The Peninsula Nespaper
Wednesday, 18 April 2012 01:59
The split in views on the situation in Syria is expanding rather than unifying. Despite the clear position of Saudi Arabia and Qatar condemning the Syrian regime and their call to support and arm the opposition, some Arab and GCC countries led by Iraq support the situation in Syria and ignore the daily scene of murder and destruction.
(1) The situation in Syria is further becoming complex and hard to find acceptable settlements. Neither the international stands including the recent mission led by Kofi Annan the joint UN envoy, nor the movements and initiatives led by the mission of the Arab League can stop the violence. The Syrian regime which is politically supported by international, regional and Arab parties and financially and militarily, by Iran, Iraq and Russia and China veto, persists to commit murder and bloodshed relentlessly. It’s really a big holocaust against the Syrian people who protested calling for freedom and democracy and termination of tyranny and dictatorship of Assad and his family, which reflects the success of the Arab Mafia to have an access to power and control the Syrian people.
The people who came out in the streets seeking change were facing more than half an armed million military and security soldiers and thugs of the regime who did not have any qualms about killing women, children and elderly peoples and crushing everyone who came out to street in front of the eyes of the world. Why the Syrian regime was not internally toppled as it happened in Tunisia and Egypt or internally and externally as it was the case in Libya? The British newspaper “The Times” reported that Bashar Al Assad had benefited from the mistakes of the divided Syrian opposition and the confused international stands. With respect to the armed resistance, the opposition Free Army is formed of dissidents who lack weapons and unified leadership, and the Syrian demonstrators became confused and unable to engage in armed confrontation against the ruling regime for it had succeeded in militarizing the uprising.
The Syrian regime succeeded in dividing the opposition, some of them vaguely demand political reform and others raises the slogan of ending the ruling of Al Assad family while the third party refused to end the uprising without completely changing the regime and not only toppling the Assad family. As a result, President Al Assad succeeded in exploiting the opposition division and placing what called “submarines” or the agents of the regime inside the opposition. They used to pretend as opponents of Al-Assad and abuse the regime. The international stand towards Al Assad regime is one of the factors that contributed in surviving the regime for one year in spite of the demands calling
Al Assad to go.
(2) The international positions towards the situation in Syria are mysterious and vague for lack of genuine resources in Syria that push the international community to fight in favour of them such as oil and gas to pay the military intervention bill, as in Kuwait, Iraq and Libya. The report of “The Times” daily points that the US position towards Syria is vague though Washington had supported Arab revolutions. The US President Barack Obama said “Assad has to go”, but he did not specify where to go. With the exception of Iran, Assad has no other place to go as the case of Colonel Gaddafi. Therefore Al Assad he did not find any way except to fight and destroy the cities such as Homs, Hama and Idlib and following the policy of “scorched earth.” The mistakes of president Obama stemmed from the mistakes of the United Nations that had failed able to provide a coherent position, and the Annan plan to adopt a cease-fire and settle the crisis ended by turning the issue into a “human crisis” based on maintenance of the status quo and allowing the experts and relief workers to provide subsidies to the affected areas. One of the mistakes of the United Nations and Washington was the failure to understand the Russian demands and allay its concerns regarding its military base in Tartus. The analysis also suggests that Moscow concerns of the US and Brotherhood Alliance, as the Islamists now control Tunisia, Egypt, Morocco and Libya. Russia’s position is based on the support provided by the Islamists to the war in Chechnya.
(3) The regime in Syria targets mediapersons. We have seen the brave reporters who risked their lives to report the real scene inside Syria became victims of violence. However, the role played by the Arab media: Al Arabia , Al Jazeera, BBC Arabic and the western media have failed to cope with the role played in other Arab countries. The social networking sites did not play the same role and got divided between supporters, opponents of the Syrian regime and most of them remained as spectator without real participation and interaction!.
The “Daily Telegraph” reported that the Syrian Revolution failed to resist or change the ruling regime through social networks as was the case of the popular revolts in Tunisia and Egypt. It is true that social networking websites Facebook and podcast made the Syria issue alive and the terrible scenes of violence on YouTube and TVs made the Syria crisis topping the political discussions, stimulated the international diplomatic efforts and played the role of the professional mass media which their business were banned in Syria.
But these activities did not achieve the desired change as al-Assad is still controlling the political game. The daily telegraph saw the overthrow of a fierce and skilled regime requires the Syrian uprising to search for more tools than Twitter, video, SMS and discussions on the Internet. The uprising needs a central organisation that could work internally and plan to overthrow the regime. The Syrians should rely only on the social networking websites and return to the traditional mean of guerilla war that toppled the dictatorial regimes. The strategy of the Algerian National Liberation Movement based on the independent cells (3 individuals in each cell), where the Liberation Army was capable to close the Algerian capital and carry out the quality operations and organize a general strike. The strategy had complicated the task of the French intelligence that failed to dismantle a single cell composed of the leader and two other peoples.
In the Syrian case, the absence of a semi-Algerian organization makes the Syrian resistance incapable to achieve its goals. Depending on the social networking sites will give the Syrian intelligence the opportunity to detect the names, plans and contact points of the internal resistance elements. On the other hand, even the modern technology has facilitated the communications, but it can be easily used against the opposition elements through creating delusive activists, stealing names and websites and spreading false information. Hence, the social networking sites which are contrary to the guerilla war, If they had existed in the fifties of the last century, the French colonial rule would have lasted for a decade or two in Algeria.
The so called (green revolution) in Iran which took place to oppose the falsified elections in 2009 based on collective communication means is a good example of the spontaneous popular revolution where the Iranian intelligence agents had succeeded in detecting arresting the its leaders. The army backing of the popular revolution and the reluctance of the dictator regime to use force against the uprising are the sole cases where social networking means succeeded in achieving political change.
(4) Is there anything we can do about the situation in Syria where the massacres outperform those done by the Israeli occupation in Palestine, Sinai and the Golan? Will we continue to watch the scenes of daily killings and destruction in Syria through the news channels and the Internet? Do the Arab governments really have nothing to do and their people only know wailing, crying on the ruins?
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق