Qunfuz

Robin Yassin-Kassab

Arm the Guerrillas

with 6 comments

picture by Reuters

This was published at Foreign Policy.

There are some, perhaps many, Syrians who detest their government and are entirely aware of its treasonous nature — yet wish for the demonstrations and the guerrilla actions of the Free Syrian Army (FSA) to stop and for President Bashar al-Assad’s regime to regain control as soon as possible. They take this position out of a profound pessimism: They believe it is impossible to uproot the surveillance-and-torture state and its deep sectarian substructure, that more people will die the longer the unrest continues, that the economy will collapse further, and that nothing will alter the end — Assad’s inevitable victory. Some Syrians go so far as to say that the regime itself, or a branch of it, is surreptitiously encouraging demonstrations so as to have an “excuse” to teach the new generation an unforgettable lesson.

I can’t agree with this defeatist perspective on principle — the principle being my refusal to give in to despair, and my faith in the ability of human beings to change their circumstances. I understand it, however, and I understand that I might share it if I were living in the heart of the horror instead of in Scotland. But apart from principle, I think the assumption underlying the defeatist perspective is mistaken. Yes, the regime is still able to kill, and will continue or even intensify its killing. However, it has lost control of the country and won’t be able to reestablish it.

The much-maligned United Nations observers have confirmed what news reports had already suggested: Large areas of the Syrian countryside and provincial cities are either under FSA control or nobody’s. Regime forces are able to infiltrate and punish areas under the revolutionaries’ sway, but they dare not linger. Sometimes, they are not even able to move in. When the Assad regime recently attempted to retake Rastan, the FSA destroyed a number of armored vehicles and killed 23 soldiers, forcing the military to retreat.

This is not the 1980s, when Bashar’s father, President Hafez al-Assad, succeeded in crushing an Islamist-led rebellion. Back then, the regime succeeded in isolating its enemies in the city of Hama while the world’s eyes were focused on a raging civil war and regional struggle for influence in neighboring Lebanon. That was before YouTube and citizen journalism, and before a generation of guerrillas learned lessons in insurgency from south Lebanon and Iraq.

Today, regime forces face roadside bombs from the Jabal al-Zawiya countryside in the north to the Deir ez-Zor governorate in the east and Deraa in the south. According to the most optimistic reports, about a third of the army has defected most men have gone home or fled abroad and are keeping their heads down, but many thousands have joined opposition militias. For the defectors, and for the civilian volunteers who fight for revenge or neighborhood defense, the regime’s re-establishment of control would mean certain death. These men have no option but to continue resisting.

A few weeks ago, the situation for the resistance militias was dire. They were hopelessly outgunned and had run out of ammunition. But there has been a glimmer of light more recently: News reports suggest that greater quantities of improved weaponry have begun reaching some of the revolutionary forces. One sign of this is the FSA’s increasing effectiveness at destroying regime tanks.

It’s too early to be certain, but it does seem that Qatari and Saudi promises to arm the opposition, or at least to fund arms purchases, are being fulfilled. The United States is reportedly helping to “coordinate” this process. After 15 months of slaughter and sectarianism, I find myself in the novel position of welcoming this vague intervention.

The dangers of foreign-funded civil war are many and obvious. Saudi Arabia and Qatar are not democracies, and Saudi and Qatari “investors” will not willingly invest in democracy. Private Gulf and other Islamist investors are likely to channel money to groups that understand the conflict in nakedly sectarian terms. The United States, one would expect, will also be doing its best to cultivate clients friendly to American and Israeli interests in the region.

I doubt that any outside power will be able to impose its candidate at the end. The balance of power in the region is currently too contested to allow one side a conclusive victory. But it’s almost certain that the country’s future leaders will be not civilians but military heroes. That’s because it’s almost certain that the conflict will be settled not by talking, but by guns. To the victor goes the spoils.

The overbearing role of armed men has been one of Syria’s curses since the foundation of the postcolonial state. A greater, and related, curse has been sectarianism — a monster now well and truly out of the bag and prancing in all its naked ugliness. Just as the regime managed to project a veneer of intelligence before the uprising by deploying urbane spokespeople and co-opted “intellectuals,” so it was long able to pose as the secular defender of Syria’s delicate social balance. Beneath the surface lay the reality: Syria is just another Levantine postcolonial regime — every bit as much a product of Sykes-Picot as the Zionist power structure. As the French appointed Maronites to rule Lebanon, they created “an army of minorities” that would rule Syria. The system has not been secularist but sectarian-secularist: Alawis overwhelmingly staff the upper ranks of the security and intelligence services, the most powerful branches of state whose permission is required for everything, from renting a building to opening a street stall. Though unfavored Alawis remain poor and marginalized, those with family connections to the security services are favored for jobs and other opportunities. The brooding social tensions this caused were set aflame when the regime began arming Alawi thugs and sending them into Sunni cities to kill, rape, and humiliate. Eyewitnesses from the town of al-Houla report that the people who cut the throats of children during the massacre were uniformed Alawis from a neighboring village.

In this context, the popular chant of the revolution — “the Syrian people are one” — sounds to many like an empty slogan. The damage is already done. It’s already too late for a happy ending. The civil war is here, and the longer the stalemate lasts the deeper the trauma will be. This is why I support supplying weapons to the Free Syrian Army. Let’s get it over with as soon as possible.

The regime deploys tanks, missile batteries, and helicopter gunships, and is aided and resupplied by Iran and Russia. Syrians have the right to defend themselves, and the right to the means to defend themselves. Most of the country, especially the Sunni heartland, has been reduced to something worse than Gaza. Syrians are fighting anyway — not for ideology, but for survival. They won’t stop fighting. Eventually they will win, although the field of their victory will be the smoking ruin of a poor and bitterly divided country. At some point before that, key sections of the military and the Alawi community will realize they have no hope of victory, and will either flee or switch sides. I would prefer this moment to come in a year’s time or sooner, not in another decade. Arming Syria’s guerrillas is the only way to bring about that result.

About these ads

Written by Robin Yassin-Kassab

May 31, 2012 at 1:38 am

Posted in Syria

Tagged with , ,

6 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. There have been no indications that the current cruel regime of Syria is willing to consider anything besides the application of more brutality, larger guns and more inflict more pain on citizens whose inherent right to protest is dismissed. .
    There are no circumstances under which such a regime should be offered the opportunity to either “win” a confrontation or to pretend to reform. This regime is bankrupt morally and has to go.
    It is ironic that many of the apologists have been forced to admit the absolute need for a radical change and so their defense of the regime has taken what is essentially an illogical twist: yes the current system needs to change but hey, it is not the worst system in the world and so let us give them time to reform. How can any rational person justify a major crime simply on the grounds that there are a few more heinous ones?
    My only possible disagreement with Qunfuz is about the role of Mr. Annan. I hope that the UN mission will be able to collect evidence to convict Mr. Assad and all his cronies but I am afraid that Mr. Annan’s mission will end up extending the “Syrian killing fields” under the rule of Bashar Assad. The additional misery that these failed efforts will inflict are not called for. Instead we should be talking seriously about the right-to-protect (R2P) not only in Syria but as a new global standard..

    gkaram

    May 31, 2012 at 11:02 am

  2. The Organisation of Islamic Counties (OIC) should fund a slow motion occupation of Syria by Iraqi troops … yeah you read it right the first time.

    Since Iraq has a similar distribution of ethnicities and religious sects, although in different proportions, the factions in Syria can accept Iraqi occupation as a sort of rough justice in favour of stability and as a bulk work against civil war until a new order is established.

    Iraqi Sunni troops can patrol Syrian Sunni areas, Shite troops patrol Alawite areas and Kurdish troops patrol Kurdish areas. If there are any, Iraqi Christian troops can patrol Syrian Christian areas etc.

    Advantage: No US, European, Turkish or Saudi Troops.

    David Edenden

    June 1, 2012 at 12:50 am

  3. When you utter an imperative sentence, e.g., ‘Arm the Guerrillas’, you are ordering, advising, demanding of, pleading with, or whatever that some part of your audience take such action. Neither I, nor most of your readers, even on the blatantly imperialist-establishment ‘Foreign Policy’ web site, have the means to arm anybody in Syria.* So you are acting as an adviser to those who do have the means, i.e., the U.S. imperialist state.

    But really it is not advice you are giving them, since you clearly have no expert or special knowledge about the actual situation in Syria that they can’t get elsewhere. What you, and people like Pham Binh of Advise Wall Street and the Repentant EX-Trotskyist, Louis Proyect, are providing is credibility to the “humanitarian” / ‘Responsibility to Protect’ (R2P) mask for their imperialist interventions around the world. I don’t know about you, Robin, to know whether revealing yourself in this way changes the image those who know you and your previous writings have of you. But certainly their support for your position on this certainly does undermine the tattered ‘leftist’ credibility of anti-anti-imperialists like Proyect and Binh.

    As for ‘R2P’, how do we honor our responsibility to protect the human species and the planetary ecosystem from their greatest enemy, the global capitalist class and its main enforcer, the United Snakes? Certainly, we don’t do it by helping provide them with “humanitarian” cover for their crimes!

    * If I did have such means, I would search for a group of communists or other leftist anti-imperialists, however small, to get those arms to. But going beyond Syria, virtually every guerrilla group worth supporting (e.g., FARC, PFLP, NPA, Hezbollah, etc.), along with a few that aren’t, is on the U.S. list of ‘Foreign Terrorist Organizations’, so you can be persecuted for giving them anything more than abstract verbal support.

    Aaron Aarons

    July 26, 2012 at 6:59 pm

    • Aaron – the ‘Arm the Guerillas’ title was tacked on by the FP people, not me. I don’t like the imperative either. In the piece I said that I was not unhappy that the Saudis and Qataris may be sending some small amount of light weaponry. I wasn’t calling for the West to arm the FSA (although at this stage it wouldn’t bother me). I’m certainly not calling for an intervention involving foreign military forces. I don’t know Proyect and Binh so I can’t comment on them. I’m sure my position on Syria (and Libya) has alienated some of the infantile leftists who agree with me on Palestine and Iraq. That’s fine with me. I haven’t changed my opinion on Palestine or Iraq. I’m simply expressing opinions here, not trying to preserve an ideologically pure ‘leftist’ image. Your comment about getting leftist anti-imperialists to deliver arms is of course entirely unrealistic – as you partially recognise – and the thing is, the revolution and repression are happening right now, people are dying, my father’s country is traumatised more every day, and there is no time for ridiculous idealism. A real materialist would recognise this. Best wishes.

      Robin Yassin-Kassab

      July 27, 2012 at 10:45 am

  4. Do you really think that calling principled anti-imperialists “infantile” strengthens your argument? Is it “infantile” to recognize that tens of thousands of real infants are dying every day around the world as a result of the workings of the imperialist-dominated global capitalist economy? It is unfortunate that the country your father happens to be from is being traumatized, but why should the left in the anglophone imperialist countries prioritize that situation, especially since there’s rather little we can do about it other than trying to prevent greater imperialist meddling there?

    Or maybe you’d prefer that we stop opposing imperialist intervention in Syria and the Arab world, and maybe even support some of it, as some senile leftists have done, but those of us who are “infantile” enough to care about those real infants I mentioned above, and the human and other species on Planet Earth, are not going to do it.

    Aaron Aarons

    August 1, 2012 at 7:47 pm

    • No, I don’t think it’s infantile to oppose the workings of the imperialist-capitalist system, and no, I’m not asking anyone to prioritise anything. Your assumptions about me belong to you. They are not related to what I’ve written. I’m asking people to stop insulting the syrian people by imagining an imperialist plot where none exists (except as far as russia is concerned). Your last sentence is a remarkable example of irrelevant self-regard. Congratulations to you for being such a beautiful humanitarian.

      Robin Yassin-Kassab

      August 1, 2012 at 9:26 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 154 other followers

%d bloggers like this: