Wednesday 5 July 2017

Syria: How the Syrian Uprising was hijacked


How the Syrian revolution was hijacked.

The Syrian Civil War is one of the bloodiest conflict of the 21st century, raging across most of the country for almost eight years, killing hundreds of thousands and displacing millions. And it doesn’t look like it is going to stop any time soon.

 It all started at the start of 2011 when Arab Spring movement was gaining momentum across the region and the peaceful mass protest around Syria, calling for an end to the socio-political repression and lack of substantial economic reforms, turned violent when government security forces started arresting protesters en masse, using live ammunition and other means of excessive force to quell the movement. After that the situation spiralled out of control quickly: people took up arms to defend their neighbourhoods against bands of government loyalists that came to intimidate, kill and plunder hotspots of dissent. Army helicopters started dropping barrel-bombs on areas packed with people, causing panic, terror and killing dozens. Battle-lines were drawn across cities and neighbourhoods and people who lived side by side for years were now killing each other. The international community repeatedly demanded that Assad should step down in an attempt to de-escalate the growing level of violence, but Assad rejected this by stating that the people who had taken up arms against him were nothing more than terrorists and foreign agents that would be rooted out and dealt with.

Now almost eight years later, the war is still going on as it is without any doubt one of the most complicated conflicts we’ve seen in modern history. and it wasn’t long before the gloves came completely off and the systematic destruction of ancient buildings and historic sites, the deployment of heavy weapons against civilian areas, massacres and the usage of chemical weapons became all too real.

The question is how this situation spiralled out of control so quickly and isn’t showing any signs of settling any time soon. In order to take a critical look at the present, we often have to look back and identify the things that had a critical impact on the general situation.
When looking at different aspects of the country, it quickly becomes clear that modern Syria is very diverse in a variety of ways.

Historically the region was one of the earliest places where the human race started to build its first civilisations around 4,000 years ago. It has seen the rise and fall of numerous empires that wanted control of the region as it was at the centre of trade routes from every direction. These empires brought with them their own culture and religion which resulted in a very unique ethnic (Arab, Hebrew, Turkmen, Syriac, Kurdish) and religious (Sunni Islam, Shia Islam, Jews, Christianity) demographic composition and is represented in communities all across Syria.

Although the country is officially known as the Syrian Arab Republic, the structure of the government shows that the actual power lies predominantly with a minority, and a select few within that minority. The ruling minority consists of Alawites which is a branch of Shia Islam and came to power after Hafez al-Assad took power in 1970, installing a regime where all the important positions in the military, state security and intelligence were dominated by loyal people from the Shia community.

This security apparatus was also designed in a way that no high-ranking position had the possibility of gaining enough influence to attempt at a coup himself. It resulted in a leadership that was well insulated, protected by a broad security force that aimed to stamp out any sign of dissent, resulting in a society where one simply had to come to terms with this new way of life or risk everything by voicing his opinion too loud.

When Hafez al-Assad died in 2000 and his Bashar succeeded him there was a hope that this new leader would herald in a new era for Syria in which the socio-political repression would end and necessary reforms would be implemented. Although the first indications were hopeful as political prisoners were released and  steps were taken to introduce certain new laws, it became clear that the balance of power was to remain unchanged and that any attempts to do so would resort in severe punishment.

When the socio-political movement, which would become known in the West as the Arab Spring, gained momentum across northern Africa and saw several controversial governments fall, the people in Syria saw a chance for a similar chance and took to the streets to give voice to opinions and hopes they had to speak about in small circles behind closed doors for so long. Cities like Daraa, Damascus and Hama became some of the prominent places where thousands of Syrians marched for change.
Although the Assad government initially didn’t seem to take it too seriously, as the protest marches continued day after day government security forces suddenly responded by arresting protesters en masse and using force to break up the groups. When they arrested a number of youngsters who were part of the protest movement, violence broke out after the situation quickly deteriorated. Military vehicles appeared in the streets and security forces were ordered to shoot at the masses with live ammunition.

These actions were defended by stating that the protest movement in Syria was the work of extremists and foreign agents who were working to undermine the stability and unity of the country. There are numerous reports that the Assad government released extremists from its prisons in order for them to mingle with the movement and re-establish contact with their own movements. It is by doing this that the Assad government was able to cause the first rift in the Syrian revolutionary movement. By injecting extremist elements into the mainly democratic movement it was able to bolster its claims that extremists were moving against the state and therefor justifying its extreme measures that could be seen in the streets. It also caused the opposition to lose coherence and break up into multiple factions of moderates and more radical groups.

It is one of the oldest lessons in warfare and is still accurate today: If you succeed in dividing the opposing force into multiple smaller, less effective forces you will ultimately succeed in defeating them.

Throughout the Syrian Civil War the Assad government would exploit the rifts and animosity between rebel groups to gain a tactical or strategic advantage where it could have suffered a defeat. For example, the government would negotiate a ceasefire with certain groups in one part of the country for then to relocate a portion of the troops from that front to a another where the situation was critical. The most recent example of this strategy is, in my opinion, the instalment of these de-escalation zones across Syria, among one of them in the Idlib province, the bulk of the Assad loyalists started a new campaign shortly after to finish the conquest of the Aleppo province and attack territory held by the Islamic State who was too busy concentrating on the Syrian Democratic Forces who were working their way through Tabqah and to Raqqa.

By successfully doing this, the Assad loyalists have secured the majority of Aleppo province, cut off both the Syrian Democratic Forces moving west from Manbij and the Turkish backed Free Syrian Army groups from moving south and strengthening its position and the negotiation table.





= = = = = = = = 


If you have any questions, remarks or constructive feedback on the content or my writing, please do not hesitate to leave a comment. I would love to use this platform to interact with people to discuss topics like these and gain new perspectives and improve on my writing skills.




No comments:

Post a Comment