Caught between the Takfeeris and Violently Repressive Regimes

We were always going to be faced with this choice sooner or later, to tolerate our violently repressive dictators, at least until we liberate Palestine and defeat imperialism, or to rebel against them and risk sweeping to power intolerant religious extremists who would threaten the cultural, ethnic and religious character and diversity of Arab countries. The Arab Spring has forced the issue to the fore and it has also laid bare the instrumental role Gulf countries played in encouraging the young facebook and twitter revolutionaries, offering unlimited financial assistance to Islamic parties to help depose the old dictators and in Egypt the military. But they did not do all this out of a charitable heart and a sincere desire to see Arab peoples free from their shackles, they had an agenda: to defeat Arab nationalism.

I always wondered what prompted a good portion of the Syrian people to break the so-called ‘fear barrier’ and go out and demonstrate in large numbers against the regime two and half years ago. The fear was always very real, it was once said that no one dared open their mouth in Syria except at the dentist’s! The consequences of questioning the prevailing order in Syria let alone trying to topple and change the regime have always been known to be too terrible and dire to contemplate. So what changed, what made so many go out into the streets two and half years ago?

The perception of invulnerability has pervaded the Arab world ever since the Tunisian fruits and vegetable seller set himself on fire. The fact that every citizen carried their own miniature television cameras and broadcast facilities (internet connected camera phones) gave people a false sense of imperviousness that was further bolstered by the social media effect. Somehow sharing a horrific experience with others going through the same or similar experiences makes it more bearable. But there was more to it than cameras and social media, there was a palpable media campaign supporting Arab Spring uprisings, money was being funneled from the Gulf countries, primarily Saudi Arabia and Qatar, to certain political parties, all of which was helping to sweeten the deal.

One after the other, the old dictators fell, the last barrier, the Saudis thought, to finally eradicating the disease of Arab nationalism and replacing it with a new nationalism one that revolves around uncompromising Wahabi ideology, one that rejects secular democracy and all manner of liberalism.

The public face of the Syrian opposition shows how ill prepared they are still to presenting a coherent united front to the world or even hope to take the place of the current regime should the war somehow turn in their favor, which I seriously doubt. The fact is the Syrian people have been under total one party rule for over 40 years and in that time there have been no real independent opposition parties within Syria.

The arming of the revolution was just as patchy and haphazard, many resorted to taking what they could get from army stores, some arms trickled through, but the Rubicon had already been crossed for the rebels and army defectors, there was no going back, ill prepared or not, they had to keep going. The regime responded with crushing efficiency and its forces do not appear to have buckled two and half years on. The war in Syria seems to have settled into a macabre routine of shelling, bombing, and rocketing as civilians flee in all directions across land borders of neighboring countries.

The sad thing is that for many Arabs the Syrian regime is still seen as the last bastion of Arab nationalism standing in the face of what many see as the imperialist (US and Israel) plot to support extremist Islamic parties to topple secular Arab movements like the Arab Baath, like the leftist movements, the Nasserites and Pan Arab parties.

The fact is a lot simpler. Saudi Arabia has long opposed Arab nationalism and has sought to support Islamic movements or even loyal secular Sunni-Muslims in the Arab World (like Hariri) in order to exert influence, which they can with money, and to weaken proponents of real democratic change within Saudi Arabia itself. Qatar and Saudi Arabia are a double team, of that there is no doubt, it’s the ‘good cop, bad cop’ routine. One cop always convinces the person being questioned that he is their best friend while the other cop plays the role of the aggressive and mean cop.

The end result has been the GCC’s underestimation of the Syrian regime’s resilience which has led to this catastrophic bloodletting that does not seem to have any clear end in site. The weakness of the Syrian opposition in exile forced the hand of the Saudis and Qataris to send Takfeeri fighters in to tip the balance in favor of the opposition. All this has done is turn many civilians against the Takfeeris and convince religious minorities in Syria that it is far safer to support the regime than it is to support the opposition.

While the regime is not the ideal choice, those of us on the fence for so long feel that the Takfeeri nightmare, which could easily spread into Lebanon, is the greater threat that should first be defeated and that the war between the regime and the opposition in Syria should be decided ultimately at the negotiating table.