Category Archives: Syrian Opposition

The internal political prospect in Syria: View from a blogger

Posted on October 9, 2011 | Comments Off on The internal political prospect in Syria: View from a blogger

From  a Blogger in SyriaComment.com
http://www.joshualandis.com/blog/?p=12447&cp=all#comment-277507

http://www.joshualandis.com/blog/?p=12447&cp=all#comment-277665

1. If Assad were such a reformer, why did he not entertain the idea of a multi-party polity before 2011?
This has been discussed at SyriaComment before. Assad did entertain it on and off over the years. Why didn’t he actually do it? Because he didn’t have to (that’s a non-trivial point). And because it wasn’t entirely clear what the multi-party polity would look like if he created one (it might’ve been dysfunctional in one or more ways; and doubtless he would’ve been unhappy with the whole thing if a religious conservative party won a big share of the vote). Foreign Minister Wallid al-Moallem has said recently that the regime didn’t do it because they were under pressure and distraction the foreigners accusing Syria of murdering Hariri, and other saber-rattling by foreigner powers. I don’t accept that. Presidental Adviser Bouthiana Shaaban said a few months ago that the regime would not have repealed the emergency law, and would not have introduced the reforms of this year, if it hadn’t been for protesters on the streets. The whole country knew that the protesters were unassailably right about the specific things that the regime has now agreed to change.

2. You have made it clear that you would vote for Assad in any future elections (were they to be held). What is it about his ‘manifesto’ that you find so compelling?
See below including point number (10).

3. What significant internal reforms has Assad instigated over the past ten years?
The most significant has been greater opening of the economy to the international marketplace and futher moves away from Statism and socialism. The process is far from finished and is proceeding at a pace of gradual, organic evolution, and certainly not revolution. Ehsani would like it to proceed much faster. There has been a risk that faster pace could cause tumults, dissolutions, hardships, in the economy and then more dangerously in the polity.

# 266 in the previous thread DIGGING FOR GOLD IN BOSRA asks pro-regimers: “Why do you think Assad would win a fair election?

Here’s a list of 16 grounds I have for thinking that the regime will easily win the fair parliamentary elections that are in all likelihood to take place in 2012 — fair except religious and tribal parties are banned. The list is incomplete and off the top of my head, in no particular order, some of it recycled, and I think I could expand it if I spent more time on it.

(1) The overall number of people who accepted the invitation to join anti-regime demonstrations was “small” (though no hard number is available).

(2) The educated classes did not join the anti-regime demonstrations. In every country every winning party needs substantial support from the educated classes. In Syria right now there is only one party that has such support. To illustrate, one of the two key reasons why the Muslim Brotherhood party is so much stronger in Egypt than in Syria is that it has attracted substantial support from the educated classes. You know the other key reason. During the past six months the Syrian educated classes had the opportunity to come out and complain about the latter, and they didn’t take it up.

(3) Most of the religiously conservative classes did not join the anti-regime demonstrations. Neither did the clergy; most of the Sunni clerical leadership went on record as anti-tumult and pro-civil-process. Most of the people who attended the mosque on Friday did not attend an anti-regime demonstration afterwards, not even if there was a demonstration conveniently available and on offer to them at the doorstep. Neighborhoods in Damascus with a high concentration of religiously conservative people had only small, and few, demonstrations over the six months. One of the regime’s core constituencies is people who are less religious or who have a more progressive, less doctrinaire, take on religion. So, it is a very big and important achievement that this regime has been able to maintain its support among most of the religiously conservative. Correcting myself, it is more cautious and prudent to say “the religious conservatives consented to the rule of the regime and did not rise up against the regime” instead of “the regime maintained their support…”. Alright, many of them may vote for another party in the elections. But since most of them don’t express alienation against the regime, you shouldn’t expect them to vote en masse against the regime.

(4) No representatives of agricultural or rural interests having been talking up an alternative to the Assad regime. There was very little or no movement of people from rural areas into the towns and cities to participate in demonstrations (despite some fake boasts from the fake revolutionaries to the contrary). Right now there exists no competitor to the regime for the rural vote.

(5) Once the reforms announced by Assad are completed, there will be no major disagreements between Assad and the general Opposition on the structure of the institutions of the State. On social and economic policies, major disagreements between Assad and the Opposition are confined to wings of the Opposition (such as the MB wing), not the whole Opposition. These various wings are known to have only small and slim political support in Syria. The general Opposition does not have a platform and agenda beyond the reform agenda that the Assad regime itself has declared itself in favour of implementing. That is, the anti-regime protests have not created a policy agenda or alternative forward vision that throws the regime on the defensive in the upcoming election.

(6) The demonstrators were predominantly from the poorly educated working class. Most of them did not have an agenda beyond wanting Assad to leave and wanting a breath of fresh air in the country of an unspecified kind. The great majority of the poorly educated working class did not join with them in the anti-regime demonstrations, and all those who didn’t join are likely to follow the lead of the educated classes in the elections. The educated folks will be creating and propagating the discourse of the elections contest.

(7) The various Syrian opposition parties are very weak today, their representatives are barely known or entirely unknown to the Syrian public, and I can’t see a route by which they can make themselves a whole lot stronger by election day. The attempt to unconstitutionally overthrow the regime has discredited swathes of opposition, and has increased the regime’s political support among previously neutral people who strongly desire civil process and no violence.

(8) The city Al-Bab, 50 kilometers northwest of Aleppo, is the eight largest city in Syria. The city Al-Safira, 35 kilometers southwest of Aleppo, is the tenth largest city in Syria. (Source). Those two plus Aleppo (all overwhelmingly Sunni in religion, btw) have had essentially or very nearly zero anti-regime demonstrations during this past six months. Opposition to the regime in that part of the country among the poorly educated working class is truly miniscule. Aleppo is Syria’s most populous province. The regime is also very stong in Ladaqia, Tartous and Sweida provinces, and Damascus City. You can appreciate that those regional strengths can be enough to win or nearly win, even if you’re not yet agreeing with a forecast of the regime winning almost everywhere.

(9) Everybody in Syria knows that the anti-regime crowd has been lying about security forces atrocities and that the regime has been telling the truth. (Foreigners don’t know it, since they don’t watch Syrian TV, but foreigners are irrelevant since they won’t be voting). More generally, the regime has been able to use its control over Syrian mass media especially TV news to strong effect. The State-controlled TV news puts out good quality products for the most part, which enjoy good credibility with the Syrian public, and have good market penetration.

(10) The next two numbered points are interrelated but distinct. They are both aspects of the spirit of the nation and nationalism. The first is that there will be people who will be voting not so much for the Assad party as for national unity. They want unity and Assad’s party is by happenstance the embodiment for it. The Assad party’s manifesto is vote for national unity. A vote against Assad’s party is a vote for discord and recrimination. (The Putin|Medvedev party in Russia enjoys a similar sort of status, and it also has to put up with dissidents who despise the basics and atmosphere of the unity).

(11) “Syrian society is nationalistic and the Assad regime has got a bone-crunchingly strong grip over how the nation and nationalism is defined. The definition of the nation that the Syrians are nationalistic about is the one developed and nurtured by the regime over decades. It is unchallenged and unchallengeable, and people are rallying around it at this time of stress.” Nationalism sells well in national elections and no challenger can outdo the regime in selling nationalism.

(12) (a) The regime is actually in touch with the pulse of Syrian sentiment, and makes it its business to be so. (b) The regime in policymaking is non-doctrinaire, and is responsive to popular sentiment.

(13) The regime’s core agenda, modernization, is supported by almost all.

(14) The trade sanctions imposed by the Europeans and Americans have alienated the Syrians, I say, and all winning parties will decry the trade sanctions in the election campaign, and candidates with endorsements from Europe or America won’t have a snowball in hell’s chance of getting elected, and I say more about the political effect of the trade sanctions at http://www.joshualandis.com/blog/?p=12429&cp=all#comment-277131

(15) Religious and tribal parties are banned in the elections. The permitted parties will be having to pretty much compete head-to-head against the regime on the regime’s own territory.

(16) Syrian society is dominated by a sociologically broad Establishment that covers all geographic parts of the country, nearly all religious sects, all age groups, all professional occupations, all big private enterprises, and the State. This Establishment has had only one political party for decades. Today it shows no inclination towards internal dissent or devisiveness such as would create two parties within one Establishment (such as the Western countries have).

Footnote: I’ve come across many commentators who think the Assad regime has a “narrow base of political support”. E.g. Joshua Landis thinks that “Syria’s chronic failing is that it lacks a deeply shared sense of political community. This explains why such a narrow regime as that led by the Assads….” In next year’s competitive elections we are going to see who’s right and who’s wrong regarding these two radically different interpretations of the same scene.

http://www.joshualandis.com/blog/?p=12447&cp=all#comment-277507

#142 Syrialover (who sounds like a straight-up anti-Syrian) says: “It’s about the economy, stupid”. It applies every time to every election everywhere, always. It’s also fuelling the Arab Spring uprisings. And if a genuine oppostion uses that slogan in a true election, the Assadists…. [will lose the election].

#157 DFGIB says in a similar vein: “I am sure that when people are presented with a credible plan for getting this country back on track they won’t be voting for Assad.” I’ve already explained why I disagree with that full sentence from DFGIB, but let me reiterate that the sentence’s first half is still very hypothetical. To illustrate:

Date 6 Oct 2011. A organization called “National Coordination Body to the forces of Democratic and National Change in Syria”, in a statement read out by its secretary-general Hassan Abdul-Azim, said it espouses the principle of national democratic change and a transition to a parliamentarian democratic leadership, and has stepped up its demands to topple the “security and tyrant regime.” The statement went on: “It’s too late to talk about reforming the regime due to its insistence since the eruption of the uprising to use violence and security and military solutions… in addition to brutal torture and wide arrests.” Banners inside the meeting hall read, “yes to the collapse of the security tyrant regime,” and “No to foreign military intervention … no to violence and no to sectarianism.” http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2011-10/06/c_131177091.htm

Thus, that organization is (a) still sincerely thinking that ordinary Syrians can be talked into going out onto the streets in very big numbers to chant for unconstitutionally toppling the regime, (b) still not talking about competing in next year’s parliamentary elections, and (c) still not talking about the economy. I say it’s a recepie for total failure.

I also insist, and I trust the regime and its security forces to insist, that the only way we’re going to have “Democratic and National Change in Syria” is by the 2012 parliamentary elections followed by the 2014 Presidential election.

The election is not going to be about the economy because, for one thing, the Opposition is devoid of fresh and saleable economic ideas; and in the unlikely event they did come up with something worthwhile and popular, the regime would appropriate it for itself. On questions of the economy, nearly all of the captains of industry are (and are going to be) supporting the Assad’s party. So are the Trades Unions. When we have the captains of industry, the trades unions and the government all reading out of the same prayer book, and we have an opposition with no real experience in economic development matters, I can’t see how the Assad’s party could get beaten on that issue. But anyway the election is not going to be about the economy. All signs say the Opposition is going to emphasize “tyranny” and “corruption”. (I already posted on this board some months ago about the regime’s exposure to the corruption allegation, but the post does not come up at google search — why not?).

Of the seventeen points I made at #121 above, here’s my favourite:

(17) Syrian society is dominated by a sociologically broad Establishment that covers all geographic parts of the country, nearly all religious sects, all age groups, all professional occupations, all big private enterprises, and the State. This Establishment has had only one political party for decades. Today it shows no inclination towards internal dissent or devisiveness such as would create two parties within one Establishment (such as the Western countries have).

As I see it the parlimentary election campaign will consist of sundry semi-anonymous and semi-disreputable dissent parties campaigning against the Establishment party. With that view, I must expect the Establishment party to win by at least as wide a margin as Mubarak’s party used to win by in Egypt under somewhat similar circumstances.

That reminds me of a totally different point, coming to mind by mention of Mubarak’s Egypt. I assume you know the place the MB and similar parties had in Egypt’s political landscape over the years. I now believe Syria’s political landscape is not going to see the appearance of a similar thing, because the Syrian Establishment — specifically the better educated Sunnis, who are the sole arbiters of this matter, I believe — have “opted for secularism to promote national unity”. A quasi-religious party would lack support from the society’s Establishment and would carry the millstone of sectarianism around its neck. Syria’s Grand Mufti Ahmad Hassoun recently said this year’s new legal ban on religious political parties is harmless to religion, a view with which I fully agree. You may well say that just because the Establishment has accepted that this is going to be Syria’s way, it does not follow that the wider masses have or will accept the same. You could be right. But I believe the masses will follow the Establishment. More fundamentally, I believe an Establishment is established.

http://www.joshualandis.com/blog/?p=12447&cp=all#comment-277665

Comments Off on The internal political prospect in Syria: View from a blogger

Posted in Middle East Geopolitics, Syria, Syrian Opposition

Syria: the Local Syrian OppositionTalks view on the expats’ Syrian National Council

Posted on October 9, 2011 | Comments Off on Syria: the Local Syrian OppositionTalks view on the expats’ Syrian National Council

Syria’s Manna: On Ghalioun and the Trinity of a Successful Revolt

By: Othman Tazghart [1]

Published Saturday, October 8, 2011

Syrian opposition activist Haytham Manna speaks about the “trinity” of a successful revolution in Syria, his take on the newly formed Syrian National Council and his recent fallout with prominent dissident Burhan Ghalioun.

Othman Tazghart (OT): What are your reservations about the recent Istanbul conference? Why have you refused to join the Syrian National Council formed as a result?

Haytham Manna (HM): This Council is the result of an initiative by a group whose identity is connected to one ideology. It was not authorized by the political opposition or the youth movement inside the country. This group spent 55 days promoting the need for such a council on the basis that it will bring the revolutionary youth out of this crisis, solve all their problems, and facilitate material help, international recognition, a no-fly zone, and so on. Over the last month and a half, there have been repeated attempts to introduce Libyan vocabulary into the Syrian revolution. The people who have done this are professionals, they do not belong to any known political group. They call themselves ‘independents’ or the ‘Independent Islamic Movement.’ This group has sought to impose their plan on everyone else from the beginning and they failed in their first two attempts in Istanbul.

There was a joint attempt by all the major political groups to form a ‘National Syrian Alliance’ that would include the real political forces within the country. But the Istanbul group tried to weaken this alliance by appealing to some of its members to join the National Council instead. They claim that the difficult part is forming the council, after which the world would recognize them and facilitate miracles, allowing the revolution to carry on and succeed, while reinforcing the role of the youth in it. Sale of this illusion went hand in hand with attempts to takeover the unified consensus work being carried out between various political movements. It gave the National Council a specific ideological coloring, where the Islamists were granted 60 percent of council membership, when their real weight within the opposition is a fraction of that.

Moreover, this council lacks modesty, because those who formed it assert that they represent the majority in the revolution, including the coordinating committees. They claim that they will save the revolution and change the course of history. This will certainly reflect negatively on them when people discover their real size, the limits of their representation, and their modest means; with all due respect to some who have supported them.

OT: Do you think that making Dr. Burhan Ghalioun, a man with genuine credibility, the president of the council will help guarantee against such pitfalls as militarization of the uprising or foreign intervention?

HM: I have said several times, particularly during my last visit to Tunisia, that the Tunisian revolution gave us three basic principles. The first is the peaceful nature of the revolution. The second is the absence of the idol. There are no idols or individual leaders, only working groups who offer democratic solutions and think in a collective manner and seek consensus and pluralistic mechanisms that respect the efforts of these people while limiting their power. The third principle is the secular nature of the collective movement. This trinity for me is pertinent when it comes to Syria. I do not believe that any one person, whoever they are, can prevent all mistakes, especially when his position changs several times in the last few days. We want to escape the individual dictatorship of Arab rulers, so it does not make sense to devote our work to dictatorship and individualism.

OT: You have close ties with Dr. Burhan Ghalioun. From the beginning of the protests in Syria you have agreed on the peaceful and secular nature of the revolution. What are the reasons behind the differences that have arisen between you lately?

HM: There were no differences until the last meeting in Berlin. Dr. Ghalioun had promised to attend the meeting of the National Coordination Committee in Berlin and we were waiting for him to arrive. We were surprised to find that he had changed course to Istanbul, with no apology, explanation, or even prior notice. We have not spoken since that day. I think that Dr. Ghalioun owes us an explanation. We need to understand why we should offer all these concessions to the Islamists in Istanbul when we are a country with 26 sects, creeds, and ethnic groups.

This means that this is a country where the relationship between religion and the state cannot be dealt with lightly. The Syrian Revolution of 1925 held that “religion is for God and the homeland is for all.” Today, minorities do not play an effective role, so we need a secular discourse to gain their confidence. The Syrian people are believers, but they don’t want any religious ideology to influence their constitution or their future. I wish that Dr. Ghalioun would not take that line. After the Hama massacre in the 1980s, Said Hawa, a major thinker in the Muslim Brotherhood, tried to explain the failures of The Fighting Vanguard, their military wing. He concluded that “the Syrian people love freedom, the republic, and democracy.” I hope that some people do not forget this lesson.

OT: Some are asking, is your opposition to the National Council because of the Muslim Brotherhood’s presence in it or because of the size of the representation they were given?

HM: It is well known that I worked hard to rehabilitate the Muslim Brotherhood with the other political parties in Syria. I facilitated their reconciliation with several political groups. I was one of the most prominent defenders of Islamist prisoners. Therefore, I have no problem with them. I see the Islamists as part of the political geography of all Islamic countries, not just Syria. But I believe that at most, 10 percent of Syrian society supports the Muslim Brotherhood. I do not understand why they are clambering for more representation.

I hope that they will be wise and rational enough to see that it is not in their interest or the interest of the revolution for them to exaggerate their role in the Syrian uprising. It is the dictatorship that is inflating their role to scare off international support. They’re serving this purpose by exaggerating their role at conferences and in the media.

OT: In one of your statements, you described the group who prepared for the Istanbul conference as the “Syrian Washington Club.” There is also talk of American funding of this meeting. What are the motives for this? Is it related to a specific political agenda?

HM: The American administration lost its battle with Hezbollah in Lebanon and with Iran over nuclear power. It is now seeking to turn the Syrian revolution into a sort of proxy war against Iranian influence in the region. It is no secret to anyone that America absolutely does not want to support a revolution which seeks secular democratic change in the Arab world. The democratic Syrian revolution is a true revolution, not a proxy war. There was definitely American funding behind the Istanbul group, official and unofficial. There was also funding from the Arab Gulf states. But I believe that money does not make or break a revolution. It affects revolutions negatively by reinforcing opportunism and conspiracy and weakening the role of the genuine fighters in certain phases. Money cannot change the course of history.

OT: Do you think that the Istanbul meeting and the National Council are in breach of the consensus document signed in Doha?

HM: Istanbul was a complete cancellation of what was agreed upon in Doha. In Doha, it was agreed that the Syrian National Alliance was the prime organizer of all efforts to later set up a Syrian political council. The agreement dictated that leadership for the national alliance should include the most significant political forces, on condition that greater weight be given to the opposition inside the country.

But this was circumvented when the Istanbul meetings were revived, after two failed attempts, by attracting some groups who are poorly represented at home, such as the Muslim Brotherhood and the Damascus Declaration signatories. The Brotherhood’s role in the revolution has been restricted to media work and sending aid, and the Damascus Declaration is no longer the force it once was. Moreover, the most prominent intellectuals behind the Damascus Declaration are now part of the National Coordination Committee and have not joined the Istanbul group.

OT: Are there differences between the Doha agreement and the Istanbul meeting on the issues of arming the revolution and foreign intervention?

HM: I have always sought to develop basic principles on which all the opposition agrees. We began by announcing the Oath of Dignity and Rights on June 17 as a supra-constitutional text that includes the basic principles of the Second Syrian Republic. This is definitely rejected by a large proportion of the Islamists, which is why this essential text was replaced in the National Council by a loose declaration. The National Council’s declaration is not based on a clear political program. All matters were left ambiguous so that each participant could explain them as they wished. One person speaks of military intervention, the other about humanitarian intervention, and another says no to foreign intervention in any form. For us, our program is clear, our loyalties are clear, and our demand for the downfall of the regime is clear. All these matters had been agreed on and there is no ambiguity or disagreement.

OT: How do you view the position of the opposition now? Do you think that differences within it are a type of democracy? Or do they deepen divisions and undermine the unity of the opposition?

HM: The Algerian Revolution was successful despite the fact that there were two separate liberation movements. This means that unity for unity’s sake is not a logical or rational program for change. We cannot accept agreement on any basis, just to preserve unity. The primary objective is a political program and finding common ground to conduct our work. I do not see this as the problem. It is the right of those who joined the National Council to try. Let them see for themselves how far this experiment can go. As for me, I believe it is my duty today to create a strong, civil, national, democratic axis, as it is the only guarantee for the revolution’s success. If the revolution becomes Islamicized, it will fail; if it becomes sectarian, it will fail; and if it becomes militarized, it will fail.

This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.

Othman Tazghart
http://english.al-akhbar.com/print/1015

Comments Off on Syria: the Local Syrian OppositionTalks view on the expats’ Syrian National Council

Posted in Middle East Geopolitics, Syria, Syrian Opposition

Syria: Russia’s credibility at stake

Posted on October 5, 2011 | Comments Off on Syria: Russia’s credibility at stake

Bashar al Assad is now squeezed more than ever to fulfill his promises. There is no escape as the Russian won’t accept a slap on their face if Bashar fails to implement the reforms. They’ll dump him.
The strategy of the Russians is to bring the independant opposition groups on the ground (not the French-MB-Turkish one) to act more decisively and find a middle way to save the country from civil war and chaos.
Bashar’s excuses has been the lack of social peace to implement the reforms, while the opposition’s reluctance is because of the use of force to get that social peace.
As the opposition on the ground lacks any charismatic and courageous leadership, the whole thing has been dragging its feet and has allowed foreign supported expats to carry the flag of the opposition while sitting on their computers or touring Turkey and the “lobbies”

The Russian hope to boost the local opposition to share the burden of imposing a social peace as well as pushing Bashar to implement the reforms in conjunction with the opposition.
It is a challenge that will be opposed and fought by the hawk western countries who prefer the full destruction of the country and a rebuild under their ‘knowledgable supervision’ to regain the upper hand on the ‘arab spring’ and better control its foreign policy, especially on Iran, Iraq and Israel.
The Russians have invested and risked a lot in that veto. They must deliver, their honor is at stake.
http://www.joshualandis.com/blog/?p=12401&cp=2#comment-276808

Comments Off on Syria: Russia’s credibility at stake

Posted in Middle East Geopolitics, Russia, Syrian Opposition

The Syria National Council: Opposition or Resistance ?

Posted on October 4, 2011 | Comments Off on The Syria National Council: Opposition or Resistance ?

JC–  3th October  2011—

Anti-regime activists consider that the president Bashar al Assad, his army and his government occupy Syria illegally or with no legitimacy.

Therefore they see themselves not as a democratic “opposition” but as a “Resistance” movement in exile, like the French Resistance operating from England to liberate France from the German.

Their strategy is to instigate revolts through peaceful local demonstrations or if this fails through a cold war using violence or a real war if they are able to get countries to help them, like what happened in Libya.

There is nothing democratic about their approach and they act from the unproven assumption that all the Syrian people are in agreement with their approach. They get active support for some western countries who have their own agenda in mind.

The “illegality” of the present government has been expressed unilaterally by a couple of Western countries who, for years, have already been sanctioning the Syrian government for its active support of the legitimate resistance of the Palestinians to the Western-supported Israeli occupation. This “deligitimization” is contrary to the chart of the UN and has been rejected by the Arab League, and most countries in the world.
By using videos of violence and demonstrations, the western media has played an important role in trying to convince the international community that the majority of Syrian are violently oppressed and that they all consider the current government as illegitimate.

Yet, unless there is a valid and reliable confirmation that the Syrian people are in majority in support of this so called “resistance’, all its acts are considered illegal and should be condemned as terrorist acts against a state and a government that is recognized and represented at the UN and all international institutions. Embassies of the countries that consider the present government as illegitimate are still in the capital.

I hope it clarifies (?) the situation of the crisis in Syria

Comments Off on The Syria National Council: Opposition or Resistance ?

Posted in Middle East Geopolitics, Syrian Opposition, US Middle East Politics, US-Syria

Who is the Syrian Opposition?

Posted on September 30, 2011 | Comments Off on Who is the Syrian Opposition?

Dp-News September 30, 2011 —

SYRIA- Since mid-March, Syria has been shaken by an unprecedented pro-democracy protest movement that the Assad regime has sought to crush using deadly force. More than 2,700 people have been killed in the unrest, according to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights in Geneva.

On the political front, Anti-regime activists inside Syria oppose the Syrian National Council, an opposition body formed in Turkey last month, because it favours foreign intervention, prominent activist Michel Kilo said on Thursday.

A Prominent dissident Michel Kilo said anti-regime forces inside Syria oppose the Syrian National Council, an opposition body formed in Turkey last month, because it favours foreign intervention.

“The opposition within the national council are in favour of foreign intervention to resolve the crisis in Syria, while those at home are not,” Kilo claimed in remarks to AFP at his home in Damascus.

“If the idea of foreign intervention is accepted, we will head towards a pro-American Syria and not towards a free and sovereign state,” he said.

“A request for foreign intervention would aggravate the problem because Syria would descend into armed violence and confessionalism, while we at home are opposed to that.”

And diplomats in Damascus told AFP that Ankara asked Damascus this summer to offer the banned Muslim Brotherhood government posts in exchange for Turkey’s support in ending the unrest, an offer rejected by President al-Assad.

Michel Kilo, 71, a writer who has opposed the ruling Baath party since it came to power in 1963, was jailed from 1980 to 1983 and from 2006 to 2009.

He is a member of the National Committee for Democratic Change (NCDC), which was formed on September 17 and groups Arab nationalists, socialists, Marxists, members of the Kurdish minority and independents such as Kilo.

He said the NCDC has a central committee of 80 members, of whom 25 percent are from the “young revolutionaries” who spearheaded protests against President Bashar al-Assad that broke out in mid-March.

Kilo said the opposition figures in Turkey have not consulted the NCDC and offered it only three representatives among the 71 of its members coming from inside the country.

The Syrian National Council (SNC) was set up in August and consists of 140 people, half of whom live in Syria. The names of its members inside Syria have not been released for security reasons, the council said.

It is dominated by the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood which is banned in Syria, but it includes liberals and Syrian notables.

The group is to meet this weekend in Istanbul in a bid to unify the fragmented opposition movement, a spokeswoman said on Tuesday.

“All our efforts now are not to appear as a movement that wants to eliminate others, we’re trying to offer a national framework,” Bassma Kodmani said.

Opposition movements behind the protests against Assad’s regime have been fragmented and difficult to measure. They are largely split along three lines: Arab nationalists, liberals, and Islamists.

Syrian opposition groups are calling for the first time for an international intervention to protect civilians from President al-Assad regime’s ongoing military onslaught, including the establishment of a United Nations-backed no-fly zone.

The opposition’s formal calls drew a tepid response Wednesday from the Obama administration and European governments, who said there is currently little appetite to reprise the type of air campaign that helped dislodge long-serving Libyan strongman Moammar Gadhafi last month.

The intervention call came Tuesday, when a coalition of leading Syrian opposition groups called on the U.N. and international community to play a greater role in protecting civilians from Syrian security forces.

They called for an internationally supervised arms embargo against Damascus, the establishment of a U.N. monitoring mission and the enforcement of a no-fly zone.

The groups, which presented their petition at a press conference in Washington, include the Syrian Revolution General Commission, a grassroots body working among activists inside Syria; the Damascus Declaration of leading Syrian dissidents; the Syrian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood; and the Syrian Emergency Task Force, made up of Syrian-American activists.

“The Syrian Revolution General Commission does seek international intervention in the form of a peacekeeping mission with the intention of monitoring the safety of the civilian population,” said the coalition in a statement released Tuesday.

The Syrian National Council, a body appointed earlier this month to try to lead the opposition, didn’t join Tuesday’s call. But it said civilian protection was a priority it would discuss on Oct. 2 in Istanbul, at its first general assembly meeting.

“In general, the SNC membership are on the same page as those on the ground in Syria and who have been asking for civilian protection for a while,” said council member Yaser Tabbara, a U.S.-based lawyer.

Radwan Ziadeh, another council member, said one proposed scenario for a no fly-zone would cover a 10-kilometer (six-mile) area inside Syria’s northern border with Turkey that would serve as a safe haven. It would be modeled on the U.N.-mandated safe haven in northern Iraq in 1991.

Rami Abdel Rahman, head of the U.K.-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, opposes the idea of a no fly-zone because it would encourage the rise of an armed rebellion rather than peaceful resistance.

In Turn, Leaders of Syria’s large minority Kurdish population show signs of organizing against the regime of President Bashar al-Assad. Several young Kurds have been active in protests and are members of the alliance of young activists that organizes demonstrations, but the cities in predominantly Kurdish areas have been largely quiet.

Kurdish activists and analysts say that in the past three weeks, members of the 11 unofficial Kurdish political parties have met with Kurdish activists from the Local Coordination Committee, an alliance for young protest organizers.

These Kurdish parties plan to name a special committee and hold a conference in Syria within the next few weeks.

Such a Kurdish group would be unrelated to the recently formed Syrian National Council, the country’s largest opposition umbrella. While Kurds say they share the opposition’s overall goal of a democratic Syria, many Kurds have also expressed frustration at what they see as protesters’ Arab agenda, and also say they aspire to greater autonomy within Syria.

“Syrian Kurds are not looking to separate from Syria—though of course the idea of a Kurdistan is a dream,” said Meshal Tammo, the spokesman for the Kurdish Future Movement, a political grouping in northeastern Syria.

“The Kurds are no different from anyone else in Syria—they are scared of what will come afterwards,” said Mr. Tammo.

“It was a question of respect: Obviously there are greater issues than Kurdish grievances at stake, but Kurds need to be assured that they are an important part of a future Syria,” said Massoud Akko, a Kurdish author and activist exiled in Norway, who was among those who left.

In early September, about 50 Syrian Kurds held a solidarity conference in Stockholm and issued a statement that said, “The Syrian revolution will not be complete without a just solution to the Kurdish cause.”

Arab officials at UN said that just the possibility of establishing a no-fly zone over a stretch of Syrian territory could it turn into a “safe haven” that may spur more defections from the Syrian military amid growing indications that lower-ranking officers are deserting.

“There are more and more discussions of this scenario to encourage more and more soldiers’ defections, yet it sounds still difficult” without U.N. backing, said an Arab diplomat.

http://www.dp-news.com/en/detail.aspx?articleid=98286

Comments Off on Who is the Syrian Opposition?

Posted in Middle East Geopolitics, Syrian Opposition, temporary

The GOP’s new love for Amb. to Syria Robert Ford

Posted on September 23, 2011 | Comments Off on The GOP’s new love for Amb. to Syria Robert Ford

Posted By Josh Rogin September 23, 2011 –U.S. Ambassador to Syria Robert Ford’s once unlikely bid for Senate confirmation gained traction this week, as multiple GOP senators and a host of conservative foreign policy leaders changed their tune toward his nomination.

Placed in his post via a recess appointment last year, Ford would have to return to Washington at the end of December if the Senate does not vote to confirm him. Over the summer, Ford has actively engaged with Syrian opposition groups and has put himself at personal risk by attending meetings of opposition leaders and funerals of Syrian activists. These efforts have convinced a large portion of the GOP, which stymied his confirmation last year, that his presence in Damascus is a useful way of confronting the regime of President Bashar al-Assad and not a concession to the brutal dictator.

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) was the first critic of Ford’s presence in Syria to reverse himself and come out in support of Ford’s confirmation. Now, several GOP senators who have criticized Obama’s Syria policy are following suit.

“Robert Ford has shown personal bravery and increasing effectiveness for advancing human rights in Syria and I am in support of his nomination,” Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL) told The Cable.

Congressional Quarterly reported on Thursday that Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), who voted no on Ford during committee consideration in July, is now a supporter. “He’s demonstrated very clearly that he can handle the tough job he’s doing in Syria,” Inhofe said.

Also, a group of conservative pundits, under the banner of the Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI), released a statement supporting Ford’s confirmation. FPI is led by Bill Kristol, Bob Kagan, and Jamie Fly.

“Whatever reason people had for wanting to withdraw our ambassador from Damascus before — and they were legitimate — circumstances have changed,” Kagan told The Cable. “Ford is, very bravely, acting as a kind of U.S. representative to the opposition in Syria and is making clear to the Syrian people that the US stands with them and against Assad.”

“It’s pretty clear the Republican tide is now turning in Ford’s favor,” a senior Senate aide close to the issue told The Cable. “The reason, ironically, isn’t because Republicans have been persuaded by the administration to support a policy of engagement. It’s because the administration has been persuaded, by the facts on the ground, to abandon engagement… Everyone realizes Ford is now in Syria not as a bridge to Assad, but as a bridge to what comes after Assad.”

The State Department senses that the tide is turning on the Ford nomination as well, and is pushing Ford out to the media this week. He conducted on-the-record interviews with The Daily Caller¸ the Huffington Post¸ and with your humble Cable guy.

In a phone call with The Cable, Ford laid out the reasons he believes that he should be allowed to stay in Damascus.

“When an ambassador makes a statement in a country that’s critical of that country’s government, when that government visits an opposition or a site where a protest is taking place, the statement is much more powerful — and the impact and the attention it gets is much more powerful if it’s an ambassador rather than a low-level diplomat,” Ford said.

Ford said he still meets with Syrian Foreign Ministry officials, as has as recently as last week, but only about routine diplomatic business and not about the regime or overall U.S. policy. “There really is not a lot that we need to say to the Syrian government,” Ford said. “We don’t need to discuss their reform initiative because we don’t take it seriously.”

Ford said he is definitely not trying to get himself kicked out of Damascus, as some in Washington believe. He is also meeting frequently with Syrians who are “on the fence,” and could be turned against the Assad regime, such as business leaders, government employees, Christians, and the Allawite community, which has until recently been loyal to Assad.

Amid discord between various opposition groups inside and outside Syria, Ford’s message to the Syrian opposition is that it should unite and put together a plan for transitioning to a new government. “Otherwise it’s just going to be very bloody and bad later,” he said. He is also urging them to keep the protests peaceful in order to maintain international sympathy.

There has been some discussion in Washington about why Ford doesn’t announce his activities in Syria or post about them on his Facebook page, which he has used to criticize the Assad regime. Ford said his activities are well-covered in Syria and around the region by the Arab language press.

“I’m thinking much more about my audience here in Syria; I’m not so worried about the Washington repercussions,” he said.

What’s clear is that Ford has had some close calls. In addition to being assaulted by a pro-regime thug, the funeral he attended of slain activist Giyath Matar was attacked by regime forces just after he left. In fact, he said, he was only a block away in his car when the attack occurred.

At first, the crowd at the funeral was chanting, “God, Syria, freedom, and that’s all,” Ford remembered. He and the other seven ambassadors at the funeral left, however, when the crowd started shouting, “The people want to bring the downfall of the regime.”

“I don’t want to be an American ambassador encouraging a crowd to bring down the regime. That would be incitement, that’s the red line,” Ford said.

It seems that Ford’s actions are getting under the skin of the Syrian regime. Ford said that after trashing Matar’s funeral, Syrian forces spray painted on the side of Matar’s house, “The Matar family is an agent of the American ambassador.”

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/09/23/the_gop_s_new_love_for_amb_to_syria_robert_ford

Comments Off on The GOP’s new love for Amb. to Syria Robert Ford

Posted in Syrian Opposition, US Middle East Politics

Tagged

Interview with US ambassador Ford in Syria

Posted on September 23, 2011 | Comments Off on Interview with US ambassador Ford in Syria

TVNZ  September 23, 2011 Source: Reuters–

President Bashar al-Assad is losing support among key constituents and risks plunging Syria into sectarian strife by intensifying a crackdown on pro-democracy demonstrators, the US ambassador to Damascus says.

Time is against Assad, but the Syrian opposition still needed to agree on the specifics of a transition and the system that could replace Assad if he is ousted, Ambassador Robert Ford said in a telephone interview from Damascus.

“The government violence is actually creating retaliation and creating even more violence in our analysis, and it is also increasing the risk of sectarian conflict,” he said.

Although Ford did not mention either by name, tensions have emerged in Syria between its mostly Sunni population and Assad’s Alawite sect, which dominates the army and the security apparatus.

The United States, seeking to convince Assad to scale back an alliance with Iran and backing for militant groups, moved to improve relations with Assad when President Barack Obama took office, sending Ford to Damascus in January to fill a diplomatic vacuum since Washington pulled out its ambassador in 2005.

But ties deteriorated after the uprising broke out and Assad ignored international calls to respond to protester demands that he dismantle the police state and end five decades of autocratic rule.

Washington, which has weighed its strategic interests in the region against a public commitment to support democracy, has responded in different ways to the “Arab Spring” uprisings.

It shows no appetite to repeat the kind of military intervention that was crucial in the ouster of Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi. Assad’s opponents say they, too, do not want foreign military intervention but would welcome “international protection” to prevent the killing of civilians.

Assad has promised reform and has changed some laws, but the opposition said they made no difference, with killings, torture, mass arrests and military raids intensifying in recent weeks.
Advertisement

The 46-year-old president repeatedly has said that outside powers were trying to divide Syria under the guise of wanting democracy because of Damascus’s backing for Arab resistance forces. He said the authorities were justified in using force against what they described as a terrorist threat.

Ford said most of the violence “is coming from the government and its security forces.

“That can either be shooting at peaceful protests or funeral processions or when government forces go into homes. We have had recently a number of deaths in custody, or extra-judicial killings,” he said.

The veteran diplomat has infuriated Syria’s rulers by cultivating links with the grassroots protest movement. It has been expanding since the uprising demanding an end to 41 years of Assad family rule erupted in March, when a group of activists, mostly women, demonstrated in the main Marjeh Square in Damascus to demand the release of political prisoners. Security police arrested and beat dozens of them.

Ford was cheered by protesters when he went in July to the city of Hama, which was later stormed by tanks. He also visited a town that has witnessed regular protests in the southern province of Deraa, ignoring a new ban on Western diplomats traveling outside Damascus and its outskirts.

Along with a group of mostly Western ambassadors, Ford paid condolences this month to the family of Ghayath Matar, a 25-year-old protest leader who used to distribute flowers to give to soldiers but was arrested and died of apparent torture.

“We wanted to show Syrians what the international community from Japan to Europe to North America thinks of the example that Ghayath Matar set about peaceful protest,” Ford said.

Citing the resilience of more than six months of what he described as overwhelmingly peaceful demonstrations, Ford said the street activists could receive a boost from a more effective political opposition.

Dissent among core

“The other part of the protest movement is to have a genuine frame for a democratic transition. I think that this is something which different elements of the Syrian opposition are trying to organise.

“It probably has two elements. One element is to have some agreed principles about how a reformed Syrian state would look and how it would operate, and another element would be how would a Syrian transition be arranged,” he said.

The Obama administration toughened its position in August, saying Assad should step down and imposing sanctions on the petroleum industry, which is linked to the ruling elite.

Ford said there was economic malaise in Syria, signs of dissent within Assad’s Alawite sect and more defections from the army since mid-September, but the military is “still very powerful and very cohesive”.

“I don’t think that the Syrian government today, Sept. 22, is close to collapse. I think time is against the regime because the economy is going into a more difficult situation, the protest movement is continuing and little by little groups that used to support the government are beginning to change.”

Ford cited a statement issued in the restive city of Homs last month by three notable members of the Alawite community which said the Alawites’ future is not tied to the Assads remaining in power.

“We did not see developments like that in April or May. I think the longer this continues the more difficult it becomes for the different communities, the different elements of Syrian society that used to support Assad, to continue to support him.”

He said Assad could still rely on the military to try and crush the protest movement but the killing of peaceful protesters was losing him support within the ranks.

“The Syrian army is still very powerful and it is still very strong,” Ford said. “Its cohesion is not at risk today but there are more reports since mid-September of desertions than we heard in April and May or June. And this is why I am saying time is not on the side of the government.”

Comments Off on Interview with US ambassador Ford in Syria

Posted in Syrian Opposition, US Middle East Politics

20 Sept 2011 Lavrov, Clinton fail to agree on Syrian problem

Posted on September 20, 2011 | Comments Off on 20 Sept 2011 Lavrov, Clinton fail to agree on Syrian problem

The Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and the US State Secretary Hillary Clinton have failed to arrive at a consensus during their meeting in New York on the Syrian problem, reports the ITAR-TASS news agency with reference to sources in the US Administration.

Clinton feels the UN Security Council should adopt a tough stand on the Syrian problem; while Lavrov calls, for his part, for launching a dialogue between the Syrian leadership and the opposition.

But Russia has agreed to continue the discussion of the ways the Security Council could act on the issue in the future. The Russian President Dmitry Medvedev is known for his critical comment on the Syrian authorities’ moves, yet the Russian leader has come out against a resolution that would condemn the Bashar Assad regime, to prevent the events in Syria from following the bloody Libyan scenario.

http://english.ruvr.ru/2011/09/20/56428901.html

Comments Off on 20 Sept 2011 Lavrov, Clinton fail to agree on Syrian problem

Posted in Middle East Geopolitics, Syrian Opposition, US Middle East Politics

20 Sept, 2011 Syria’s Muslim brotherhood: No dialog with regime

Posted on September 20, 2011 | Leave a comment

London, Asharq Al-Awsat- Ali Sadraldin al-Bayanuni, former head of the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria, has stressed that, “The moderate Islamic trend is present in all Syrian governorates.” Al-Bayanuni points out that the Muslim Brotherhood has direct communications with all the coordination councils at home as well as the Syrian opposition abroad. Al-Bayanuni, who is also known as Abu-Anas, explained to Asharq Al-Awsat that: “We do not have bases at home because of the unjust Law No. 49 of 1980 that sentences those affiliated to the Muslim Brotherhood to death.”

Al-Bayanuni, who is in Turkey participating in the Muslim Brotherhood Shura Council meetings, told Asharq Al-Awsat: “It is too late for any political or reformist solution in Syria; therefore, there is no solution now other than the departure of the regime. This has a price that the people will pay in order to achieve their aims of freedom, justice, and democracy.”

Al-Bayanuni reiterates that the demonstrators in the beginning raised slogans demanding reform and freedom, “but the way the regime dealt with the demonstrators pushed them into raising the ceiling of their demands, and they will not stop until the regime goes.”

Regarding the confessions of Lt-Col Hussein Harmush, which was aired on Syrian Television under mysterious circumstances after his dissent from the army in June 2011, the former head of the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood told Asharq Al-Awsat: “We do not have detailed information. However, we support the statement by the Turkish Foreign Ministry that denies handing over the dissident Syrian Lieutenant Colonel to the authorities in Damascus.

Al-Bayanuni points out: “The oppression by Bashar al-Assad’s regime has caused the death of more than 3,000 Syrian citizens, and the arrest of no less than 15,000 others, who according to human rights organizations are in the Syrian prisons and detention camps exposed to all kinds of torture and humiliation.”

Al-Bayanuni says: “The Muslim Brotherhood is in solidarity with the revolution at home and abroad, and we will not accept anything less than the toppling of the regime.” Al-Bayanuni stresses that the Muslim Brotherhood Group “does not and will not accept the idea of sharing power with the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.”Al-Bayanuni says: “There is no truth whatsoever in the circulating claims about the possibility of a settlement between the Muslim Brotherhood and Al-Assad’s regime with Turkish sponsorship and US blessing. This is unfounded. Neither the Turks are pursuing this, nor have we any information about it. All these are leaks by some pillars of the regime.”

Al-Bayanuni adds: “We do not participate with criminals. This is a criminal regime, and it ought to go. Whatever the temptations through promises, posts, or reforms might be, we will not participate with the killer of the people, and there is not even the intention to engage in a dialog with him. The dialog with him is rejected and prohibited, and we have taken our decision about this.”

http://www.asharq-e.com/news.asp?section=1&id=26648

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Syrian Opposition

Tagged

Sept 19, 2011 Opposition has to find common ground in Syria

Posted on September 20, 2011 | Comments Off on Sept 19, 2011 Opposition has to find common ground in Syria
National Editorial (UAE)

On the six-month anniversary of the first anti-regime protests in Syria last week, opposition groups in Istanbul announced the formation of a Syrian National Council to steer the transition to democracy. But it was the second such announcement – the first one a month ago in Ankara turned into a fiasco.

Even people who were named as opposition leaders distanced themselves from the first council, saying it failed to represent protesters who were risking their lives on the ground in Syria.

This time it is imperative that they find common ground. For a start, a single voice will help to convince Russia, China, India and Brazil – all of which continue to support the Assad regime – to take a stand against the bloodshed. These countries do not side with the regime for existential reasons, as Iran does, but for strategic interests. Russia, for example, has a Cold War base in the coastal city of Tartus, its only naval presence on the Mediterranean.

A unified alternative to the regime will begin to convince the international community at large that it is safe to invest in the opposition. It is time to begin considering a future beyond the regime, although admittedly the Assads’ violent grip on power has shown few signs of weakening.

http://www.thenational.ae/thenationalconversation/editorial/opposition-has-to-find-common-ground-in-syria

{…}

 

Comments Off on Sept 19, 2011 Opposition has to find common ground in Syria

Posted in Syrian Opposition

Tagged ,