Syria – The De-Construction of a Fraudulent Season and and the Possibility of a Real Syrian Spring.

By Christof Lehmann – nsnbc. After decades of governance under emergency laws there could be little doubt that many politically active citizens in Syria were wanting for political reforms. Reforms which even progressive elements within the governing Socialist Arab Baath Party, including President Bashar al-Assad were wanting for. The reform process, however, and reformist powers, were confronted with two major obstacles. The first one was the fact that the nation had been governed for such a long time under emergency laws that many of the political processes which were based on emergency laws had become informally established as systemic and that it would demand a great amount of political energy to overcome the inertia of the systemic colossus that was based on emergency laws, but which had become institutionalized. The second, and more imminent obstacle was the fact that Syria since 1973 has been in a permanent low intensity state of war with Israel and her allies. No open war, but intelligence and special operations here, there, tit for tat attacks, a shadowy subversion as well as a permanent public relations warfare that scapegoated and positioned Syria as rough state, sponsor of terrorism, torturous regime, and what not.

Media war is war too – and little is it publicly debated in Western Media that Israel still occupies the Golan Highs, that Syria is the sole Arab nation that consistently and consequently has supported the Palestinian cause and lobbied for a Pan-Arabic Arab League, Arab Independence form former colonial powers. Little is it known that the USA kidnapped the Syrian Canadian citizen Maher Arrar, sent him to Syria in what is euphemistically called extraordinary rendition, and “forced” the Syrian authorities to keep and investigate the man in spite of the fact that they found nothing that tied him to terrorism. The US position was clearly this one: If you release him, we will tell the world that you let terrorists go free and we will position you as sponsor of terrorism; if you keep him we can always scapegoat you for torturing him – we live in a free world so it`s entirely your choice what you do with him. Syria has been the darling Arab scapegoat of the West for decades and with good reasons. Syria is a former colony, and as such it is expected to act and behave as such – which it never did.

There are certain common elements that are prevalent in all post-colonial internal unrests regardless if it is in African or Arab countries. The involvement of foreign nations, the instrumentalization of local elements, and the goal to control resources, economy, and geopolitically as well as strategically significant locations. Popular consent with contemporary, or Modo-Colonial transgressions is commonly manufactured by Western Main Stream Media by eliciting fabled advocacy for freedom, democracy, human rights or stability while nothing could be farther from the truth.

The successful plundering of Libyan natural and economical resources as well as the political chaos and wide spread human rights abuses, the massive war crimes during NATO´s Operation Unified Protector are just one, though an appalling and recent example of the fact that the narrative sold by media is an Orwellian charade, played out in media with the function of covering over modo-colonial atrocities.

As to the involvement of foreign nations we know that NATO has special operations ongoing in Syria and that they have been ongoing even before the first unrests. We know that Turkey has a recruitment office and intelligence operations room in Amman, Jordan. We know that Saudi Arabia demands a military solution and provides arms en mass, that it has deployed Al Qaeda´s Omar Brigade to Syria;  we know that Qatar massively supports the NATO and MI6 darling Abdelhakim Belhadj – the Al Qaeda terrorist who is now commander of the Tripoli Military Council and parts of the Free Syrian Army. We are aware of the fact that Qatar – read MI6 – and the international wing of the Muslim Brotherhood is fighting in Syria. We also know that most of the shadowy figures of the Syrian National Council are known to have ties to the National Endowment for Democracy, Reagan Fascell Fellowships, Zbigniev Brzezinski, Henry Kissinger and associates and other notorious warmongers and their organizations. All one has to do to find ample documentation is to make a search for the word “Syria” on nsnbc`s archives. (1)

After months of relentless unconventional and undeclared war on Syria by NATO and the Gulf Cooperation Council member states a six point plan has been brokered by Kofi Annan. The “Assad must go” dictate is off the table, and so is the demand that only a military solution is a viable option. Syria and it`s citizens are facing a near future where important, difficult, and painful decisions will have to be made for the future of the country.

Nobody can have it all, which should be the first lesson in democracy for the National Council of Syria who until very recently demanded to be recognized as the sole representative of the Syrian People by the “International Community” which usually translates into NATO and allies. The National Council is a council, of which most members are anonymous and those who are known are predominantly those with ties to Brzezinski, Kissinger and associates, the NED and other suspect warmongering operations.

Four new political parties have been registered and can take part in the next coming elections, besides and on equal terms with the Socialist Arab Baath Party. Now those Syrians who really are interested in political and social reforms, regardless if they have ties to or are favoring the one or the other party or not have hard and difficult decisions to make too.

This includes those who so far have been actively or passively supporting the armed “opposition“, the National Council of Syria or other of the organizations who were or are cooperating with the “foreign elements” which are all too common in modo-colonial transgressions against sovereign nations. The questions are “what Syria of the Future and what Future for Syria do I want ? How ? At what cost ? At what risk ? Who is actually representing my ideas or at least a political program I can live with and accept ?”

As to those who favor the National Council of Syria what should be considered is, that many of it`s members are anonymous; whom would I actually be supporting ? Is it in the best interest of myself and my country to support a political organization that has ties to Brzezinski and Kissinger ? Another point that should be given serious consideration is that the National Council of Syria has had months to establish a coherent political opposition and a political program for the future of Syria and it has utterly failed to deliver. The only clear messages from the NCS are hand us the power and we show you who we are and what we want, which is not exactly a signal that lets one assume that the NCS can provide reform, political stability, safeguard human rights, develop democratic, pluralistic institutions, guaranty gender equality and a policy that embraces the full spectrum of ethnicities and religions in Syria.

The mere argument that the National Council of Syria is merely a starting point is also full of problems. For the first, it might be a starting point, yes, but which one, and in what direction will it lead. If to reflect on the presence and the recent past all we really see is a strong foreign influence and participation in an armed adventure that so far has cost thousands of Syrians lives on all sides. Do I really want to invest my trust in a shadowy organization with that track record ? What alternatives are there ?

Another point that also needs serious consideration is the question which potential harm the National Council of Syria could have inflicted on the country and it`s people, had it succeeded at overthrowing the government. It would not have had the military muscle to control the country from descending into chaos. It would not have had the political program to unify the nation and it`s full spectrum of ethnic, religious and political groups, it has no official opinion on the Palestinian issue, no program how to deal with Israel that still occupies the Golan Highs. In other words – a successful subversion would have resulted in a Syria that would have descended into utter chaos – and it would have taken years of misery, suffering and violence before the country could eventually have been stabilized.

The really important question is ” Do I really want to trust anybody who would inflict this infamy on me and my country in coalition with foreign elements – what more to expect of these people – are they having an ethical position which I can embrace ? ” In case the answer is – no I can`t, no I won`t the next question needs to be if it would be more wise to embrace more constructive political initiatives – and eventually which one or which ones.

The best step for Syrians to secure a Future for a strong a prosperous Syria and it`s people, an all embracing, peaceful and strong nation that protects genders, minorities, participatory political processes, justice, human rights and more is to publicly turn the back on anyone who resists giving up the armed subversion attempt – if necessary to flee any area where armed insurgents operate. It would be the fastest way to reveal the fact that most of the armed insurgency consists of foreign or heavily foreign supported elements who are in fact a minority that tyrannizes an entire nation. It is the fastest way to bring an end to the violence, and most importantly, it is the fastest track towards being able to fully work for political reforms and future elections. It is the fastest way to maintaining Syrian sovereignty inside Syria, to the detriment of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Israel and NATO who would have liked the exact opposite.

Coming to elections – too little is known about the registered political parties and Syrians won´t have the possibility to fully inform themselves about them before a cessation of the violence and a return to a stability that allows for open political campaigns and eventually elections.

What Syria needs is unity and peace. New parties need to gather political and administrative experience and besides that, provide evidence for that they not only have a political program, but that they are able to work peacefully and constructive for a pluralistic and tolerant Syria. Many difficulties could be overcome by forming a national unity government after eventual future elections.

Supporting the legally formed political parties, including the Baath Party by denying a platform for those who preach violence, and demanding, that the next coming parliament forms a government of national unity for one or two legislative periods until the new parties have had time to consolidate, is most likely the most constructive solution. A solution that will ensure Syrian sovereignty in Syria and peace. It is also a solution that will be vehemently opposed by those foreign interests who would like to see a weak, unstable and chaotic Syria for the foreseeable future as part of the strategic isolation of Iran and Russia. The new Syrian constitution, which defines Syria as an Arab State, as part of the Arab Nation is after all a direct slap into the face of Modo-Colonialism and Zionism and it will be opposed as any nation that faces colonialism.

Christof Lehmann

31.03.2012

1) nsnbc archives “Syria” http://nsnbc.wordpress.com/?s=syria

About christoflehmann

Christof Lehmann is the founder and senior editor of nsnbc. Christof Lehmann is a political writer, psychologist, and independent political consultant on a wide range of issues, including conflict and conflict resolution, negotiations, security management, crisis management. His articles are published widely in international print and online media and he is a frequent contributor to radio and TV programs. He is a lifelong advocate for human rights, peace and international justice and the prosecution of war crimes - also those committed by privileged nation. In September 2011 Christof Lehmann started the blog nsnbc in response to what he perceived as an embargo on truth about the conflict in Libya and Syria. In 2013, he plans to transform nsnbc into an independent, daily, international online newspaper.
This entry was posted in Analysis, Middle East and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.