by Jan Pêt Khorto
This is article is publish in Danish in Information Avis:
https://www.information.dk/debat/2016/07/mellemoesten-faaet-demokrati-fik-kaos-oedelaeggelse
 |
| Photo by Peter Hove |
The schoolmaster shouts: “Our
pledge!” and we response thoughtlessly, loud, glamorously: “To confront
Imperialism, Zionism and the Reactionary Mind, and crush their criminal device:
The Muslim Brotherhood criminal gang.” Thus started my first day at primary
school in 1990. A repeated chant that we echoed every morning for years into my
education without comprehending its meaning. I was even practicing saying it in
front of the mirror at home to show my fellows that I am the most loving son of Syria’s “Father”; Hafez Al-Assad.
Our notebooks replaced Stalin’s and Lenin’s pictures on the front cover with
this Father. We treated the notebooks
as scriptures; it shall always be clean and tidy. We kept being reminded of the
enemy in the south – Israel, and the source of all evil in the world - America
at school, on the radio, on the télévision
and in the demonstrations every time we have a public celebration, or every
time America or one of its allies’ attack
or invade a new country
(regardless if we are an ally with these countries or not). I even dropped a
tear when the Father died in 2000,
not knowing the reason why! On that particular day my biological father gazed
at me from the corner of his eyes and whispered: You idiot!
During these years of
schooling we learned the history of the Arab World and the glorious victories they
had against the Western invaders in the last few centuries. However, with the
beginning of the 2000s I started realizing that the Syrian political façade was
nothing but a farce. On 9/11, Bashar Al-Assad quickly condemned the terrorist
attack on the World Trade Center. However, there was an undeclared satisfaction
among those who I encountered of regime supporters, beside those of the beard. During the Friday sermons there
were speeches of an unintended victory on the “source of all evil” and on the
“American infidels”. The Security Service forces were everywhere, and the
clerks were strangely outspoken. When the American troops invaded Afghanistan
and Iraq rage was escalated, and countless of demonstrations were held across
Syria against the American invasion of these two Muslim countries; a vivid contradiction in the Syrian political identity,
with Syria being identified as one of the sturdiest secular states in Middle
East. The people were divided into three groups: one which opposes the American
invasions; one which supports them (being careful not to be heard publicly);
and one which is ambiguous. Those of the ambiguous group always puzzled me, as
you never knew what they could do and what their hidden objectives were.
During the Iraqi war, Syria
became a hub for extremists who have travelled across the globe to fight the
foreign infidels in Iraq (a cynical phenomena considering the Syrian conflict
nowadays). At the time, my uncle was a military officer at Al-Bukamal checkpoint
on the border with Iraq. He told me once that the orders they received were to
register every person who exits Syria into Iraq and detain them when they come back.
After a couple of years, I met some of those extremists who fought with AL-Qaeda
in Iraq in the detaining and investigation centers of the Secret Service, when
I was imprisoned in 2007 due to my writings and political activism. The
majority of those extremists were used as a tool by the Syrian regime in their
different vicious tactics in the Levant.
Prior to my arrest, I was studying
journalism at Damascus university. Me and several other classmates initiated an
underground paper. Our objectives were clear: the rise of a civil society in
Syria and the call for a multi-party political structure, hence Al-Demokratiya. We were impressed by the
Western democracy and craving for freedom of expression in Syria. Being an agnostic
myself, I was impressed with the Danish government’s response regarding the Muhammad
cartoons’ issue, citing it as an act of freedom of expression. I personally
refuse everything that leads to violence, however, the stand which the Danish
government took fascinated me. I remember being close from clashes at the
Danish embassy on February 2006. I remember hearing the demonstrators chanting
“With our blood and souls we defend you, O Prophet of God”. The first part of
this phrase was repeated for almost 4 decades in Syria with a different ending
“…., O Hafez” and then “…., O Bashar”. My friends and I quickly left the
neighbourhood that day, avoiding a confrontation with the demonstrants or the
Secret Service. This incident, together with our initial objectives of fighting
for a civil society and calling for the rights of minorities in Syria such as
the Kurds, shaped our understanding that nothing could be changed in Syria but
by Western assistance. Although we clearly comprehended at the time the bloody
history of the imperialist involvement in the Middle East for centuries, and
the consequences the American wars had on the political and societal
environment in the Islamic World, we found no other alternative solution but
calling for help from the Western powers. Almost more than half of my close
friends opposed this “insane” idea. However, we needed nothing but “Freedom”!
After a couple of years, I
found my self in a situation that forced me to leave Syria. I arrived in
Denmark in 2009. Through my prison experience, journey through the EU and my
personal encountering of the political sphere in Middle East, my understanding
of the conflicts in the Islamic World started taking another shape. I have come
to realize that the Western involvement in Middle East created unfavourable
consequences that would not have existed in the absence of such external
interference in these countries. Almost all dictatorships – including
monarchies – in the Middle East were directly or indirectly backed by the US or
have had strong economical and geopolitical ties with the pax americana. However, when interests change, the backing
disappears and as a consequence the US and its allies were good at destroying
their enemies in the region in order to satisfy the desirable interest. The
aftermath of these wars were horrendous. Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya became the
most destabilized and failed states in the world, and the rise of sectarian
tensions together with the flourishment of jihadi islamist groups have had dreadful
consequences not only on these two countries, but also on the entire region and
the whole world.
When the Syrian revolution
started and transformed into a violent civil war, I myself became one of those
ambiguous personas. I was certain that the Syrian opposition was not capable of
defeating the Al-Assad regime without the help of the West. Simultaneously, I
was confident that Western involvement in the war would worsen it even more,
especially because of the proxy dimension of the Syrian conflict; i.e. Saudi
Arabia contra Iran and Russian/Syrian’s camp contra Western/Syrian-opposition’s
camp. Nowadays, five years into the conflict and it is more difficult for me to
accept Western troops in Syria. America’s fixation on fighting ISIS shifted the
international communities’ focus from defeating the source of unrest in Syria
to assisting it indirectly: i.e. strengthening Bashar Al-Assad’s argument in
fighting terrorism in Syria. There are several things which could have changed
the course of events in Syria from the beginning of the conflict. A No-Fly zone
was essential and could have ended the war in earlier stages, as Al-Assad and
Russian air forces have devastated thousands of houses, which resulted in tens
of thousands of deaths and pushed hundreds of thousands of refugees to
neighbouring countries and hence towards the EU. Supplying the FSA with more
weapons and threatening Iran, Russia, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf countries with
economic and political sanctions, should they continue their support to their
allied forces on ground, to name other examples. In addition, the western
countries who were/are involved in wars in the Middle East shall take
responsibility of the consequences of their involvement in this region by at
least containing the refugees’ influx and helping in building the infrastructure
of these countries. The most indispensable thing is to stop arguing that the
events in the Middle East are only a natural “religious” and “cultural”
consequence of the region’s history and admit that the Djinni would not have
come out of the lamp had they not broken it in the first place.
This is article is publish in Danish in Information Avis:
https://www.information.dk/debat/2016/07/mellemoesten-faaet-demokrati-fik-kaos-oedelaeggelse
