More good stuff from "Trends". This looks like an excellent source for us. I could not find anything on the European Journalist who wrote this. This is a ME Mag, edited in Europe, aimed at U.S.Business. This is the best piece of Journalism I have read on Syria since we started this board.
Syria
Heat on the street
What do ordinary Syrians want most? A special report from the streets of Damascus.
By Anders Strindberg
Damascus
"What else could I do?" asked Samira, a 20-year-old Syrian woman taking part in one of the first of a series of spontaneous demonstrations in Damascus, protesting Israel's re-occupation of the West Bank in mid-March. "What else could I do? I was watching the Israeli invasion on television and then we began hearing news about atrocities. I couldn't bear it anymore and I had to do something. But what could I do?"
"As an Arab, even though Palestine is very close, I can do nothing. I heard about this gathering and decided to come here. I know it makes no difference, but it makes me feel a little bit better inside. At least I am not just keeping quiet."
Holding vigil. Dozens more demonstrations were to follow; like clockwork, every night at seven, crowds would gather outside the United Nations office in the fashionable Rawdah neighborhood of Damascus and hold vigil for a few hours, followed by marching through the streets of the city. These were not government-organized gatherings. In the beginning, they were not even government-approved.
Bewildered police officers were scrambling for instructions and equally bewildered mukhabarat officers were milling about in the street. Within days, what had begun as a modest gathering of protestors had become a massive, daily, traffic-jamming fixture. Most of the participants in these nightly demonstrations gave the same reasons for marching as Samira: "What else could I do?"
The demonstrations were truly ecumenical affairs. Ba'ath Party flags flew side by side with the logos of Hezbollah and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, pictures of Gamal Nasser and even Yasser Arafat. The Syrian Social Nationalist Party, banned until recently because of its ideological commitment to the dream of "Greater Syria," was out in full force, as were activists of the semi-underground so-called "democratic movement," all eager for the public exposure brought on by the demonstrations.
Under the leadership of President Bashar al-Assad, Syria's internal strictures have been loosening little by little and the margin of individual political freedom, although still narrow, is gradually widening. Most people today seem to be more comfortable with speaking their mind on a range of issues, including foreign and security policy, than they were two or three years ago.
Freedom. "During the rule of the late President [Hafez al-Assad], foreign policy was not a topic of discussion; it was merely an issue of agreement," said an academic at Damascus University. "There are new freedoms in this country, and people are eager to make use of them." So when news of Israel's actions in the West Bank hit Damascus, people did not wait for government instructions. Outrage and solidarity combined with a freer political climate to produce truly popular activism.
The government seems to have been surprised by the spontaneity of the demonstrations, as well as somewhat alarmed. It is not the normal Syrian order of things for people to organize and activate themselves on a large scale without government prompting. The government and the ruling party organized their own demonstrations. As luck would have it, the 55th anniversary of the foundation of the Ba?ath Party took place in early April, bringing with it an opportunity to commandeer thousands of workers, farmers and bureaucrats onto the streets of Damascus, chanting slogans of "Unity, Freedom, Socialism!" in addition to slogans of solidarity with the Palestinian people.
Because of the situation in Palestine, the participants in the official demonstrations seemed more enthusiastic and sincere than commandeered demonstrators tend to. Yet the slogans of the independent demonstrations were pointed and assertive, and left no doubt about popular dissatisfaction not only with Israel and the United States, but with the leadership of the Arab world: "Where are the Arab armies, where?" "Where are the Arab governments, where?" So as to not be open to accusations of anti-government activity, the marchers interspersed these rhetorical questions with pledges of loyalty to President Assad, "the only Arab leader who defends the honor and rights of the Arab people," as one man addressing the crowds explained.
The Damascene street has for several years been predisposed towards eventual conciliation with Israel and rapprochement with the United States. Entrepreneurs know that their businesses would benefit. Academics and professionals covet greater mobility. Young people hope that they would not have to serve two and a half years in the Syrian Arab Army. Indeed, the present Syrian government itself knows that bringing closure to half a decade of non-peace with Israel would reduce defense expenditure and thus free up funds for investment in the public sector, for combating unemployment and corruption, and for a much-needed expansion of social services.
The familiar accusation that "Syria does not want peace," usually leveled by Israel and various elements within the US government, is thus pure nonsense on both the popular and governmental levels. To be sure, very few Syrians would ever be content to have Israel's existence usurping Palestinian rights and prerogatives, and even fewer would be prepared to accept continued Israeli occupation of Arab lands, including the Golan. "But then again," said a Palestinian journalist in Damascus, "that would not constitute a just peace. As you know, the Syrians are not interested in anything other than a just and comprehensive peace."
Syria is a relatively poor country. It has lost its Soviet state patron and its ideological flavor was that of last month. It has a young, progressive and "Westernized" president. It is central to any and all Arab-Israeli peace negotiations. Yet it refuses to play America's regional game. This exasperates Washington, which feels vulnerable to challenges to its importance after September 11th delivered a hard blow against its global political prestige.
Syria, one of the seven countries designated "state sponsors of terrorism" by the US State Department, has found itself under a significant amount of US political pressure since September 11th and has, in turn, grown increasingly irritated with US policy in the Middle East. This is reflected by the mood on the Syrian street.
"America has shown its true nature by siding with the [Israeli] occupation," said Mazen, a 23-year-old building engineer from Aleppo. "I used to admire America, its way of life, its freedoms. I wanted to go there and make a life. Now, I hate America for what it is doing."
Such a radical change of heart is not uncommon, and has occurred at various levels of society. "For two decades I have worked to instill Syrian policy with an amount of pro-Americanism, but no more," commented a senior civil servant. "If what we see now are American values in action, I give up."
Remarked another official, "Israel has made a big mistake. I was a young man in 1948 and know how that state was founded, on the ruins of Palestinian lives and homes. I know the founding ethos of Israel. Two months ago, my five-year-old son and his friends, they did not know this. It was abstract to them. Now, they too know the barbarism of Israel, which has renewed conflict and enmity for another 50 years. And this time America has placed itself right in the middle of it."
On the official level, relations between Syria and the United States seem set to reach a new nadir. The main points of difference are not new, primarily related to America's routine backing of Israeli policies and practices versus Syrian inveterate support for a range of Palestinian resistance groups, as well as for the Lebanese Hezbollah.
Just solutions. These differences, in the words of one Syrian civil servant, are "related to different ideological points of reference, as well as a very basic disagreement as to [what constitutes] terrorism. . . . But this is a disagreement states have all the time. It doesn't mean that we want to wage war against the United States, or that we want to destroy Israel. Syria has been committed to Israel?s right to exist for several decades, based on UN Resolution 242. All we want is a just solution in accordance with UN resolutions. How is this an extremist position?"
The polarization of positions in the region, as well as globally under the pressures of the "war against terrorism," has played a central role in turning the hopefulness of ordinary Syrians into a bleak expectation that, in the words of Shakespeare's King John, "so foul a sky clears not without a storm."
"There really has been a change of mood here,"remarked another academic at Damascus University. "The reasons people took to the streets so easily was partly outrage against Israel, partly a sense of betrayal by the United States. That feeling of being let down applies to the government as well."
Syria feels that it has gone out of its way to cooperate with the United States on terrorism-related issues where there is agreement, but has refused to tailor its position to Washington's requirements. Syrian officialdom maintains that the root causes, nature and objectives of any instance of armed struggle are crucial factors in determining whether that struggle should be classified as "terrorist" or not.
"You have to go to the roots of terrorism to see if this fight is for liberation or for aggression," said a senior government official, "Of course, the United States also takes such matters into consideration, but they like to pretend that their definition is somehow objective and non-political. Instead, Washington's concentration on the means and methods of violence is myopic."
Syria has pressed for an international debate within the framework of the UN in order to define terrorism. Such a debate would likely be singularly fruitless' a universal definition of "terrorism" has eluded the academic community for the 30 years that terrorism has been a subject area of study, but Syrians point to the United States' refusal to agree to such a forum as evidence of post-Cold War hubris.
Restraint. Washington, on the other hand, maintains that Syria's objections are intended to disguise the fact that Damascus is not doing all it could and should in order to "restrain" Hezbollah and the various Syria-based factions of the Palestinian resistance from attacking Israeli targets. "Before we can start any productive dialogue and cooperation," suggested a US State Department official, "[the Syrians] need to decide once and for all whether they are on the terrorists, side or our side."
The perception in Damascus is that the United States is interested in neither dialogue nor rapprochement. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's addition of Syria to the so-called "axis of evil" in March, the reluctant and terse visit of Secretary of State Colin Powell to Damascus in April, and the introduction in Congress of the Syria Accountability Act are all seen as deliberate signals from Washington that it does not seek dialogue, only compliance.
"When Powell came here," noted a European diplomat in Damascus, "he came because Hezbollah's attacks forced him to." Indeed, the US embassy in Damascus is alleged to have pleaded with Washington on a daily basis, from the day the peace mission was announced, to dispatch Powell to Damascus in order to not make Syria feel out of the loop. What seems to have led to Powell's eventual visit were the activities of Hezbollah. "His visit here had little connection with the rest of his regional peace mission," continued the diplomat, ?but was essentially an attempt to threaten the Syrians that they had better rein in Hezbollah. Only more bad blood came of that visit."
The friction with the United States presents a domestic political difficulty in that Syria's program of social and economic reform necessitates good working relations with the West. While the reform program is a motor for improved relations with the West, it needs momentum in the form of Western incentives, which are currently missing due to tension in the region.
Assad's reform package is a highly selective enterprise, seeking to preserve and develop those aspects of the late President Hafez Assad's policy deemed of continued relevance and benefit, while reforming and replacing concepts and policies considered defunct. The Syrian government has refused to import any of the many post-authoritarian or post-socialist blueprints for wholesale reform, puzzling analysts as well as eliciting accusations of "sham reform" and "bogus development."
"We are a sovereign country and we have the right to reform the system as we see fit," said a senior official of the Ba'ath Party, quoting a dictum of the late president, "We seek guidance in others' experiences, but we never copy."
Countries whose experiences are studied with attention are Egypt and China; Russia and the former Eastern Bloc countries are largely rejected as dismal failures. A multitude of political and trade delegations have been exchanged with Beijing in order to investigate China's experience and the lessons it may hold for Syria. "There is a miscalculation in this government's comparison of itself with China," said a member of Syria's business elite. "China contains over a billion potential customers, vast natural resources, an enormous production base. The multinationals are clamoring to get into the Chinese market. Syria, on the other hand, who cares?"
Be that as it may, it is certain that an opening towards the West is a necessity in order to stimulate both the growing private sector and the stagnating public sector. With increased tension in the region, as well as friction between Syria and the United States, that opening is threatened. In retaliation for what it perceives as Washington's imperiousness, Damascus has reverted to a harsher tenor in its communications with, and official references to, the United States. Indeed, it appears for now that Syrian officialdom, as well as large portions of the Syrian people, have all but given up hope of improving relations with the present American administration.
mafhoum.com |
