Opposition Disunity Becomes the Problem as the West Gets its Ducks in a Row
Posted: 29 Aug 2011 08:04 PM PDT
Western diplomats have gotten their ducks in a row. They have fulfilled their goal of diplomatically isolating President Bashar al-Assad and the Syrian regime. Sanctions have been tightened and plans drawn up for a total oil purchasing ban by the EU. The major European countries have now all reiterated Washington’s statement that Assad must go. They are committed to bringing down the Baath regime.
The Arab League has taken the initiative to ask for presidential elections in Syria and an end of repression. Russia and Iran, although presently sticking by Syria’s side, have openly criticized Assad for his repression. Russia’s delegation has just returned from Damascus. Western leaders have prepared the world to support the Syrian revolution. Some may even be contemplating an eventual military solution. Today arming Syrians is not being openly discussed, but many are coming to the conclusion that it may very well have to be somewhere down the road.
The stumbling block in the way of developing further momentum for the revolution is the Syrian opposition itself. Western capitals have been driving the momentum over the last weeks with condemnations, enhanced economic embargoes, and by herding Arab and Middle Eastern statesmen to make accusatory and condemning statements about the Syrian regime. If the opposition continues sniping among factions, momentum will be lost. To whom should aid be sent? To whom could arms be sent if a military option is to be opened? More importantly, whom should the Syrian people look to as an alternative to this government?
Burhan Ghalioun
The announcement of the formation of the Syrian National Council with Burhan Ghalioun, an Alawi sociology professor at the Sorbonne, as its president was immediately denounced by leaders of the opposition within Syria, who claimed it had no connection to activists within the country or control over events on the ground. Muhammad Rahhal, Chairman of the Syrian Revolutionary Council of the Coordination Committees, said:
“Those who formed the Syrian National Council are ghosts claiming to represent a large part of the Syrian people, while they have no relations whatsoever with the revolution. We are not part of the opposition abroad. The revolution has an internal body that decides its course.”
A full fledged food fight has broken out among opposition leaders over who should assume control over the revolution, whether it should take up arms, and what role foreign powers are playing. Underlying these overt clashes is the question of how much play should be given to Islam and the Muslim Brotherhood; Arabism versus Syrianism (the Kurds want recognition of their national and linguistic rights within a Syria that is not defined ethnically), and can ex-patriots lead or do they establish a “Chalabi effect?” Distrust of the West remains strong in Syria. Activists inside Syria don’t appreciate how Western governments must be brought along step by step. They cannot get out too far ahead of their people, who don’t want to spend money right now. Expats believe that Western governments are going to be crucial in bringing down the Assad regime and must be treated with respect and brought along. Some in Washington are already warning that the Syrian opposition will soon begin calling for external military intervention and that Washington should prepare itself and NATO to intervene.
Formation of the Syrian National Council, August 29, 2011
A meeting of the Syrian opposition in Ankara, Turkey has formed the Syrian National Transitional Council, following in the Libyan opposition’s footsteps. It is to be headed by Dr Burhan Ghalioun, a prominent opposition figure.
He is a Syrian thinker, director of the Centre d’Etudes sur l’Orient Contemporain (Ceoc) in Paris, and a professor of political sociology at the Université de Paris III
They have chosen 94 members for the council, 42 of whom are inside Syria and the rest are in the Diaspora.
The press statement was delivered by a spokesman for the Youth of the Revolution, saying the choices of the head and members of the council were mad based on consultations and agreement with those in Syria.
Abughassan writes in the comment section:
It is premature to draw conclusions about the choice of Dr Galioun to be the president of the transitional council formed by the opposition. I am not even sure if this council will be THE council for the opposition. I certainly see it as a positive step that must be followed by the public release of a roadmap for change. The opposition needs to tell us where it is headed.
Contacts with moderate elements in the army and among community leaders seem to be a reasonable second step. The council will be DOA if it does not deliver a moderate and inclusive message that is peaceful at its core.
Galioun, as most of you know, is a secular Alawi who is a bitter opponent of the Baath Party. But he is also just as fiercely opposed to Islamist. It remains to be seen how he will be received by conservative Muslims and how effective and influential he will be at his position. He is also an expat which will be used against him by both foes and friends.
Naming Galioun was a political move to assure some Alawis and deliver a message to islamists but it is obviously too early to say much about his appointment or election by the council.
Syrian uprising to get aggressive- Activist,
29/08/2011, By Paula Astatih
“Regarding the announcement of the establishment of the Syrian National Council, Rahhal told Asharq Al-Awsat: “Those who formed the council are ghosts claiming to represent a large part of the Syrian people, while they have no relations whatsoever with the revolution. We are not part of the opposition abroad. The revolution has an internal body that decides its course.”
Beirut, Asharq Al-Awsat- Muhammad Rahhal, Chairman of the Syrian Revolutionary Council of the Coordination Committees has announced that the council has adopted a resolution to soon move into the second stage of the revolution, which requires arming it, and moving towards an aggressive direction.
Rahhal told Asharq al-Awsat: “We have adopted the resolution to arm the revolution, which will take an aggressive direction very soon, because what we are facing today is an international conspiracy that cannot be confronted except by armed uprising.” Rahhal considers: “The circumstances no longer allow peaceful dealing with the criminality of the regime. Moreover, confronting the ghoul that seeks the protection of the world countries requires weapons, especially as it has become evident to all that the world has not supported the Syrian uprising except by words.”
“We will declare the revolution with what we have in our hands of weapons and stones, and we will respond to the calls of the masses for arming the uprising.” Rahhal added.
With regard to the sources of weapons, the Syrian activist told Asharq Al Awsat: “The Arab countries, which are supposed to help and support us, are cowards, and they refuse to act. Therefore, we will follow the Afghan example; when the Afghans were asked: Where will you get the weapons? They answered: As long as the United States is here, there will be weapons.”
Regarding the announcement of the establishment of the Syrian National Council, Rahhal told Asharq Al-Awsat: “Those who formed the council are ghosts claiming to represent a large part of the Syrian people, while they have no relations whatsoever with the revolution. We are not part of the opposition abroad. The revolution has an internal body that decides its course.”
Divisions in Syrian opposition over arming protesters
Aug 29, 2011, AFP
Cairo – The first signs of divisions among Syrian opposition groups emerged Monday over the contentious issue of arming the pro-democracy protesters.
The Local Coordination Committees of Syria (LCC) rejected calls by some opposition groups to arm the protesters, saying such a move would be ‘unacceptable politically, nationally, and ethically.’
The LCC, one of several online groups that have been organizing and documenting the protests, said arming the protesters would minimize popular support for and participation in the rallies.
The group said in a statement that it understood the motivation to take up arms, but rejected it. ‘The method by which the regime is overthrown is an indication of what Syria will be like post-regime,’ it said.
‘If an armed confrontation or international military intervention becomes a reality, it will be virtually impossible to establish a legitimate foundation for a proud future Syria,’ the statement said.
The regime of President Bashar al-Assad has cracked down on the pro-democracy protests that started mid-March, triggering international condemnation. The United Nations says more than 2,200 people have been killed.
Mohammad Rahhal of another group, Syrian Coordination Committees, supported the decision to arm the protesters.
‘We made our decision to arm the revolution which will turn violent very soon because what we are being subjected to today is a global conspiracy that can only be faced by an armed uprising,’ he told the London-based Asharq al-Awsat newspaper on Sunday.
In Turkey meanwhile, some opposition members announced the formation of a National Transitional Council to lead activists calling for al-Assad’s ouster.
While a council spokesman said the members were chosen after consultations with activists and protesters in Syria, according to Al Jazeera, some members told regional broadcasters that they were not notified about or consulted on their appointments.
The council is to comprise 94 members – 42 in Syria – and be led by Burhan Ghalioun, a sociologist at the Sorbonne in Paris. Hundreds of Syrian dissidents had gathered in Istanbul last month and agreed to form a council in order to unify the opposition. more…
Syrian opposition decides to take up arms against Assad regime, 28.08.11
Leader of Revolutionary Council tell London-based As-Sharq al-Awsat that the only solution to regime’s violence is armed uprising.
The leader of the Revolutionary Council of the Syrian Coordination Committees, Mohammad Rahhal, said in remarks published Sunday that the council took the decision to arm the Syrian revolution.
Since mid-March pro-democracy protests have engulfed most of Syria calling for political and economic reforms as well as for the ousting of Syrian president Bashar Assad.
“We made our decision to arm the revolution which will turn violent very soon because what we are being subjected to today is a global conspiracy that can only be faced by an armed uprising,” he told the London-based As-Sharq al-Awsat newspaper. Circumstances no longer allow dealing peacefully with the regime’s “crimes,” he added. “We will use whatever arms and rocks … We will respond to the people’s calls to arm the revolution,” he said.
“Confronting this monster (the Syrian regime) now requires arms, especially after it has become clear to everyone that the world only supports the Syrian uprising through speeches,” he added. Rahal lashed out some Arab regimes and described them as “cowards.”
Assad’s troops have harshly cracked down on protests against almost five decades of Baath Party rule, killing over 2,200 people and triggering a wide-scale international condemnation.
….The Syrian state, however, until this very day, does not feel weak or in danger. Wishful thinking is one thing, but hard reality is another. On the contrary, Syrian authorities are firmly convinced that the “crisis” is ending and the nation is still very much under control. Schools and universities are opening next September, infrastructure projects are still underway, employees are still showing up at ministries, and state salaries are still being paid. No serious defections have taken place in the army or the foreign ministry, and no critical mass has been recorded in the capital Damascus. Also, the state feels that the demonstrators are getting fatigued because of fear, death and so many arrests during the past two months.
For their part, the rioters are also now certain that the state is much stronger than they expected and unlikely to relinquish power as the case in Tunisia or Egypt, anytime soon. Given the current balance of power, the street will probably never take Damascus or Aleppo — the two largest cities in Syria — and nor will the protesters ever occupy a central part of the capital, as they did with Tahrir Square in Cairo.
That explains why there are certain voices in the Syrian underground now calling for taking up arms, claiming that a “peaceful revolt” will never achieve its objective…..
No Bullet Holes in Bab Touma; Several Accounts of Life in Syria
Posted: 29 Aug 2011 11:06 AM PDT
An intrepid reporter working for the SC community has cleared up a mystery. Over a week ago I published an article in which the author Ammar Shami wrote that “armed men sprayed bullets” at a church front in Bab Touma during the opening weeks of the revolt. The article was entitled “Did Syria Use Tanks and Gun Boats to Shell Hama and Latakia?,” which set off a heated debate. A commentator who goes by the name, “Some Guy in Damascus” immediately disputed the claim that a gunman had shot up the front of a Bab Touma church and set out to prove it. This weekend Some Guy in Damascus went to investigate the churches of Bab Touma and found no evidence of bullet holes on any of the church fronts. He posted this short video on Youtube of himself in front of al Saleeb Church in Damascus by way of proof that he has investigated the churches of Bab Touma and found no evidence of bullet holes.
We have yet to hear back from the author of the original article, explaining his account that contradicts SGID’s findings.
I want to thank SGID for his intrepid reporting. Again this story underlines how difficult it is to rely on reports coming out of Syria, when there are no professional journalist to count on. It is also underlines how important it is for journalists, publishers, and bloggers, such as myself, to publish corrections and counter evidence when we find out that we have made a mistake or published articles based on erroneous accounts. We continue to await a professional treatment of the main contentions of Shami’s article – that the Syrian army did not use gunships to shell Latakia or tanks to shell Hama, as most journalists have reported. Certainly his broader claims are now in doubt too.
I apologize for the false report and thank Some Guy in Damascus for his video, good humor, and reporting in these dark times. Joshua Landis
Here are several accounts and short articles
The foreign media ban and its effect on the Syrian perception of the uprising
By Daniel Paul-Schultz (A Master’s student who recently returned from a year in Damascus)
For Syria Comment, 6/24/2011The Syrian uprising, while influenced by the unrest in the rest of the Arab world, is set apart by the impact of the foreign media ban. No foreign reporters have been allowed to operate freely inside Syria since the protests began in the middle of March. While Arabic and English foreign media networks such as Aljazeera and BBC have consistently shown footage of the massive protests in Yemen, and have even filmed the rebels in Libya, there have been no independent reports coming out of Syria. Instead, the foreign media has been forced to rely largely on a mixture of YouTube videos and telephone conversations with both pro and anti government Syrians. This lack of firm sourcing has caused many Syrians, who generally have equal access to state and foreign news sources, to discount the foreign media as at best subjective, and at worst actively fomenting discord. As a result, the propaganda effort launched by the Syrian has benefited immensely.
While state Syrian television has always been the propaganda arm of the government, its role has become more crucial as the protests have escalated, and with them the violence of the government’s reaction. On a typical Friday, while shows grainy footage of alleged protests from around the country, the state television attempts to reassure the country that nothing is actually happening by showing videos of calm streets in major cities and interviews with mothers in the parks with their children rejoicing that the country is free of the ‘armed terrorist gangs’ whom the government blames for the deaths during the protests.
I spent the last nine months in Syria, and although many young educated Syrians I spoke to did not believe the government’s story, many more Syrians considered the state news reports to be accurate. This may be due to the propaganda embedded in the curriculum through the education system that strongly discourages any questioning or distrust of the regime. It is also due to the fact that Syrian society is replete with conspiracy theories that accuse Israel, the United States and the Gulf states of plotting against Syria. Accordingly, foreign media organizations, along with other outside groups such as human rights groups and other non-governmental organizations, are viewed with distrust by many Syrians, and with the government’s encouragement, seen as potential agents for foreign interests.
The foreign media ban has been an invaluable instrument for the Syrian government because it forces the foreign media to rely on unreliable eyewitness accounts from protesters rather than on neutral and more informed testimony from journalists. While channels such as BCC Arabic dutifully interview Syrian government spokespeople every day, they are quite aware that they will always receive the same rehearsed line blaming armed terrorist gangs for all deaths and denying even the existence of protests in the country. Therefore, to learn any real information, the networks are forced to rely almost exclusively on phone calls with various protesters who own satellite phones.
While these activists are certainly courageous, their testimony is not unbiased. They have a clear vested interest in portraying the events in a particular way that promotes their perspectives. Though their information is undoubtedly accurate to some extent, it is often relayed by the foreign networks as fact rather than opinion. This reliance on vague and unverifiable information ultimately undermines the credibility of the foreign media with their Syrian audience, to the great benefit of the Syrian government.
There is no easy solution to the dilemma facing the Arabic foreign media. Attempts to openly defy the ban on foreign media put reporters in significant danger, as the case of Dorothy Parvaz illustrates. Moreover, in an age of increased competition for the speedy conveyance of news, simply refusing to report on Syria is not an option for major news outlets.
One option, however, is for the networks to become more transparent in detailing exactly how they arrive at specific information, without revealing the names of any sources. For instance, networks could choose to explain to the viewers the specific procedures they go through in order to verify the death of a protester, the size of a protest, and claims made of human rights violations during the unrest.
The networks might also stress, when possible, that the information they are reporting comes from multiple independent sources. While these sources cannot be identified by name for theirown safety, giving ancillary details about their job or age will give more confidence to the Syrian public that this information is accurate.
Although these options will not necessarily cause a rapid change in the of average Syrians, it may convince some doubters that the protests are in fact real and that the government propaganda is in fact lies. While the Syrian public is not the only target of the foreign media, it is the group for which the foreign media has the potential to have the most significant impact. It is therefore imperative that the networks take stronger measures to convince Syrians that they, and not the Syrian government, are reporting the truth.
A Syrian Friend in Beirut
I’m amazed of how fast the Syrian business community are beginning to dump Bashar and the regime. I have also met very rich and influential Syrian business people here in Beirut who are ready to accept mayhem and chaos in return for the departure of Assad and the regime. Just last year, I swear, they were arguing with me how great the regime and Bashar were. Last year, they insisted that Bashar was moving in the right direction. When I asked them about the sanctions, they now say that sanctions are good because they will force Bashar to leave. Now of course these do not represent the majority, but I’m shocked. Damascus looks normal. But it is simmering from the inside.
Another Syrian friend
I’m meeting more and more people wanting violence as means of “resistance” to the brutal regime.
An Atassi – one of the thousands
In the end, revolutions are so seldom about the people, especially if the people are not what they need to be. I might not be old enough, but I know that the Alawites have paid a high and heavy price to get to where they are today.
More than any other minority in the Levant, Alawites paid with their blood for centuries of abuse by the Sunni majority. And they have nowhere to go.
They were poor and hungry (many still are, unfortunately). They were denied the very basic of human rights and dignity. My grandfather used to tell me that in Homs, the Alawites were not even allowed to walk the sidewalks, they needed to be on the street like the rest of the animals.
No one will sell them anything, and few bought from them. Why? They are heretics and the enemy of God and His Messenger.
They were so poor, living over land that cannot be properly cultivated, they sold their daughters to homes in Homs, Hama, Lattakia and other major cities so they can survive with the few pennies that we threw at them.
We continuously deny the horrible facts in our history and we continuously pretend that other sects and religions coexisted peacefully in Syria. Baloney. Not true! And our history is written by Sunni historians or historians that were enriched by the Sunnis.
I am a Muslim Sunni and I know; I am ashamed of my sect and my people and my religion for not coming in full force to repent and pay back for the severe injustices they were perpetrated on other sects – all in the name of we are Muslim and we Muslims are good.
The only time I will trust Syrians with democracy is when I see heads of families treating their families with respect. When adult children are free to make choices away from family and tribal pressures. When families tell their children about the value of the Syrian mosaic and how to respect and treasure diversity in Syria. When they tell their children that we have abused minorities and it’s time to talk about it.
I will trust my fellow Syrians when I see them revolt and getting disgusted when a brother slaughters his sister because he thought she harmed the family honor.
I trust Syrians when they start trusting one another because they all belong to the same institutions of law and order.
Until we start a national dialogue, and until the MBs apologize for the killings they committed, and the regime erects monuments for the people they killed, and the Sunni admits their unmistakable prejudices, and until the people break the taboo of not talking about sectarian hatred and cynicism, and until the people are genuinely free as individual people, and until relations between religious sects becomes a national topic that is taught in classrooms, and until the constitution is clearly written to protect the minorities from the oppression of the majority, and to protect the Syrians from their own government, I’m doomed to not trust any outcome.
It’s amusing to me when i hear people talking about Article 8, and how to remove it and by when, at the time when the whole country is boiling with sectarian hatred and terrible class relations. Talk about misaligned priorities.
I am currently a rebel on the loose looking for a revolution that fits my definition.
Muhammad writes:
Yesterday one of my friends reminded me of a conversation a while back when I stated that I would vote for Bashar if he stood in an election. It gave me insight how much my position has shifted during the last 5 months. I’m sure there are millions of stories similar to mine. Bashar has lost his biggest asset and rather than being a strength to the regime he is now a liability.
A little story from my home city (Edleb). Edleb has seen massive demos for a while. The first casualty was over a month ago and it resulted in a significant shift of mood in the city. Before then, there used to be pro-regime demos. After that guy got killed (he was shot while still inside the mosque – they were trying to stop the demos early) none of this happens. A lot of people who used to be pro-regime came to his funeral and stated through speakers their “repentance”. The participation in the strike after his death was easily 95%. Adunnya channel tried to play a really dirty game by blaming his murder on another family in the city. The two families the biggest in Edleb in terms of numbers. It did not work well for Adunnya. The second family set up their own funeral for the martyr and the two locations became permanent anti-regime demos for days. The city became a completely different place following this event.
In terms of demos Edleb is on a par with Deir Alzor & Hama (considering it is smaller city). It has seen relatively very little bloodshed (I think 4 killed so far) although there has been a lot of violence on the streets between the police and the demonstrators. It is the only Governorate Centre currently that sees one large demo daily instead of multiple small once. There are areas the demos don’t go through (mainly by the last standing statue of Hafez). The army surrounds the city but as for now it has not gone in (snipers were deployed at one time though). I’m not sure whether the government has too much on their hands currently or whether they are afraid of a massive refugees movement similar to Jisr (we are about 20 km from the Turkish border) should the army go in.
syriafrance 