltering support within Russia.

BY MICHAEL WEISS , JULIA PETTENGILL | FEBRUARY 2, 2012

Eleven months and more than 7,000 deaths later, the Syrian regime’s only ally outside of Iran remains Vladimir Putin’s Russia, which has provided both diplomatic support to President Bashar al-Assad by obstructing key Security Council resolutions and material support in the form of a vigorous arms trade with Damascus. The Kremlin has proven that it is expert in the grim application of realpolitik to defend its last remaining friend in the Middle East.

There is, however, another important element to Putin’s defiant support for the Syrian regime: the upcoming Russian presidential election, scheduled for March 4. Putin’s orchestrated return to power as president has been complicated by an increasingly vocal domestic opposition movement, which took to the streets en masse to protest against voter fraud in December’s parliamentary elections.

These demonstrations, coupled with the general weariness at the decline of living standards and increasing state corruption, have raised the possibility that Putin may not secure a majority in the first round of voting, a contingency he has acknowledged as possible — though it would no doubt be politically disastrous for him and his ruling United Russia party. As a consequence, Putin is attempting to shore up his reputation as an unyielding strongman abroad to detract from the increasing perception of weakness at home.

Putin has not had a significant foreign policy standoff since the 2008 Russian-Georgian War, which was billed as an effort to reclaim Russia’s “near abroad” from creeping Western and NATO influence. He opposed, but did not veto, the Security Council’s authorization of a NATO-imposed no-fly zone in Libya last year. He now appears to be compensating for that acquiescence by backing a friendly tyrant and showing a wobbly electorate that Russia won’t be pushed around by American and European democracy-promoters.

Putin has hard military reasons for supporting Assad’s Syria, home to Russia’s only warm-water port in the Mediterranean and a longstanding symbol of Russian influence in the Middle East. In 1957, Bashar’s father Hafez, then still a Syrian Air Force pilot, received his training in MiG fighter jets in the Soviet Union. Since the end of the Cold War, the Syrian-Russian relationship has not only endured but strengthened. In recent years, Damascus and Moscow have enjoyed an arms trade estimated at $4 billion. Last month, a Russian naval flotilla, including the aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov,docked in the Russian-controlled port of Tartous. Two weeks ago, Russia dispatched a freighter carrying several dozen tons of munitions to Syria via Cyprus. And just as the Arab League was deciding to endorse a policy of peaceful transition of power in Syria, Moscow inked a $550 milliondeal to provide Assad with 36 new Yakovlev Yak-130 attack jets.

Putin’s defiance on Syria is also an effort to reclaim the mantle of nationalism, which he once used to his advantage but has now slipped beyond his control. Great Russian chauvinism, historically exploited by czars and Communist Party general secretaries, has always been both an asset and a liability to Putin’s political fortunes. Far-right nationalists oppose Russia’s financing of puppet-regimes in the Caucasus, for instance, yet Putin has underwritten jingoistic pro-Kremlin youth movements such as Nashi, whose agents have harassed Western diplomats, violently disrupted pro-democracy demonstrations, and staged annual indoctrinating summer camp programs where figures such as former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili are compared to Nazis.

As Putin has sought to project strength abroad, he has intensified his efforts to whitewash his authoritarian political record and re-write Russian history. Over the last month, he produced a barrage of opinion pieces covering everything from his program of economic and political “reforms,” to the imperative of preserving the “dominance of Russian culture.” Nostalgia for lost great power status looms large in the mind of a man who once called the collapse of the Soviet Union “the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the twentieth century.” In another recent article, Putin attempted to regain the ground lost to opposition nationalists by reasserting the platform of Russian exceptionalism that United Russia has long cultivated. “The Russian people and Russian culture are the linchpin, the glue that binds together this unique civilization,” he wrote. “But all kinds of provocateurs and our enemies will do their best to snatch this linchpin from Russia … What they really want in the end is to make people destroy their homeland with their own hands.”

Putin’s Russia has also employed this ultra-nationalist rhetoric in an intensive media war meant to prop up the Syrian regime. Kremlin-controlled media outlets, such as Pravda and the English-language channel Russia Today, have repeatedly parroted Assad’s justification that his brutal assault on Syrian demonstrators is actually a crackdown on “terrorists” abetted by foreign intelligence agencies. To rally domestic support, Putin has implicitly drawn a parallel between the Syrian regime’s crackdown on a civil protest movement and Russia’s scorched-earth campaign in Chechnya.

It’s a familiar playbook for Putin. The Second Chechen War vastly increased his poll ratings when he was still Boris Yeltsin’s last prime minister and heir apparent. Assad’s rhetoric, which depicts the Syrian demonstrators as a contagion to be “cleansed,” echoes Putin’s infamous threat to Chechen rebels that he would “wipe them out in the outhouse.” By defending Assad’s propaganda war on an imagined Islamist insurgency, Putin is reminding Russians of what made them want to vote for him over a decade ago.

Yet Putin’s opportunism might just be his rivals’ opportunity. The United States, the European Union, and the Arab League — all committed to phasing out the Assad dictatorship — stands to remind the tens of thousands of Russians set to protest this week that their battle for self-determination is the same as their counterparts in Syria. Russian democrats should be encouraged to show Putin that his foreign policy is a symptom of, not an antidote to, his defunct domestic agenda.

#Syria Bashar al-Assad to be driven from power within three months, says Syrian MP

Syria: Western journalist 'killed in Homs'
Bashar al-Assad’s hardline speech last week in which he promised to use an ‘iron fist’ against the “terrorists” who opposed him has triggered fresh talk of military intervention Photo: STR/AFP/Getty Images

Imad Ghalioun, who defected from the regime and landed in Cairo on Sunday, claimed the situation in the city was “more difficult than anyone can imagine”. But he also said in an interview that the crisis was destroying the regime from within.

“Economically speaking the regime can’t hang on longer than two months, politically speaking it can’t stay longer than two months,” he said. “My estimate is that the regime would collapse in maximum three months.”

Mr Ghalioun was speaking as clear battle lines were being drawn both inside Syria and outside. Mr Assad’s hardline speech last week in which he promised to use an “iron fist” against the “terrorists” who opposed him has triggered fresh talk of military intervention.

Diplomats and even opposition activists acknowledge that the balance of power inside the country remains firmly in Mr Assad’s favour, with defectors to the Free Syrian Army a small proportion of the regime’s military strength.

In what some might say was a sign of desperation, the FSA, which is now in regular contact on tactics with the Syrian National Council, issued a statement on Monday night calling for United Nations intervention under “Chapter 7”, which allows for military action.

However, it is also clear that the regime’s capacities are being slowly degraded. An economic crisis as foreign investment has fled, combined with sanctions, has hit power supplies and raised prices in the shops.

Meanwhile, in some cities, notably Homs but also smaller towns such as the resort of Zabadani near the Lebanese border, rebels have been able to seize and hold on to territory against military shelling for several days.

The rebels are also striking against regime troops more boldly, to lethal effect. A brigadier-general, Mohammed Abdul-Hamid al-Awad, was shot dead on Monday, while a rocket attack on Tuesday killed an officer and five of his men at a checkpoint near Damascus, the state news agency reported.

Russia, which has rejected all forms of intervention against its closest Middle East ally, has now presented a resolution condemning both regime and opposition for violence, but it is unlikely to proceed as it fails to suggest a solution.

Much will depend on the hearing the Arab League will give on Saturday to its peace monitors, who are due to complete the first stage of their investigation this week, and whether it seeks to force the issue at the United Nations itself or merely extend its mission.

Although Qatar has called for Arab troops to be sent in, western nations have made clear that even if they intervened, it would only be with Arab League and United Nations backing.

On Tuesday, a renewed assault in Homs, including the use of tank rounds, killed eight people – a sign not only of the regime’s violence but of the continued resistance of defenders.

Mr Ghalioun said: “The situation in Homs is more difficult than anyone can imagine. The shooting is going on, and no one can even leave their homes to purchase what they need. The situation is inhumane.”

He said he was moving to Cairo because he could only represent his constituency from outside Syria. “We can’t express our position in Syria,” he said. “We can’t even help the people, which is supposed to be my role as a member of parliament.”