Forward or back? The very large demonstrations in support of Syria sponsored by Hezbollah, whether forced or not, can be interpreted as the ...
Forward or back?
The very large demonstrations in support of Syria sponsored by Hezbollah,
whether forced or not, can be interpreted as the end of the "Cedar Revolution".
There is certainly enough genuine nationalistic support for Syria within Syria
itself.
Syria Comment (Joshua Landis) says:
Family members called me from Latakia to ask me what I though and to tell
me how proud they were and what a great man Nasrallah is. I was out doing
errands much of the day and all the shops had the TV on. Store owners and
errand boys alike were leaning over their counters watching the demonstration
with amazement and gratification. “This was the true Lebanon,” they insisted.
“People from every part and every religion,” they intoned, repeating the line
that the Lebanese opposition has been using for the last two weeks to insist
that it expresses the true Lebanon. “George Bush asked for democracy. This is
the true democracy," I was told repeatedly.
Today, Syrians will demonstrate. Many have told me they will go. The school
in which my wife teaches has closed for the day because it is in Mezze, the
section of town where the demonstration is to begin; the director fears that
the kids will not be able to get home because of the crowds. The UN offices
are only opening for half the day. It would seem that all of central Damascus
will be closing early today. This is the first demonstration of its kind that
most Syrians can remember and they are excited.
Having stemmed the tide and survived the scare pro-Syrian forces have moved
to reassert control. The
Associated Press reports:
Lebanese legislators ignored the popular anti-government protests and
decided to re-install the pro-Syrian premier who was forced to step down last
week, a move ensuring Damascus' continued dominance but raising opposition
denunciation. ... Outgoing Prime Minister Omar Karami was virtually assured
nomination after 71 of 78 legislators put forward his name during
consultations with President Emile Lahoud, according to announcements by the
legislators as they left the presidential palace. ... The pro-Syrian
parliament members apparently were emboldened in their choice by a thundering
protest in Beirut the day before that showed loyalty to Syria, countering
weeks of anti-government and anti-Syrian demonstrations.
Some would dismiss
President Bush's call for a Syrian withdrawal by May as mere posturing or
tilting at windmills.
President Bush demanded that Syria withdraw its troops from Lebanon before
parliamentary elections in May. ... "All Syrian military forces and
intelligence personnel must withdraw before the Lebanese elections for those
elections to be free and fair," he said. ... He said that freedom will prevail
in Lebanon and sided with anti-Syrian protesters in recent weeks, who have
demanded that Syria remove its 14,000 troops, following the February
assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik al-Hariri. In what he
called a message to the Lebanese people, Mr. Bush said the world is witnessing
a great movement of conscience.
In fact,
Juan Cole believes the whole thing is set to blow up in President Bush's
face, noting that anti-Syrian Jumblatt was recently anti-Wolfowitz.
The main exhibit for the relevance of Iraq to Lebanon is Druze warlord
Walid Jumblatt's statement to the Washington Post: "It's strange for me to say
it, but this process of change has started because of the American invasion of
Iraq. I was cynical about Iraq. But when I saw the Iraqi people voting, eight
million of them, it was the start of a new Arab world." It is highly unlikely
that Jumblatt is sincere in this statement. He has seen Lebanese vote for
parliament several times, and has campaigned, and Iraq was nothing new to his
experience (like Lebanon, it is occupied by a foreign military power even
during its elections).
I guess now that Jumblatt sees a way of getting the Syrians out of Lebanon
by allying with Bush, all of a sudden America is no longer an imperialist
cause of chaos. People who want to believe that remind me of PT Barnum's
dictum that one is born every minute.
Nor is he alone in that appreciation.
Richard Fairbanks, a former U.S. negotiator for Middle East peace and
counselor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington
D.C. said:
"One, if it's seen as the West wants Syria out, that would not be helpful
to swaying the minds of the Shia and perhaps some others in Lebanon. Second,
these calls by the Europeans and Americans are not self-executing and there is
not another counterforce on the ground. So as much as the majority of the
people want this to happen it's not going to be so simple," he said. Political
analysts also argue that Middle East reforms have been announced in the past,
only to fizzle out before fundamental change took root.
My own nonspecialist opinion is that despite their apparent strength Syria is
holding a losing hand. The train of reasoning begins with the observation that
no country has ever been able to maintain occupation over another using secret
services alone. Secret services must ultimately operate behind a shield provided
by a secure border or conventional forces; otherwise their headquarters,
safehouses and files will be vulnerable to the first foe that shows up with a
tank. By sending those conventional forces back to the border while reinstalling
Karami, Syria is attempting to restore the status quo ante under weakened
circumstances. Can they do it?
One wonders what the Syrians will do if the Lebanese opposition simply
refuses to cooperate with a new Karami government. It would then fall to the
Mukhabarat to break passive resistance. With the Syrian Army moved back the
contest comes down to a secret service war where the party with the most money
usually wins. And if -- and even Juan Cole doesn't wholly deny this -- a
majority want Syria out, what would prevent the US from providing the money to
make it happen? One can imagine a scenario where the opposition calls a protest
boycott; maybe people get money not to work. It would be a sight to watch the
Mukhabarat collect garbage or force people to.To rule requires a lot more
resources than to disrupt. Therein lies the Syrian strategic weakness.
It isn't necessary and probably unwise to send conventional forces into
Lebanon to chase the Syrians out. It would be sufficient to gum the Mukhabarat
up; to run interference for the opposition and provide them with technical
support to achieve a decisive result because it is unlikely that Syria can
maintain control of Lebanon unless the Lebanese want them to, whatever
Juan Cole thinks. The problem with dictatorships is entropy; a lot of energy is
needed to keep people in line against their will and that task is frankly
impossible. So dictators cheat and create the illusion of omnipotence and a
climate of fear to hustle people along. Dictatorships depend, as Cole says
though he probably didn't mean it that way, on "PT Barnum's dictum that one is
born every minute". If the Syrian conventional troops are moved out of Lebanon,
its hold will depend utterly on smoke and mirrors.
COMMENTS