By Orkhan Sattarov, exclusively to VK
Reports of clashes between government and opposition forces keep coming from Syria. Despite all his efforts, President Bashar Assad he still can’t regain control over the situation. Homs was at the center of recent violent developments; among other casualties , Western journalists were killed.
Russia and China stand firm in their decision to prevent foreign intervention into Syrian affairs. Russian President Medvedev confirmed this position in his telephone talk with his Iranian counterpart Mahmud Ahmadinejad. According to Kremlin press-service, ‘both parties supported the fastest resolution of the conflict by the Syrian people’. The very fact that such a conversation took place is symbolic, as Iranian regime is the principle ally of Bashar Assad.
The League of Arab States and the West advanced a resolution on Syria in the UN General Assembly that calls on Assad to leave his post and condemned the violations of human rights by the regime. Even though it has a purely symbolic meaning, the demonstration of diplomatic influence of Assad’s opponents was pretty impressive: 137 of 193 states voted for the resolution.
The US administration expressed its hope that Russia puts pressure on Bashar Assad in bilateral talks. The US will also continue trying to persuade China to change its decision. In the meantime the US doesn’t exclude the possibility of its direct intervention into Syria: as a State Department representative, Victoria Nuland, told the journalists, “if Bashar Assad doesn’t bend to the international pressure, all other options would be revised”.
On the other hand, there’s no reason to believe the Russia or China would subdue to the US pressure. So it seems that President Assad, possessing such powerful foreign allies, could have dealt with the unrest at home a long while ago. There were similar incidents in the history of the regime: Hafez Assad, the father of the current Syrian dictator, crushed Islamist uprising in 1982 killing tens of thousands of the rebels. So will Assad the younger be able to repeat this ‘deed’?
Today Syria is in a very difficult position. The sanctions imposed by the US, LAG and Turkey strongly affect Syrian economy. The Economist reported in December that Syria loses some 400 million dollars a moths to the oil export embargo. Revenues from tourism used to form 10% of the country’s GDP, but now they dropped, if not vanished completely, due to the constant unrest. According to Faisal Kudsi, businessman and the son of Syrian ex-president, Syria lost some 45% of its GDP. He also said that Iran gives money to Damask, but it’s not enough, and Syrian business milieus don’t support Assad any longer. It is obvious that in any given dictatorship large-scale business supports acting government as in case of its radical change there’s a risk of redistribution of influence zones that could prove fatal for some oligarchs. But the sanctions managed to change this traditional picture, and, if Mr Kudsi is correct, Assad lost the support of a very influential social stratum.
Unlike Iran, Syria failed to construct an economy that would remain stable under western sanctions, and now Syrian currency is tumbling rapidly. In addition, the ‘treachery’ of fellow-Arab League countries, came as a surprise to Damask. However, Syria’s main economic partner – Iraq – didn’t join the sanctions, while Iran promised to share its experience of getting round western sanctions. But now Assad has to search for new markets in the conditions of a lost information war and frail support of his home allies.
Western strategy is as simple as it is efficient: it is aimed at weakening Syrian economy thus fueling inner discontent with the power that for now remains legitimate. The strategy also involves supporting the armed opposition via Arab allies. According to the Arab media, Sunni Muslims from the neighboring countries sign up to the Free Syrian Army. It is quite possible that many of them are al-Qaeda militants – the terrorist organization officially supported Syrian protesters.
However, it is still unclear which forces dominate the anti-Assad movement in Syria and it is impossible to predict who would rise to power if Assad falls. In any case, current strategy of the West has all the chances to become successful in removing Assad from power. Despite Nuland’s statement, experts don’t think that US direct military intervention is a real possibility; as such an action would set the whole region on fire and cause military conflicts in other countries such as Iran as well as destabilize Lebanon and Iraq. The docking of Iranian military ships in Tartus is a clear demonstration of Tehran’s support for Syria. However, a large-scale regional war is not in the interests of Iran or, for that matter, the US.
despite this reluctance of the international community to intervene directly and despite Moscow’s and Beijing’s support, it is unlikely the Assad’s regime will be able to turn the tide in its favor. The protest movement is getting stronger, yesterday’s peaceful protesters take up arms, and the international position of Assad becomes more and more precarious.
Many experts see the fall of Asad’s regime as a fact, not an option. So what will happen next in Syria? Some experts warn that the consequences of Assad’s regime fall would be devastating for the region. Syria is a multiethnic and multi-confessional state, historical center of the region, so the fall of Assad’s regime could trigger a new Sunni-Shiah conflict outbreak in Lebanon and Iraq, activate Kurd factor, strengthen the positions of al-Qaeda. In any case, there are no solutions to the Syrian dead-end that would have no negative sides, so the world would have to choose the lesser of many evils. And in such a case each power would try to advance only its own interests.
