The Syrian stalemate and the Lebanese (mis)givings

By Scarlett HADDAD | 20/10/2011
(L’Orient-Le Jour- Lebanon Translated from french)

While the mediation of the Arab League is heading for a clinical death, the situation in Syria continues to divide the Lebanese between those who believe that the fall of the regime is inevitable, even imminent, and those who think that Bashar al-Assad almost got over it. The reality, as is often the case elsewhere, however, is between these two extremes.

Back from Syria, visitors report that the regime is in total control of the situation in large cities, particularly Aleppo and Damascus, where incidents occur regularly, but are quickly contained.
In remote areas, the situation is more confused. Small communities have often to deal with robbers and other troublemakers that are not necessarily with the opposition but take advantage of the fact that the police are busy elsewhere.

At present, the real problem for the Syrian authorities is concentrated in Homs where a security chaos is prevailing. In this socially diverse city, the police have no control over entire neighborhoods, which are in the hands of the opposition. But authorities remain broadly confident, preferring to let the opposition exhaust itself or sink into violence, which to them would only serve to discredit them to the people. Besides, everyone (almost) now recognizes that violence is the fact of both sides.

According to many Lebanese figures who visited Syria recently, the regime of Bashar al-Assad is more serene, confident that the situation is bound to evolve in its favor.
It considers itself protected from foreign intervention and sanctions of the Security Council of the United Nations by the Chinese and Russian veto, which is part of the long-term strategy of these two states and is therefore not subject to a sudden change. Similarly, it considers itself protected internally by the strength of its institutions, including the army and security forces that did not suffer from significant defections, seven months after the start of the insurgency.

Turkey, which represented a real threat to the Syrian regime with its plan to create a buffer zone at the border and thus give a bastion to the Syrian opposition, is currently immersed in its own problems with the Kurds but also with the various components of its social fabric.
Spearhead of European-American plan to destabilize Syria, Turkey is now virtually paralyzed, and the harsh statements of its leaders against the Syrian regime and their considerable support for the Syrian opposition do not constitute a real threat to Assad.

As a matter of fact, the real problem of the Syrian regime is elsewhere. It lies mainly in the deepening of the divide between the community components of the Syrian society, especially between Sunnis and Alawites.
Now, members of both communities are openly critical of each others, while for many years, the religious approach was apparently non-existent in Syria. If there is actually a plan of confessional destabilization through the exacerbation of sensitivities between Sunnis and Shiites, as the camp hostile to the Americans believes, it is scoring points in several countries in the region, particularly Syria.
This new reality hinders the process of reforms intended and announced by the Assad regime. Thus, in a climate as exacerbated, if the reforms were to occur through an electoral process, the regime may fall. It’s obviously what it does not want. Therefore it would be in a kind of impasse, convinced of the need for reforms, but reluctant to give them shape and risk its survival.

This allows us to reach the following conclusion: the system is therefore still the reins of the country and is not seriously shaken. But there is no end in sight to the internal crisis.

The authority has shown that its security approach widely criticized has allowed it to remain in place and push the opponents to resort to violence, but has not yet found a solution that allows it to calm the opposition.
Faced with such findings, many Western governments believe that the Syrian crisis would take more time and that its outcome is uncertain.
The Lebanese that are waiting for an early resolution to this crisis will be disappointed, and the Lebanese political class that have been waiting for the evolution of in Syria to move in one direction or the other would need to change its plans and approach.

The Syrian regime seems here to stay, even if it has less time to spend on local developments in Lebanon. It would be a positive development if the Lebanese of all affiliations, stop keeping an eye on Syria before making a decision about them. Not to mention their watches, set permanently on the Syrian hour

Comments are closed.