Syria: Initiating Reform is Time Sensitive

So the unrest in Dar'a south of Damascus is either according to SANA perpetrated by an armed mob that resorted to violence and burning buildings, or accroding to other media oulets, a spontaneous start of an uprising that is being supressed. In either case however, there remains a fact that both the Syrian people as well as Syrian officials know very well, and that is the need for political reform and the need to curb corruption...etc.

Syrian officials have recently expressed admiration for the Turkish model of democracy. The Turkish model has tremendous support in the Arab world including in Syria. Arriving at the institutional structure supporting such democratic model however is a long and winding road, which will includ bureaucratic overhauls, inacting the tenants of the rule of law,.. all of which need political will, political mobility and a unified political elite. The need to jumpstart the process seems to be stronger than ever.

Syria is particularly situated to inititate a gradual and peaceful road to reform. Its foreign policy seems to be popular, but can not substitute for a critical self examination, where progress made in areas such as education should be acknowledged and other needed reforms should be discussed openly. All this within an understanding of the importance of national unity.

Horan Arabs, Druze, Kurds, Muslims, Christians,.. are all parts of Syria's unique social fabric, if one social element is in pain, that must not sit well socially and politically until it is equitably addressed by the government.

The potential of Syria is limitless.. the upward mobility in all areas, education, economics, health, tourism, green industry, ... is noteworthy. The Syrian government has a well intentioned and well educated cadre that is capable of formating a plan.. A plan forward.

Syria: Vision of a Future that is Rooted in History

Notwithstanding the ongoing populas litmus test of regime ligitimacy in the Arab world, there are some early winners and loosers. Syria, among others, has successfully managed and weathered the storm. Why and how are questions to be marveled at by political scientists and Middle East experts for many years to come.

Syria, with its institutional and demographic complexities, does differ although not fundamentally from other Arab countries. Syria, however, was successful in taking gradual steps towards economic, education and health reforms. Gradual political reform is anticipated. A framework of such reform has not been declared yet. Access to social media has been granted and the media and press are exercising social-cohesion conscientious form of free speech.

One element stands out that differentiates Syria; an elemant that echoed in the streets of Cairo and in Tunisa; which is the core populas demand for the state to uphold Arab dignity.

Syria with its principled pragmatism in foreign policy conduct gave a voice to that need, gaining in this sense a popular edge over so called American allies in the region. Syria successeded in being preceived domestically and regionaly as the carrier of Arab aspirations to a just solution to the Arab Israeli conflict, regional proseperity and regional sovereignty. Collaboration with regional powers such as Turkey and Iran are key in Syria's outlook.

Syria has a clear and dignified vision. A firm understanding that does not disconnect notions of progress and peace from the historical context and the realities of displaced people. Even if that meant standing up to hegemonic agendas. This position had cost Syria dearly in the past, from political to economic isolation, yet the worst days of international pressure in 2005 have only streangthened Syria's resolve.

Maybe a reconfiguration of American foreing policy and a redefinition of who America's friends are, is due.

Long Live the Egyptian People

Long live the Egyptian people.

The ownership of this revolution belongs to each and every one of them. A true leaderless peaceful people's revolution that will take it's place in history.

The whole regime tumbled because Egyptians refused to part with their proud past that used to invigorate the region with pride and hope. They refused to engage in a passive role while the economy of Egypt is taken hostage by a few.

Egypt is free and the Egyptian people gave meaning to the concept of peaceful revolution and to democracy in the Arab world. This is a glaring defeat to al Qaeda, who advocated violence and theocratic rule. Democracy demanded by Egyptians is against al Qaeda's vision for Egypt, and it is also different from the hollow, procedural, and meaningless "democracy" practiced elsewhere in the region.

A dignified indigenous strife for freedom has been victorious in Egypt.

I am sure that everyone is hoping that the army will keep its word and facilitate a peaceful transition once elections are held.

I'm watching with tears and a heart filled with hope as I am sure many people around the world are.

Egypt and Tunis proved George W. Bush to be Wrong

Elliot Abrams wrote an article yesterday in the Washington Post arguing that the recent uprising in Egypt and Tunis have proved George W. Bush to be right. His main points express that Arabs, surprise, do value freedom, that Bush's overthrow of Sadam was the right thing to do in 2003, and that both regimes in Tunis and Egypt were dictatorships. Well this is a misrepresentation of what the western position was from those two regimes:

First Husni Mubarak and Zain al Abidin bin Ali were two important western allies in the Middle Eastern region. Their prized credentials are massive suppression of opposition, tight control of media, liberal economic policies, and good relations with Israel. Those two countries would have never ever been on George Bush's radar for "regime change".

Second Husni Mubarak and bin Ali, both presidents for over 20 years, have promised change and never delivered. In fact 9/11 gave their regimes a boost to crack down on opposition in the name of "the war on terror". They garnered even more support from the west for their rule when they championed the motto of : Either us and stability or the Islamists and chaos, as "Stability at all costs" was the name of the game.

Third, Tunis and Egypt have been part of what is called the "Moderate Arab Camp", these two coutries were the economic modernization and deplomatic example for the rest of the Middle East. George Bush's "New Middle East" agenda was supported by Mubarak and bin Ali, among others.

The barrier of fear has been broken in some Middle Eastern countries. Some observers are just now jumping on the truth wagon, and trying to distort the implications of what happened in Tunis and Egypt. Demands for political pluralism, freedom of expression, comprehensive policies for employemnt have always been brewing in the Middle East, where unemployment can reach 35% in some countries and political imprisonment are a normal occurence.


The hope is that U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East (agreeing in this part with Abrams) advances from having it both ways: support for regimes and expressing dismay at human rights violations. And instead adopt a clear stance supporting the public's aspiration for indigenous solutions for regional problems, economic reform and political pluralism; a stance that is congruent with American ideals.

The Syrian Vision: Harnessing Regional Potential

In al Hayat newspaper interview on Oct. 27th, Syria's Bashar al Asad indentified the region as a strategic hub, connecting the five seas (Red, Mediterranian, Black, Caspian, Persian Gulf) through Oil, Gas and communication lines. This vision has passed the rhetoric stage and phased implemetation has been underway.

What is striking, yet not surprising, is that Syria is reinforcing its regional role over and beyond what might be described by "Syria as a key player" in any Arab-Israeli Peace deal.

The expansion of the geopolitical focus of Syrian foreign policy, is transcending its mediation role in the Hamas-Fatah reconciliation, and mediation roles in Iraq, Sudan and Yemen, political management of Lebanon, to include a creative look at how power centers are allocated in the Middle East.

First, from the Syrian perspective there has been a strategic breakthrough in the region. Arab states are not encircled by the Shah of Iran, a hostile Turkey and Ethiopia in the south anymore. Thereby, the contemporary promoting of Turkey and Iran as power centers to the benefit of Arab revival and prosperity of the region is vital for Syria.

Second, from the Syrian perspective, Arab identity (as a cultural reference) needs to be reinforced in the face of ethnic and religous factionalism, like the prevailing political systems in Lebanon and Iraq.

Third, the traditional delineation of the Middle East: Arab states in addition to Israel, Turkey and Iran is too limiting and does not live up to the potential of the region. Recent Syrian talks in Bulgaria, Romania and Azerbaijan are necessary precursors to the natural definitional expansion of what a viabale Middle East could be.

Hariri's visits to Syria and current visit to Iran, is not news anymore. Fatah and Hamas holding talks in Damascus is not news anymore. Ordogan's warm welcome in any Arab state he visits, is not news anymore. Arab states not buying the argument of Iran being the altmimate threat to the region, is not news anymore.

The ME is ripe for a regionally produced plan, and Syria is making use of the podium.

** Warm wishes to King Abdullah of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia for a quick recovery.

Christians in Iraq: Mercy Lost

Just when one thought it could not get any worse on the social and political scene in Iraq, given that seven months have past since the election and still no government. The church massacre in Baghdad reminded us that chaos, perpetrated by mercyless killers, has always room to grow in Iraq. Again today, more than seventy people died in bombings across Baghdad. Maliki sure likes holding on to power more than holding Iraq together.

The vulnerability of the security situation in Iraq is not a surprise, what is a surprise however is that Iraqi politicians seem to believe that they are entitled to "play" the political game of trying to outlast and outsmart their political opponents. As if Iraq is not going through an extraordinary period of its history, no government, no security, armed groups roaming free, Islamized militias with an uncomprimizing agenda of eliminating the "other". The other being : moderate Muslims, Christians, Jews, Yazidies,.. plenty of what could be considered "other" from ones own standpoint in the Middle East.

Factionalism seems to be too obvious, too ugly, too scary in countries that are "democratic" in the Middle East, like Lebanon and Iraq, Both countries seem always on the edge of civil war, which continously invites the "broker" role of neighboring countries, the US or Europe to intervine and mediate between the different factions. Factionalism is clearly stated and incorporated in the constitution of both countries, a democratic model that has only inflamed differences.

Those two countries might not be the envy of other Arab countries in the Middle East at this moment.

I have to commened NGOs in Syria and Jordan. Civil society in both countries have made conscience efforts over many years to gloss over religious and ethnic differences, make a point of minimizing the role of such preferences in the community, and by celebrating diversity in their organizational makeup. Granting economic and political rights have a central role in pushing ethnic and religious differences to the backburner, I believe on that front there is always more to do. Minimizing the reference to ethnicities and religious differences, might not be a bad lesson to learn from these two countries. Civil society and government support for such activism in these countries is not sufficient to eliminate the possibility of descending into chaos, that is why gradual reform, economic and political, is key.


Referencing ethnicities and religious differences in politics "factionalism" must be shamed and looked upon with disgust.

Mercy lost on that Sunday in Baghdad, Mercy lost on many days in Baghdad.

الكرامة الوطنية و كرامة الفرد في سوريا

لا تحتاج السياسة الخارجية السورية لمن يبرهن على فعاليتها و مهنيتها العالية, خاصة في العشر السنوات الأخيرة. السياسة الخارجية السورية أعطت لمفهوم الكرامة الوطنية نهجا وخطوات عملية ريادية يحتذى بها.

يكثر الحديث عن الثمن الذي تضطر لدفعه الدول التي تعتز باستقلالية الرأي والتي لا تبدي أولوية للتناغم مع سياسة الدول العظمى. فهناك من يشير إلى العقوبات الإقتصادية, و هناك من يشير إلى العزلة الدولية. هناك من من يشير بالتحديد إلى وضع الفرد في داخل سوريا, و يربط بين النهج السياسي الخارجي لسوريا و بين حالات فساد في مؤسسات قضائية و مالية, أو الوضع الإقتصادي المتدهور لفئة ما من التجار, أو هجران المزارعين لأراضيهم, وبدهاء يشير إلى أن الكرامة الوطنية تكلف الفرد في سوريا... نعم كرامته.

ان الكرامة الوطنية هي كرامة الفرد في سوريا, و كرامة الفرد جزء لا يتجزأ من كرامة الوطن

نعم, استطاعت السياسة الخارجية السورية تجاوز محنة العزلة و التضييق الإقتصادي, لكن سوريا الآن أمام استحقاق داخلي بأبعاد إقليمية. التجارب الدمقراطية في المنطقة, مثل لبنان و العراق, تظهر الطائفية عارية و ترغمنا على تقبل فكرة أن تكريس الطائفية والدمقراطية (أو الإصلاح السياسي كمفهوم أدق) جزء لا يتجزأ.

لسوريا دور في طرح بديل إصلاحي داخلي محلي , لا يرتكز على الطائفية. كما سياسة سورية الخارجية ريادية بحيث أثبتت صواب وجهة النظر السورية في أمور إقليمية عدة, طرح بديل للدمقراطية المطبقة بالعراق, والإصلاح السياسي هو استحقاق سوري بامتياز.

أرى في الأفق مرتفع آخرفي منطقة الشرق الأوسط ينتظر من يقود و يرفع العلم عليه, هو مرتقع منهاج للإصلاح الداخلي النابع من الشرق الأوسط و الذي يخدم الشرق الأوسط. بهكذا نهج تتكامل الكرامة الوطنية وكرامة الفرد, ويلام حينئذ كل من يحاول الفصل بينهما.

سوريا أنت لها.