World must tell Al Assad to go — now

The poorer segment of Egyptian society is grumbling that the country’s first post-revolution, democratically-elected president has failed to live-up to his promise of change during his first 100 days in office. “The streets are still dirty, gas bottles are expensive and jobs are still scarce,” they moan. But if they pause for a moment to digest what is happening in Syria, they will count their blessings with the thought: “There, but for the grace of God, go we”.

Someone has just emailed me recent photographs of Syria’s largest city Aleppo. I could hardly believe my eyes. They looked like stills from a Hollywood Armageddon-type movie. Much has been made of the incineration of Aleppo’s 15th-century ‘Silk Road’ Souq Al Madina, a Unesco Heritage Site, in the media. That is certainly a tragic loss, not only for Syrians but also for the world, but the sight of rubble and corpse-strewn street upon street of apartment blocks, people’s homes where babies gurgled and children played, turned into semi-demolished grey shells have had a greater impact on me.

Fuelled by wider Arab Spring aspirations, the small crowd that gathered in Damascus to chant “The revolution has begun” on March 15, 2011, could not have foreseen the death and devastation that lay ahead. How could they, when they had witnessed how people-power forced Tunisia’s president Zine Al Abidine Bin Ali into exile and President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt to step-down? They probably imagined that the toppling of Bashar Al Assad would be, relatively speaking, a piece of cake, especially since his dynastic, repressive regime had little popular support.

But those disenchanted ordinary folk seeking to emulate the successes of freedom-seeking Tunisians and Egyptians did not reckon their president’s tenacity or the extent of his brutality. Al Assad saw how badly his counterparts fared and dug-in his heels from the get-go, refusing to make meaningful concessions; his resolve would have been even greater after witnessing Muammar Gaddafi’s humiliating end. Moreover, even if he felt tempted to flee with his family to a friendly land, where they could enjoy a peaceful existence, he would forever be burdened with the thought that he had thrown his own Alawite community to the wolves. Most crucially, from Al Assad’s perspective, he has loyal friends in the higher ranks of political and military spheres as well as powerful, committed allies, notably Russia and Iran.

Moscow does have a naval base at the Syrian port of Tartous, but that is secondary to its determined aim to keep Washington from enlarging its sphere of influence within the region, which is why it is blocking western-led diplomatic efforts within the United Nations to stop the bloodshed seen as a slippery slope towards military intervention. Tehran needs Al Assad to remain in place to maintain the so-called Shiite triangle, ensure the supply of Iranian cash and weapons reaches its proxy of Hezbollah in Lebanon and to keep Syria on its side in the event of a conflict with Israel that has been brewing for years.

It seems to me there is enough blame to go round. Al Assad could have avoided the uprising’s escalation by acceding to democratic reforms. Opposition groups should have formed a united front to strengthen their demands. And if the military had sniffed the way the wind was blowing, it should have felt duty-bound to rally around the people, instead of propping up a dictatorship that is destined to fall sooner or later. It should never have turned its guns on the very population it swore to defend.

Ironically, Al Assad’s initial faux charges that the anti-government sentiment in his country was fuelled by foreign powers and terrorists are now legitimate when the Free Syrian Army, by its own admission, is being funded and armed by the US, France, Turkey and others — and Syria has emerged as a magnet for foreign fighters. In that respect, Al Assad’s hands are not clean either. Last month, the Commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards’ Quds Force General Mohammad Ali Jafari, confirmed his force’s activities within Syria to help the regime crush the rebellion.

More than 30,000 Syrians have been killed, hundreds of thousands have fled to Turkey, Jordan, Lebanon, Algeria and Iraq; the country is embroiled in a civil war that, if allowed to continue unchecked, could continue for many more months or even years. More likely, it could escalate and spread to Syria’s neighbours as the US Secretary of Defence, Leon Panetta, warned following a Syrian mortar attack on the Turkish border town of Akcakale with lethal consequences. The Turkish parliament has authorised cross-border reprisals, but Ankara is understandably hesitant to go it alone. Its complaints to the Euorpean Union (EU), Nato and the UN about the Akcakale incident elicited nothing more than mealy mouthed sympathetic statements.

As a general rule, I believe that a nation should be left alone to solve its interior problems, without any foreign interference. However, in this case, I am dismayed that the international community is steadfastly keeping its distance. This is the one time when Washington, Moscow, the EU, Turkey and the Arab League should put aside power plays for humanitarian concerns. Speaking with one voice, they should tell Al Assad and his cronies to go — and go now, or else... That’s only step one. United, they must help Syrians mend their ravaged homeland and assist them to build the democratic institutions they crave for.

Linda S. Heard is a specialist writer on Middle East affairs. She can be contacted at lheard@gulfnews.com