The balance of power in Syria was changed forever last Wednesday. Inside a nondescript three-floor building in the heart of a secure zone in Damascus, three security chiefs were dead and a fourth mortally wounded as the Middle East’s most ruthless regime was rocked to its core.
The rebel force filming nearby had just detonated a bomb inside the inner sanctum, something that was never supposed to happen in a state rooted in four decades of totalitarian rule and fear.
Panic was clear in the voices of the emergency responders, whose radio calls were intercepted by the watching rebels. Their frantic alarm, the rebels say, showed a dimension to revolutionary Syria that did not exist even hours earlier and had never been a trait during the dynastic rule of the al-Assads.
Even during four embattled days before the bombing, the regime had maintained the appearance of control as a large rebel force advanced on the capital from three directions — the first time such an assault had been launched in 17 months of violence. There is no calm anywhere any more.
Now, with Syria’s rigid order ever more vulnerable and its neighbors increasingly alarmed, planning for life after the regime is well under way. That Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is finished is now a given; far less certain is what will be left of Syria in his wake.
The key ingredient in the regime’s longevity — fear — is no longer the glue that will hold it together. As loyalist troops battled rebel forces in Damascus over the weekend in an attempt to seize control of ground they had lost in the capital, more senior generals than ever announced they had switched sides. Defections, or desertions of more junior officers and the rank and file, were widely reported across the country.
There is now a real sense among diplomats in Beirut and the exiled Free Syrian Army leadership in Turkey that a catalyst has been reached, perhaps well before anyone was ready for it.
“In many ways, they got to this point before they or anyone else has prepared for the next phase,” a Western official in Beirut said. “There are no credible systems in place among the Syrian National Council [SNC], or anyone in the opposition groupings, which could act as a buffer to chaos.”
Wissam Tarif, a senior official from the global campaigning organization, Avaaz, said an urgent appeal to Syrians living in exile was needed to help prevent a highly dangerous power vacuum that will likely follow the crumbling of regime authority.
“It will require highly skilled people with advanced material skills to prevent sectarian war,” he said. “There is a huge task in trying to get people home. We haven’t heard of any initiative or planning. There is a transition plan, but no planning for who is going to fund the transition period.”
Forty years of rule by a police state has crippled any meaningful development of a civil society in Syria. The key institutions of state remain interwoven into the Baath party, which has acted as the eyes and ears of the regime, and the pillars of justice, such as the rule of law and court system, are far from independent.
When the corroded institutions of state fall along with the regime, there will be next to no checks and balances. The looting and bedlam that followed the fall of Baghdad is very likely to be repeated in Damascus, unless order can somehow be quickly secured.
Earlier in the uprising, the Syrian National Council was groomed by the West, the Gulf states and Saudi Arabia as an alternative administration that could offer a more pluralistic, representative rule and convince the country’s citizens that it was ready to take power.
However, relations between all potential patrons and the SNC have cooled considerably since the start of the year, with many now doubting that their leaders can assemble a credible body. The Syrian people whom they were supposed to represent are just as underwhelmed.
“They fight more than they work,” one US official said. “And they don’t deliver.”
Moreover, council members and Western observers said some senior leaders who have received money sent to fund the administration have not passed it on.
“I was at a meeting in Cairo in May,” said Thaer Abboud, a member of the Alawite community who has worked against the al-Assad regime, at times with the SNC. “It was an important gathering in the Semiramis hotel and [US Ambassador to Syria] Robert Ford [now a key member of the US National Security Council’s Syria strategy group] was there. One delegate, a well-known SNC member, started accusing the Americans of not helping them, not doing this or that.”
“Ford replied that he was the one a very large amount of money had been sent to, and where had it gone? He sat down and didn’t say a word and was chased out of the room by the other people there. It was shameful,” Abboud said. “One thing that we have in common, all of us, is lack of trust. The SNC should be the most credible body to negotiate in the name of people. But it is not able.”
As the SNC bickers and falters, Syria’s Muslim Brotherhood, long a pariah body under al-Assad and his father, former Syrian president Hafez al-Assad, has been quietly building support. It claims to have the ear of no more than 25 percent of the population, after a year of low-key work, primarily through its three seats on the SNC’s executive committee.
The group’s slow-burn style is replicating the work of its counterpart in Egypt, which won democratic parliamentary and presidential elections held this year after the fall last year of Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak.
A prominent role in Syria for the conservative Islamic group, with links to the Sunni Arab powerhouses, is one possible outcome in the wake of the regime.
“We are ready for the post-al-Assad era, we have plans for the economy, the courts, politics,” Brotherhood’s spokesman Muheim al-Droubi told Agence France-Presse. “However, my opinion is that in free elections the Muslim Brothers wouldn’t have more than 25 percent of the votes.”
In Syria, the Brotherhood has unfinished business with the al-Assads, dating back to a massacre in 1982 launched by Hafez al-Assad, which killed an estimated 20,000 people in Hama. The killings of large numbers of Sunni Muslims during this uprising, ordered by an officer class dominated by the Alawite sect, has only added to a foreboding specter of revenge that is looming ever large as order continues to decay.
“There won’t be a Tahrir Square moment in Syria,” Tarif said. “Revenge is a problem. How do you manage that? You need those officers who have defected to come back and take charge. They will have to at a certain point make concessions to prevent a total collapse; a country with no leadership, fighting among groups and sects.”
A long-mooted contingency plan for the regime has been to retreat to the Alawite mountains in northern Syria and carve out a homeland from there through to the heartland of the sect in the coastal cities of Latakia and nearby Tartus. Many among the mysterious, heterodox sect with loose links to Shiite Islam are believed to see the violence in Syria as an existential threat, which will escalate if the regime falls. Other Alawites say they resent that their sect has been hijacked by the regime and used to solidify its rule.
“We can’t be separated from them as a people,” one Alawite man in Antakya said. “The trust is so broken down that we will be tarnished by the regime no matter where we stand.”
A potential Balkanization of Syria, which would possibly be linked to outright sectarian war, would be deeply alarming for the region. The sectarian tinderbox that is Lebanon, 21 years after its own sectarian civil war ended, could easily be reignited. Iraq, slowly recovering from a more recent civil war of its own, is by no means stable, or immune.
Turkey, which does not want to let Syria’s woes give the region’s Kurds a raison d’etre to press their claims for statehood, would clearly feel threatened if the nation states carved out of the Arabian deserts in the wake of the Ottoman empire suddenly came tumbling down.
Shashank Joshi, a research fellow from the Royal United Services Institute, said: “We should also not exclude the possibility of prolonged resistance from rump security forces, including the concentration of regime security forces within Damascus or in ‘Alawite’ areas in the Levantine highlands.”
“It would likely result in a longer-term defeat for loyalist forces. An Alawite mini-state would be outgunned, isolated and opposed by Turkey, but such a defeat could only come about after a deeply divisive and casualty-intensive process entailing the temporary Balkanization of Syrian territory,” Joshi said.
“If state authority were not established within a reasonable period after collapse, the longer-term prospects for a democratic, stable Syria would shrink even further, because local militias would gain in strength, helped along by foreign powers eager to cultivate clients — a process familiar to us from Lebanon’s civil war. What is clear is that the past few weeks’ series of defections, assassinations and the loosening grip of Damascus all indicate an ever-narrowing base of support, and a high probability of sudden and unpredictable collapse,” he added.
A veteran diplomat agreed: “The Alawite issue in the transition needs to be addressed in a very clear way. There has been nothing done by anyone, ourselves included, to give them the comfort they need.”
One way to avoid the abyss is the anointing of a hardman to take over. Syrian General Manaf Tlass, a former friend of the al-Assad family who defected, is a potential candidate. The lessons of Iraq dictate that former regime figures cannot afford to be sidelined when a new state is built. Tlass has yet to reveal his hand, but he — and others like him, who waited many months before defecting — are increasingly being treated with suspicion.
“These people should be engaged and integrated,” Tarif said. “There are other officers like him who must play a role. Order is preferable to chaos.”
A return to power for former US president Donald Trump would pose grave risks to Taiwan’s security, autonomy and the broader stability of the Indo-Pacific region. The stakes have never been higher as China aggressively escalates its pressure on Taiwan, deploying economic, military and psychological tactics aimed at subjugating the nation under Beijing’s control. The US has long acted as Taiwan’s foremost security partner, a bulwark against Chinese expansionism in the region. However, a second Trump presidency could upend decades of US commitments, introducing unpredictability that could embolden Beijing and severely compromise Taiwan’s position. While president, Trump’s foreign policy reflected a transactional
Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has prioritized modernizing the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to rival the US military, with many experts believing he would not act on Taiwan until the PLA is fully prepared to confront US forces. At the Chinese Communist Party’s 20th Party Congress in 2022, Xi emphasized accelerating this modernization, setting 2027 — the PLA’s centennial — as the new target, replacing the previous 2035 goal. US intelligence agencies said that Xi has directed the PLA to be ready for a potential invasion of Taiwan by 2027, although no decision on launching an attack had been made. Whether
A chip made by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) was found on a Huawei Technologies Co artificial intelligence (AI) processor, indicating a possible breach of US export restrictions that have been in place since 2019 on sensitive tech to the Chinese firm and others. The incident has triggered significant concern in the IT industry, as it appears that proxy buyers are acting on behalf of restricted Chinese companies to bypass the US rules, which are intended to protect its national security. Canada-based research firm TechInsights conducted a die analysis of the Huawei Ascend 910B AI Trainer, releasing its findings on Oct.
In honor of President Jimmy Carter’s 100th birthday, my longtime friend and colleague John Tkacik wrote an excellent op-ed reassessing Carter’s derecognition of Taipei. But I would like to add my own thoughts on this often-misunderstood president. During Carter’s single term as president of the United States from 1977 to 1981, despite numerous foreign policy and domestic challenges, he is widely recognized for brokering the historic 1978 Camp David Accords that ended the state of war between Egypt and Israel after more than three decades of hostilities. It is considered one of the most significant diplomatic achievements of the 20th century.
RSS