How do we make sense of the fast-paced developments in Syria, whose people suffered immensely under 54 years of inhuman rule by a dynastic dictatorship that used mindless violence, global and regional political dynamics, and internecine conflicts to remain in power for so long?
The starting point is to admit that the fall of the regime is a historic blessing for most people in that country, regardless of the ‘who made it possible, what next and where the country will go from here’ questions.
The large number of illegal detainees who came out of the regime’s notorious prisons after decades of torture, denial of basic human rights and loss of a decent life alone should be enough to clinch the argument that the tyrant had to go.
That the Al Assad regime lasted almost a decade and a half more than its equally reprehensible counterparts in the region who were toppled during the Arab Spring was because of a host of geopolitical reasons, including the sudden emergence of an ISIS-led ‘caliphate’ three years into the civil war.
Once the inevitability of the regime’s collapse is acknowledged, we must of course consider the who and what next questions.
What caused the fall of the regime was not a popular revolution; it was an armed rebellion led by Hai’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS – Hayat is the word used by the media, which means life and hence wrong. Hai’at means organisation), a bunch of religious zealots whose contempt for the country’s diversity is matched by the regime’s disregard for its people.
That said, most Syrians supported the zealots who came from Idlib (but not their fanaticism) and rejoiced in the collapse of the regime that they hated with all their heart. Its leader Abu Mohammed al-Jolani (real name Ahmed al-Sharaa) does not represent even remotely democratic ideals or freedom; let us not forget he is someone who chose to join Al Qaeda and even establish its Syrian branch when he could no longer agree with the ‘extremism’ of ISIS!
While we feel jubilant at the sight of political dissenters walking out of the collapsed regime’s prisons, we must remember that critics jailed by Al Jolani in Idlib are still languishing with no hope or sign of release.
Before we get into the nitty gritty of the current machinations in Damascus, it is of utmost importance to spell out a few general observations based on random, yet exhaustive perusal of media coverage and discussions on a wide range of Arabic language television and YouTube channels and digital platforms.
The word democracy is totally absent in all interviews with and statements from the new forces that took over the reins of power.
They all talk about the retention and expansion of state institutions, improvement in civic services, betterment of law and order, and general assurances of safety and security for religious, ethnic and political segments, but not a word about the inclusion of various components of the polity in government, conduct of free and fair elections, or the character of the constitution to be prepared for the post-Al Assad phase.
At the same time, there are unmistakable indications that HTS wants to impose on Syria an Islamic theocracy, which they claim will be different from that of ISIS and other hardline groups. HTS has not consulted the other opposition groups in the country on the contours of the post-Al Assad political system till now and has not said it would even consider forming a representative government in the transitional phase.
What is evident is the possibility of a ‘secular’ dictatorship being replaced by a fanatical and theocratic one, totally disregardful of the aspirations and views of the multiple segments of the Syrian polity, which are more diverse than most other countries in the region. HTS is speaking in a tone that indicates willingness for a forced reconciliation with other players in terms of a general peace, which is conditional on it having its way unhindered and unchallenged.
Also read: Why It Is Not All Despair for Syrians
The external players – the US, Turkey, Israel, Iran, Russia, Arab countries – are struggling to either shape the new Syria according to their interests or redefine their role and relevance in the changed scenario.
Turkey is of course the winner in the game at present, as HTS is beholden to it in no small measure and will do what it wants to oppress and marginalize the Kurdish groups.
The Turkish-backed Syrian National Army and the US-supported Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces are currently engaged in bloody battles in northern Syria.
Iran and Russia are of course the losers, but HTS has assured Russia that it will not remove Russian military and naval bases so long as it promises non-aggression.
Israel has launched more than 400 strikes against Syrian arms depots and is pushing troops well beyond the demilitarised buffer zone extending from the Golan Heights that it has been occupying since 1967.
Turkey has been in occupation of a large area in northern Syria since 2016 and is now the main sponsor of the forces that captured Damascus, but that did not prevent it from decrying Israeli incursions into the country with no sense of irony.
The countries in the region allied with the US, including Saudi Arabia, and the US itself, continue to seek avenues of intervention in the situation, but with little success.
Iran’s so-called axis of resistance is now rudderless with their main conduit for moving weaponry from Tehran to Hezbollah in Lebanon now gone.
Apart from ensuring a reprieve for the Kurdish groups that it supports, the US does not seem to be in a position to influence the goings on in Damascus.
In the current circumstances, there is only one possible outcome that can guarantee that Syria will not enter a new phase of civil war and that appears increasingly unlikely.
Free and fair elections with the full participation of all political groups under a new secular democratic constitution that enshrines equal citizenship for all and the complete dissolution of all armed militias under UN supervision are the only way out of the half a century of turbulence in the country.
Given the equivocations and one-upmanship of the HTS in the past week, it is amply clear that they will not countenance giving an inch of political space to communities that they often described as heretics, blasphemers and apostates.
That he chose the historic Umayyad Mosque in Damascus to deliver his victory speech was a symbolic gesture to convey that Al Jolani saw himself as a new caliph for a country that is too diverse to stomach the advent of a theocracy. He said in that speech: “This victory, my brothers, is a victory for the entire Islamic nation.”
Gregory III Laham, emeritus patriarch and the former spiritual leader of the Melkite Greek Catholic Church, and a Syrian himself, said in an interview on December 11 on Al Hadath TV: “I pray to Allah for saving us from any impending catastrophe, but more important than that is to pray that we are saved from one another.”
Nothing could have captured the current situation in Syria more eloquently!
Shajahan Madampat is a writer and cultural commentator writing in Malayalam and English.
