Middle East

Why the Syrian Revolution is different

UNLIKE all the other revolutions that took place in what became known as the “Arab Spring”, the Syrian revolution stands as a unique revolution that is evident through the ongoing events taking place over the past 26 months.

The understanding of the present and anticipation of the future requires an appreciation of the past.  One is unable to understand the present reality and circumstances of the revolution in Syria, without comprehending the history that played a direct role in shaping the reality that led to the outbreak of the revolution.

World War One – Divide & Conquer

After the Ottoman Caliphate, the last legitimate Islamic state at the time, was defeated by the allies during World War 1, the victors – mainly Britain and France – conquered the Muslim world. This was an important historical landmark, as it was the first time in history, that the entire Muslim world would be dominated by its opponents. The European powers colonised the Muslim world then divided up the Muslim lands under a “Divide & Conquer” strategy.

Bilad Al-Sham (Greater Syria) was also divided. Syria and Lebanon were declared two different entities, whilst Jordan and Palestine (later occupied by the Jews) were also cut-off and separate borders were created for the new nation states.

That period marked the end of an era and a beginning of a new one. A new era shaped by two realities that the West sought to preserve until today and for as long as possible. The first is the removal of Shariah as a ruling system and the application of Western secular law through the imposition of Western way of life upon the Muslims in general, and in Syria specifically being the subject matter here. The second is the domination and exploitation of all facets of society, an indirect colonisation through the political and economical establishments. Those were strategic objectives that would maintain the new World Order which ensures the superiority of the West over Islam and the securing of its interests. This reality was preserved through direct influence over the agent regimes, or through the agencies of the new World Order, such as the United Nations the Security Council and the World Bank.

Thus, there is little relevance to the withdrawal of French troops as in the case of Syria in 1946 and the declaration of the so-called independence in the same year, as the French although leaving Syria physically, maintained their direct influence through the imposed agent regimes.

International Struggle for Syria

From 1946 the international powers underwent a power struggle over domination and interests. Syria was one of the hot spots for such a struggle due to its geopolitical and strategic location. Different international powers orchestrated military coups until the power was seized by Hafez Assad in 1971, backed by America. Despite empty rhetoric shown by the Assad regime, both the father and the son, that they are a regime of ‘resistance against Israel and ‘anti-American’, actions speak much louder than words and in the world of politics, never look at the words, rather scrutinize the actions.[1]

Reality of the Assad Regime

Life in Syria under the rule of the Assad family has been painted with fear, tyranny, and corruption. The Assad regime through the Ba’ath Party and the intelligence and security agencies was able to maintain a tight grip over the nation who was ruled by an iron first. The regime has banned political activism and persecuted its opponents, in particular the Islamic movements such as the Muslim Brotherhood and Hizb ut-Tahrir. Unlike its response to Israel’s continuous aggressions and occupation which has been one of self-restraint and expression of ‘anger’, the Assad regime was quick to oppress its nation for merely showing discontent with the status quo. The most brutal case of the regime’s crackdown against the Muslims of Syria was the infamous Hama Massacre (1982), in which up to 40,000 civilians were killed. [2]

The Arab Spring

As the masses in the Arab world erupted in what became known as the ‘Arab Spring’, their common slogan was “The nation wants the downfall of the regime”, which was a clear signal that the masses have revolted against the very same status quo that the West has imposed post world war one, and that they wanted to see a radical change. This movement that spread across the Arab world was indeed the biggest threat to Western strategic interests in the region.

However in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Yemen; the West was quick to ride the waves of the revolutions and claim that they too are in support of the demands of those nations, despite decades of support for those very same tyrant and corrupt regimes. Thus, the West worked hard to hijack the uprisings and to get away with mere cosmetic change. Consequently, the outcomes of the revolutions that took place in those countries was contained by the West through political manoeuvres. Today what is happening in those countries: the continuing prevalence of social dismay and discontent is pushing the respective nations to realise that their revolutions are far from being over.

The key point here is that the West was able to sway the uprisings in a way that does not threaten the West’s strategic interests in the region. This was by instigating cosmetic change that addressed the symptoms of the problem and not the problem itself. For example, there was significant media coverage about the wealth of Egypt’s Mubarak and his sons[3], and the corruption under his rule, hence diverting the attention away from the actual regime change which includes changing the political, ruling and economical systems to only changing the president himself.

The Syrian Revolution

The “Arab Spring” reached Syria on 15 March 2011. As with the other countries, the protesters in Syria demanded freedom from the oppression of the Assad regime. America, realising very well the oppressive nature of the regime, was confident in its ability to crush the uprising within the first few months. Subsequently, America’s strategy at the time was one of disregard and implicitly giving their agent Assad the chance after another to put an end to the revolution using necessary force.

However, events rapidly escalated and few months later, the Syrian army started to witness defections from officers and soldiers who refused the commands to shoot at the peaceful protestors. This phenomenon went further and the army defectors formed the Free Syrian Army (FSA), for the purpose of protecting the nation from the aggressions of the regime. This later developed further which saw the formation of numerous armed brigades.

As developments on the ground shifted in favour of the armed brigades, America though it was time to recognise the threat that their agent Assad regime may fall at the hands of the nation supported by the armed brigades, so it worked tirelessly to ride the waves of sentiments. Thus, America resorted to a different strategy which was aimed at containing the outcome of the revolution, just like what has occurred in the other ‘Arab Spring’ countries. Therefore, America backed the creation of the Syrian National Coalition (SNC) and then the transitional government, and had propped up opposition figures in order to present them as potential leaders for the post-Assad era. It had also called for a ‘Yemeni approach’ whereby a political transition would take place and the president would step down.

However, what was happening on the ground was of deep concern for America and the west as a whole. As the uprising carried on, the slogans and objectives expressed by the Muslims of Syria and the armed brigades have become Islamic in nature.

It was becoming apparent that the Muslims of Syria did not only want a change of president – a mere cosmetic change in the face of symptoms, such as daily humiliation and corruption, of the greater problem. So they rejected the Western propositions and turned their backs to the Western-backed secular opposition. It was becoming clear that the demands of the Muslims of Syria stemmed from their Islamic creed and from their high political awareness. They realised that the root cause of the problem was when the West imposed their way of life after World War One, and whatever came after that were mere symptoms of the greater problem. They also realised that only through Islam would they find a solution to their ongoing problem. Hence, numerous protests across Syria called for the restoration of the Khilafah, from Deraa in the south, to Damascus the capital, to Homs in the west, to Aleppo and Idleb in the north, and Alraqqa in the east. Indeed this was the first time since the destruction of the Islamic Khilafah that masses in the Muslim world rallied – in their tens of thousands – demanding the return of the Khilafah.[4]

The resilience and determination of the Muslims of Syria has flabbergasted the whole world and sent shockwaves through the policymakers of the Western administrations. What is astonishing is that despite the heavy crackdowns and the unprecedented heinous crimes committed by the Assad regime during the course of the uprising, the Muslims of Syria have expressed their opposition to any political solution that would lead the president to step down and put an end to the killing, but keeping the structure of the regime untouched.

Today America works on multiple fronts to ensure that the outcome of the Syrian revolution does not lead to the reestablishment of the Khilafah and the end of Western influence in Syria and ultimately the region. It is working with Russia and Iran to aid the Assad regime militarily and logistically, and at the same time it is working to strengthen the US-backed Supreme Military Council, led by Salim Idris, so that ‘extremist’ elements are weakened.[5] This is in addition to the political efforts to prop up a new political leadership that would have roots within Syria, something that has been a failure as in the case of the SNC previously and more recently with the appointment of Ghassan Hitto, as an Interim Prime Minister.

Future of the Syrian revolution

At least 100,000 Syrian civilians have been killed by the regime in the past 26 months; however the Muslims of Syria realise very well that this path will require many sacrifices. The Muslims of Syria also understand the nature of the struggle, that it is a struggle between the Muslim Ummah on one hand, which attempts to regain its true independence, and the West on the other hand, which attempts to ensure that any change that occurs in the Muslim world is a change of faces not systems, and a change that would address symptoms and neglect the roots of the problem.

Unlike all the other revolutions that took place in the Arab world, the Syrian revolution stands as a unique revolution that is proving to be a decisive point in the history of civilisation. The land of Al-sham (Syria and its surroundings) and its inhabitants have been mentioned in numerous Ahadith narrated by the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, highlighting the blessed nature of that land and the steadfastness of its Muslims. Also, in the history of the Muslims, it was in this particular region, that the Muslims have regained their power and revival after defeating the Crusades and Mongols.

Therefore, the decisive question is, will history repeat itself by the Muslims of Al-Sham once again by leading the revival of the Ummah, after a century of colonisation, humiliation and tyranny?

By: Anas Alwahwah