July 1, 2010
Syria Must Be Contained, Not Engaged
Nibras Kazimi suggests in the pages of the New Republic that the Middle East's violent Islamists might go after the Syrian government after they're finished in Iraq and Afghanistan. "On jihadist online discussion forums," he writes, "they have been authoring what amount to policy papers calling on the jihadist leadership to take the fight to Syria."
It would make a certain amount of sense if they did decide Syria ought to be next. Most of the country's leadership is from the Alawite minority sect, which branched off Twelver Shia Islam in the 10th century and became something else almost entirely. Both Sunnis and Shias have long considered them heretics. When French Mandate authorities ruled the area after World War One, many, if not most, Alawites yearned for their own sovereign homeland along the coast of the Mediterranean apart from Damascus and the largely Sunni interior.
"The Alawites refuse to be annexed to Muslim Syria," Suleiman Assad, grandfather of Syria's President Bashar Assad, wrote in a petition to France in 1943. "In Syria, the official religion of the state is Islam, and according to Islam, the Alawites are considered infidels. ... The spirit of hatred and fanaticism imbedded in the hearts of the Arab Muslims against everything that is non-Muslim has been perpetually nurtured by the Islamic religion. There is no hope that the situation will ever change. Therefore, the abolition of the mandate will expose the minorities in Syria to the dangers of death and annihilation."
Western foreign-policy analysts rarely seem to take this into account, but the most dangerous people in the Middle East always do. "Islamists arguing for a jihad in Syria believe that they have hit the trifecta," Kazimi writes. "In the Syrian regime, they have an enemy that is at once tyrannical, secular, and heretical."
Read the rest in Commentary Magazine.
Posted by Michael J. Totten at July 1, 2010 10:39 AM
Comments
If a reader/commenter were to write, "the spirit of hatred and fanaticism imbedded in the hearts of the Arab Muslims against everything that is non-Muslim has been perpetually nurtured by the Islamic religion", would that reader/commenter be considered an "islamophobe"?
Posted by: del at July 1, 2010 11:01 am
would that reader/commenter be considered an "islamophobe"?
By whom? Me? I don't use that word.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at July 1, 2010 11:14 am
By whom? Me? I don't use that word.
del, the answer is yes, he would be denounced as such by the sort of people who like to throw around the word "islamophobe." That's a really interesting quote from 67 years ago ... shows how little things have changed, really, in that part of the world.
Posted by: Gene at July 1, 2010 11:25 am
How should we (the West) bring about the drastic changes needed?
Posted by: Ali at July 1, 2010 12:40 pm
Ali, why should the "West" do it? Why shouldn't China, India, Japan, South Korea, Indonesia and other great global powers do their part?
China is the largest buyer of oil from Saudi Arabia and Iraq. China wields great influence throughout the middle east.
Posted by: anan at July 1, 2010 1:04 pm
China is the largest buyer of oil from Saudi Arabia and Iraq. China wields great influence throughout the middle east.
"A secular non-Muslim Arab government at peace with Israel and the West and an enemy of the “resistance” movements would make an obvious next stop for roaming insurgents."
Michael, I don't think you appreciate the vexing power of the Syrian internal security service. (That should be plural as there are a good number of them.) They keep the country on lock down, similar to how Iraq was in the Age of Saddam, or how Jordan or Egypt is now. But most Middle East experts seem to agree that Syrian internal security is about as good as it gets.
I don't think Salifi-Jihads are a credible threat to As'ad. I mean they are. But nothing to worry about.
Just walking around Hamma & Homes makes this quite clear.
I think As'ad is locked in a stalemate with his own Baathists over the Golan... he can't do anything short of getting it all back or there will be mutiny among the ranks. Thus, the on-going thing with Israel.
Posted by: Abu Guerrilla at July 1, 2010 2:15 pm
Michael, I don't think you appreciate the vexing power of the Syrian internal security service. (That should be plural as there are a good number of them.) They keep the country on lock down, similar to how Iraq was in the Age of Saddam, or how Jordan or Egypt is now. But most Middle East experts seem to agree that Syrian internal security is about as good as it gets.
I don't think Salifi-Jihads are a credible threat to As'ad. I mean they are. But nothing to worry about.
Just walking around Hamma & Homes makes this quite clear.
I think As'ad is locked in a stalemate with his own Baathists over the Golan... he can't do anything short of getting it all back or there will be mutiny among the ranks. Thus, the on-going thing with Israel.
His dad was offered all of the back. He walked away.
I'm not I want Chinese-style dictatorship in my homeland. India is looked down on in Saudi Arabia even though by most measures it is a lot more successful. The other countries aren't very influential in the Middle East even though they purchase very significant amounts of oil.
Posted by: Ali at July 1, 2010 2:39 pm
I'm not I want Chinese-style dictatorship in my homeland. India is looked down on in Saudi Arabia even though by most measures it is a lot more successful. The other countries aren't very influential in the Middle East even though they purchase very significant amounts of oil.
correction: I'm not sure I want Chinese-style...
Posted by: Ali at July 1, 2010 2:42 pm
Abu Guerrilla,
Don't forget what Walid Jumblatt said to me last time I met him:
---
"Assad doesn’t care about the [Israeli-occupied] Golan [Heights]," Jumblatt said. "Suppose we go ultimately to the so-called peace. Then later on, what is the purpose of the Syrian regime? What is he going to tell his people? Especially, mind you, he is a member of the Alawite minority. This minority could be accused of treason. It’s not like Egypt or Jordan whereby the government has some legitimacy. Here you get accused of treason by the masses, by the Sunnis. So using classic slogans like 'Palestine will liberate the Golan with Hezbollah' is a must for him to stay in power.
"I had a friend at the time – he is still my friend - when I was in Syria. He was the chief of staff of the Syrian army and is now living in Los Angeles. He was quite an important guy and honest with media. He was a Sunni from a big family in Aleppo. And when Hafez Assad was about to fix up the so-called settlement through Bill Clinton, and before they met him in Geneva, a prominent Alawite officer in the Syrian army came to Assad and said, 'What are you doing? We will be lost if you make peace. We will be accused of treason.'"
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at July 1, 2010 3:03 pm
Don't forget what Walid Jumblatt said to me last time I met him:
---
"Assad doesn’t care about the [Israeli-occupied] Golan [Heights]," Jumblatt said. "Suppose we go ultimately to the so-called peace. Then later on, what is the purpose of the Syrian regime? What is he going to tell his people? Especially, mind you, he is a member of the Alawite minority. This minority could be accused of treason. It’s not like Egypt or Jordan whereby the government has some legitimacy. Here you get accused of treason by the masses, by the Sunnis. So using classic slogans like 'Palestine will liberate the Golan with Hezbollah' is a must for him to stay in power.
"I had a friend at the time – he is still my friend - when I was in Syria. He was the chief of staff of the Syrian army and is now living in Los Angeles. He was quite an important guy and honest with media. He was a Sunni from a big family in Aleppo. And when Hafez Assad was about to fix up the so-called settlement through Bill Clinton, and before they met him in Geneva, a prominent Alawite officer in the Syrian army came to Assad and said, 'What are you doing? We will be lost if you make peace. We will be accused of treason.'"
A picture is worth a thousand words...
http://pictures.pichaus.com/c3bcd99986c206ae44108fc87e12205a50ae12a3?AWSAccessKeyId=0K4RZZKHSB5N2XYJWF02&Expires=1278040000&Signature=OMn9PXu3KGsGtkVZIS%2Bzsk9xdCA%3D
Posted by: Maxtrue at July 1, 2010 3:40 pm
http://pictures.pichaus.com/c3bcd99986c206ae44108fc87e12205a50ae12a3?AWSAccessKeyId=0K4RZZKHSB5N2XYJWF02&Expires=1278040000&Signature=OMn9PXu3KGsGtkVZIS%2Bzsk9xdCA%3D
Right -- the Alawites can not have peace with Israel and remain in power. ... unless somebody is willing to fight the Muslim Brotherhood.
What if the "separation of church and state" West can NOT have peace with Islam, until there is a war against Islam?
It seems to me that Islam already is at war, and we can't have peace unless they stop, or we surrender. Pretending they're not at war isn't making them stop, it's making them think we'll surrender.
Starting with the surrender of Israel. Or Iraq. Or Afghanistan. (And, actually, surrender might be better then getting nuked. I advise evacuation, first -- but if not, then pre-emptive strike.)
The USA doesn't know how to do nation building yet, and Iraq doesn't provide a sufficient model. Israel also did not succeed in nation building while it was occupying the post '67 territories.
Syria can't be contained, so if that's what "must" happen, it ain't gonna happen. You don't really discuss what "not containing" Syria means, tho.
Posted by: Tom Grey at July 1, 2010 3:57 pm
What if the "separation of church and state" West can NOT have peace with Islam, until there is a war against Islam?
It seems to me that Islam already is at war, and we can't have peace unless they stop, or we surrender. Pretending they're not at war isn't making them stop, it's making them think we'll surrender.
Starting with the surrender of Israel. Or Iraq. Or Afghanistan. (And, actually, surrender might be better then getting nuked. I advise evacuation, first -- but if not, then pre-emptive strike.)
The USA doesn't know how to do nation building yet, and Iraq doesn't provide a sufficient model. Israel also did not succeed in nation building while it was occupying the post '67 territories.
Syria can't be contained, so if that's what "must" happen, it ain't gonna happen. You don't really discuss what "not containing" Syria means, tho.
Is this a good time to bring up the ROE question again?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hama_massacre
DARK SIDE
OF
THE MOON,
R
Posted by: Render at July 1, 2010 4:22 pm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hama_massacre
DARK SIDE
OF
THE MOON,
R
...considered an Islamophobe.
I assume you've seen this fascinating account of de Tocqueville's perceptions of Islam.
Posted by: Barry Meislin at July 1, 2010 4:53 pm
I assume you've seen this fascinating account of de Tocqueville's perceptions of Islam.
Render, you know better. ROE applies to what Israel and the US does....., not the Russians, North Koreans, Chinese, Pakistanis, Indians, Iraqis, etc....
On a another point: Spencer had a post on the Son of Hamas. Many people actually took a line similar to most here regarding Young (although Young is light years beyond the Son of Hamas). At JW there was a fight between those saying a bridge was good so why blast it and those saying it didn't mean anything, the guy can't be trusted. I know Spencer was surprised. Those on the Left did not back down.
Back to topic, Assad is in a box. Things have to change outside Syria before anything can really change in Damascus. Containment is the reality now, although more secret facilities or enabling Hizb'Allah will draw fire. Great time for a false flag. There are many people who have a target on Assad.
If he disappeared tomorrow, what would happen Michael?
Posted by: Maxtrue at July 1, 2010 5:41 pm
On a another point: Spencer had a post on the Son of Hamas. Many people actually took a line similar to most here regarding Young (although Young is light years beyond the Son of Hamas). At JW there was a fight between those saying a bridge was good so why blast it and those saying it didn't mean anything, the guy can't be trusted. I know Spencer was surprised. Those on the Left did not back down.
Back to topic, Assad is in a box. Things have to change outside Syria before anything can really change in Damascus. Containment is the reality now, although more secret facilities or enabling Hizb'Allah will draw fire. Great time for a false flag. There are many people who have a target on Assad.
If he disappeared tomorrow, what would happen Michael?
"Nibras Kazimi suggests in the pages of the New Republic that the Middle East's violent Islamists might go after the Syrian government"
I fail to see the negative part here.
Posted by: leo at July 1, 2010 6:04 pm
I fail to see the negative part here.
Should we assume that an Assad overthrow means Islamists will take over? Perhaps Syria might be dominated by Sunnis that aren't Islamists of the Muslim Brotherhood type?
It does, however, seem like Syria's biggest internal threat comes from Islamists, as they're the ones that have tried to overthrow the regime in the past. So perhaps I answered my own question. How depressing. Syria would simply go from bad to worse. Or can Syria be any worse than it already is? I wonder how a Sunni Islamist Syria, or even just Sunni dominated Syria, would act towards Hezbollah? What would happen to the alliance with Shiite Iran?
So many unknowns ...
Posted by: semite5000 at July 1, 2010 6:11 pm
It does, however, seem like Syria's biggest internal threat comes from Islamists, as they're the ones that have tried to overthrow the regime in the past. So perhaps I answered my own question. How depressing. Syria would simply go from bad to worse. Or can Syria be any worse than it already is? I wonder how a Sunni Islamist Syria, or even just Sunni dominated Syria, would act towards Hezbollah? What would happen to the alliance with Shiite Iran?
So many unknowns ...
This article (http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3913795,00.html) by Guy Bechor is pretty optimistic about the upcoming sanctions on Iran. Let's say the Iranian regime collapses in a year or two (we can hope!), it would be interesting to see how that would affect Syria and Hezbollah. I think it would be Syria and Hezbollah's worst fears.
Posted by: semite5000 at July 1, 2010 7:33 pm
We should bomb Syria into the Stone Age - that would be a great advancement for them.
Posted by: Gary Rosen at July 1, 2010 10:45 pm
Regarding your conversation with Jumblatt, Michael - I don't want to sound smug but I figured that out a loooooong time ago. There is absolutely *no* benefit to the Assad regime in making peace with Israel. They desperately need the conflict to draw attention away from their own repression and barbarism. But of course the anands and fnords of the world still blame it all on da Joooooos.
Posted by: Gary Rosen at July 1, 2010 10:51 pm
"They desperately need the conflict to draw attention away from their own repression and barbarism."
Indeed that is true of all of Israel's enemies. But the worst offenders are Syria and Iran.
Posted by: Gary Rosen at July 2, 2010 12:56 am
Indeed that is true of all of Israel's enemies. But the worst offenders are Syria and Iran.
That's how the Alawites have always legitimized their rule, by being the most nationalistic and radical of all Arabs in the hopes that emphasizing their Arab bonafides make people overlook their 'infidel' status. Once Syria makes peace with Israel, all that's left is a regime that is no longer leading the Arab revolutionary front against Israel, and at that time the Sunni majority will wonder why they hell a bunch of infidels rule them.
As an aside, I wrote a university paper years and years ago about how the Alawites were able to dominate the country. As I recall, the French turned the relatively backward, mountain-folk Alawites in to their gendarme. When Syria became independent the Alawites found themselves in key positions in the military, and eventually took over the country.
Posted by: semite5000 at July 2, 2010 7:23 am
As an aside, I wrote a university paper years and years ago about how the Alawites were able to dominate the country. As I recall, the French turned the relatively backward, mountain-folk Alawites in to their gendarme. When Syria became independent the Alawites found themselves in key positions in the military, and eventually took over the country.
Post a comment
