|
-
-
May 24,
2004 © New York University. All Rights Reserved.
-
-
Engage,
don’t alienate, Syrian reformers
By Robert Blecher
Global Beat Syndicate
RICHMOND, Va.—The Syrian Accountability and Lebanese
Sovereignty Restoration Act that just became law marks the latest
U.S. misstep in the Middle East. Pushed by Congress and endorsed
by President Bush, the new law will not hasten the administration’s
stated goal of bringing democracy to the region, but instead
will delay it by pushing reform-minded Syrians toward the regime.
American failures in Iraq are obvious. But the Bush administration
plan to level sanctions on Syria makes clear Mr. Bush has not
abandoned his efforts to remake the region. Our policymakers
see in Syria what they saw in Iraq: a regime that brutalizes
its own people, possesses weapons of mass destruction, occupies
a neighboring country and threatens global order by supporting
terrorism. But by viewing Syria through Iraqi-tinted lenses,
we not only pursue a partly erroneous and bankrupt policy, but
fundamentally misconstrue the Syrian political scene.
The room for political maneuvering in Syria, though severely
circumscribed, has long been larger than in Iraq. In the areas
under Saddam Hussein’s control, political opposition was
moribund, although Islamist groups maintained a weak presence.
In Syria, by contrast, opposition parties have remained a staple
of the political scene. Syria’s Ba‘th Party rules
in conjunction with seven others in the National Progressive
Front. Opposition parties have little independence, but the
NPF coalition itself creates inherent tensions that can be exploited;
the Ba‘thists have never been able to ignore the NPF’s
demands completely.
Moreover, “illegal” parties have long been active
in Syria. Even after Hafiz al-Asad decimated the Islamist movement
in the 1980s, smaller-scale organizing continued. Disaffected
Kurds, Palestinians and Islamists coalesced around local issues
to challenge to the regime. The regime’s response was
harsh, but its victories were never absolute. In fact, the disturbances
that recently rocked several Syrian cities would never have
spread so widely had the political base not been prepared by
eleven illegal Kurdish parties.
Even before Bush’s Middle East reform policies, social
and intellectual ferment in Syria was growing, reaching new
heights following Hafiz al-Asad’s death, when hopes for
true political and economic reform were widespread. The “Damascus
Spring” withered on the vine, but a new social solidarity
took root then, especially among intellectuals in major cities.
Today, political forums are watched by informers, but dissidents
still meet informally. A decade-old wave of conspicuous consumption
has produced many new cafes, restaurants and other venues where
elites share their discontent. Nor is dissent restricted to
the wealthy: complaints about the economy and government corruption
are commonplace on satellite television and even in state-run
newspapers.
Another hopeful sign is that reform itself is now subject to
debate in Syria.Older voices are being challenged by a new generation.
As one “twenty-something” said after attending a
political forum, “The older generation, they just want
to hear themselves talk. They are only out to promote their
own reputations. It’s the younger folks who have the most
interesting things to say. One got up and attacked Riyad al-Turk
[Syria’s leading dissident]. It was the best thing that
happened at the meeting.”
Informal social networks, rising expectations, and the rapid
dissemination of information have conferred a new, if still
inchoate, sense of empowerment. This gradual aggravation of
domestic tensions dividing the regime from various social groups
offers the best chance for reform. The process might not happen
as quickly as the proponents of democracy and justice wish,
and it might produce a government unlikely to do our bidding.
But it offers the best possibility for authentic reform that
speaks to the needs and desires of the Syrian people.
While many Syrians want to see a representative government replace
Ba‘th rule, they support their regime’s foreign
policy. Thus, our new Syrian Accountability Act will narrow
the gap between the regime and the people, not exacerbate it.
Riyad al-Turk, who has spent most of two decades in jail, says
the fight for reform in Syria is a “struggle within one
family” and he opposes foreign intervention to change
the regime. Outside pressure, he maintains, will only lead the
regime to crack down on internal opposition, forcing dissidents
into political quietism lest they accused of sedition. Syrian
human rights activist Haitham Maleh shares those fears.
The Bush administration’s heavy-handed approach will compromise
and alienate the very groups it should be courting. Already
it has raised Syrian suspicions that “reform” is
simply a codeword for the installation of a compliant, not democratic,
regime. Toppling Bashar al-Asad is a recipe for plunging Syria
into the same instability and enmity in Iraq today.
-
ABOUT
THE WRITER
Robert Blecher is Assistant Professor of History at the University
of Richmond, where he teaches Middle East history. He is currently
completing an manuscript on the origins of international humanitarian
relief.
- © 2000
New York University. All Rights Reserved. The Global Beat Syndicate,
a service of New York University's Center for War, Peace, and
the News Media, provides editors with commentary and perspective
articles on critical global issues from contributors around the
world. For more information, check out http://www.nyu.edu/globalbeat/syndicate/.
-
-
Home |
About
| Archives
| Advisors
|
Staff
|
|
|