In their
battle to rid themselves of the murderous, corrupt Assad regime, the Syrian
people faced a succession of obstacles. Decades of repression had left
organizers trying to make up for lost time when the revolt broke out. This was
followed by a usurpation of leadership of the movement by various bourgeois
forces, from the Muslim Brotherhood to pro-capitalist former regime or military
officials, all seeking imperialist aid and intervention while promoting a
military “strategy” divorced from and opposed to the needs or capacity of the
masses. Now we see increasingly direct intervention by the U.S. and its Saudi, Turkish, Qatari, and
other proxies. Yet through all this, mass organizing has continued—whatever the
ebbs and flows.
As we go to
press, two outcomes look increasingly likely: (1) a “peace” plan brokered by
the UN under U.S. direction, which garners Russian and Chinese support by
leaving in power much of the old regime, and perhaps even Assad himself, while
including some forces from the Syrian National Council/Free Syrian Army
“opposition”; (2) stepped-up military aid to the SNC/FSA to deepen and prolong
the civil war to the point where an imposed “peace” plan becomes more
acceptable to all concerned.
“All concerned,” of course, does not include
the grassroots movement that began the revolt, and which still persists. This
movement, as throughout the Arab Revolution of the last two years, first took
shape through neighborhood-based committees, which repeatedly mobilized in the
face of murderous regime attacks.
But there
are a number of indications that this movement can—if not soon, then surely
over time—develop a program and strategy to oust Assad while keeping the
imperialists and their traitorous Syrian flunkies at bay.
Evidence of
this includes the continued mobilization at the grassroots level; the roots of
the uprising in economic exploitation, and the resulting determination of the
country’s workers, peasants, youth, and women to win liberation; and the
historic regional potential and implications of the revolt.
In contrast
to the overwhelming focus of the mainstream media on the political and military
activities of the bourgeois, pro-intervention “opposition,” numerous leftist commentators
point to continued activity at the grassroots.
For
example, author Phyllis Bennis, associated with the Institute for Policy
Studies and United for Peace and Justice, reported on June 28 that “the
original non-violent opposition—broad and diverse, secular and faith-based”—is
maintaining its opposition to arming of the opposition and to outside military
intervention. What’s more, she claimed that street protests “are continuing
despite civil war-like conditions. It appears that more public
mobilizations … are on the rise again with broadly democratic
participation, especially in and around the major cities of Damascus and Aleppo, once known as relative strongholds
of regime support.”
Other
reports focus on activism by particular sectors. A report dated June 30 from Britain’s MENA Solidarity Network (“The
revolutionaries are our children”) described the efforts of women in the town
of Zebdani, west of Damascus, who from the beginning of the
revolt insisted on being in the forefront of the struggle: “We insisted that
women stand in the first line. An argument started with the enthusiastic young
men, as everyone wanted to lead the march. But we insisted, and pledged, that
we will not allow the security forces to touch our children.”
Said the MENA
reporter: “Women are taking an increasing role in the revolution. As well as
writing placards and sewing revolution flags, we are rescuing the wounded,
caring for the families of the detainees, as well as joining the demonstrations
in increasing numbers. The Zebdani women produce a newspaper called Oxygen,
which is published every 15 days.
“For the
women, the revolution is no longer simply about bringing down of the regime—it
is about transforming the whole of our society.”
An article
published on June 8 in jadaliyya.com by Layla Al-Zubaidi (“Syria’s Creative Resistance”) pointed to
grassroots efforts still ongoing to keep alive the uprising through cultural
activities. She described “a wealth of satirical dramas, jokes, chants,
graffiti slogans, videos, songs, and dances that have proliferated since
Syrians began to rise up against the rule of the Assads.” These activities are
to a certain extent a temporary substitute for demonstrations which are met
with murderous gunfire, but—as was seen in the profusion of biting humor in Egypt’s squares—are also a permanent and
valued part of the revolution.
For
decades, wrote Al-Zubaidi, “Syrians would do no more than whisper. … Political
jokes were kept within trusted circles and people were forced to bow to the
iconography of their leader, a cult celebrated in schools, public spaces,
cultural productions and the media. As the uprising evolved, the state media,
sticking with the delusional narrative that all protesters are armed
terrorists, has lost its grip on most of the public. A powerful counter-culture
unlocked minds, drawing on popular tradition and skillfully exploiting the
tools of modern communications technology.
One artist
was quoted as saying, “It is not the elite artists or intellectuals who form
the avant-garde, but the ordinary people. … I consider myself an expert on Syria,” he said, “But suddenly places are
springing up out of nowhere and we’re hearing dialects that we never knew
about. Now it’s the simple people in the country, whom everyone considered
illiterates, who are giving us an education. Look at Kfar Nibl.”
Kfar Nibl,
a village in northern Syria, “was entirely unknown until
sarcasm and wit put it on the map. Kfar Nibl has become a trademark for the
best and funniest slogans, shared and disseminated by activists and fans. When
the Arab League monitors arrived in Damascus and took up residence at the
Sheraton Hotel, a picture was passed around showing a group of villagers
holding a banner that read: ‘The people of Kfar Nibl demand the building of
5-star hotels, so that we can attract the Arab monitors to visit us!’ Security
forces invaded the village several times, but the slogans continue.”
“We should
safeguard the civic soul of this revolution,” said another artist, “and I
believe that women will be the leaders in that.
“He pointed
out that it was young women who recently took their protest to the heart of
political and business establishments. On April 10, 2012, the day that the
ceasefire negotiated through Kofi Annan’s initiative was supposed to come into
effect, 34-year-old Rima Dali poured white paint on her red dress in front of
the parliament, holding up a sign that read: ‘Stop the killing. We want a
homeland for all Syrians.’ A few days later, four young women sprawled like
corpses on the floor of Damascino Mall while upper-class shoppers tripped
around them.
“As biting
dissent has stripped the regime of whatever legitimacy it once enjoyed, he
bitterly admits, it is now naked violence and the higher stakes of
international politics that keep it standing. He finds wisdom in an entry on a
Facebook page: ‘The regime is gone, but how do we get rid of it?’” This is a
common refrain in writings and speeches of oppositionists: now that the masses
have lost their fear of Assad, the regime has already fallen in their hearts,
in their vision of their future: all that remains is to unify and expand the
forces needed to remove it physically.
Another
opening to make that so comes in the increasing defections from Assad’s army,
defections by soldiers whose loyalty will now be contended for by the
pro-imperialist opposition and the grassroots movement. The mainstream media
constantly points to Washington’s frustration with the inability of
the varied local militias who have adopted the rubric “Free Syrian Army” to
unite in a disciplined force worthy of the name “army.”
Those
divisions can be a leverage point for local committees trying to organize armed
elements who are resisting control by the SNC and its masters. The committees
can insist that the defectors put their arms under the leadership of the
movement, and return to the original role from which many of them
sprang—defense of peaceful protests against regime attacks. And what would be
more natural than that defectors returning to their hometowns and villages
should maintain their arms but use them in defense of their communities?
Heightened
exploitation in Assad’s Syria
Phyllis
Bennis, cited above, is one of many authors and activists pointing to the
continued support for Assad among the country’s bourgeoisie: “Despite his
government’s history of brutal repression, Bashar al-Assad still enjoys
significant support from parts of Syria’s business elites, especially in Damascus and Aleppo.”
In the same
vein, Syrian exile Khalil Habash, member of the Syrian Revolutionary Left
(Yassar Thawri Suri), described the policies of exploitation, corruption, and
enrichment that have sustained the Assad regime. A melding of military and
security officials, grown wealthy from state-owned assets, with a restored wing
of the old private bourgeoisie, benefited from successive waves of
privatization and neoliberal austerity policies. Such policies, he wrote, have
also “satisfied the upper class and foreign investors, especially from the Arab
Gulf, by liberalizing the Syrian economy for their benefit and at the expense
of the far majority of Syrians hit by inflation and the rising cost of living”
(Habash’s May 29 article first appeared at www.newsocialist.org; reprinted at
www.internationalviewpoint.org.).
But these
same policies enraged the country’s workers and peasants, its youth suffering
the same horrific rates of unemployment as those throughout the region. It is
these policies, and the repression needed to enforce them, that eventually
ignited the uprising. And with space to organize, the victims of these policies
can develop a program to take economic power out of the hands of Assad and his
followers, a program that could give renewed and heightened motivation for the
grassroots to retake its leading role in the revolution.
Like other
radical authors, Habash noted the origins of the revolt in the towns, villages,
and neighborhoods most impacted by exploitation and crisis, from rural areas
such as Idlib and Deraa to the working-class suburbs of Damascus and Aleppo, areas which all “show the massive
involvement of the downtrodden.”
He notes
the “successful campaigns of general strikes and civil disobedience in Syria in December 2011 that paralyzed
large parts of the country,” campaigns that “showed the activism of the working
class and exploited who are indeed the heart of the revolution. This is why the
dictatorship has laid off more than 85,000 workers from January 2011 to
February 2012, and closed 187 factories.”
As in Egypt, there were massive strikes in the
years immediately before the revolution. The degradation of living standards of
the majority, coupled with repression, led to visible protests since 2006. “In
May 2006,” Habash wrote, “hundreds of workers of the Public Building Company in
Damascus held a demonstration that erupted
in clashes with security forces. In Homs, clashes broke out between the
police and demonstrators protesting against the demolition of homes occupied by
poor people. Data from 2007 shows that people living in extreme poverty,
defined as those unable to obtain their basic food and non-food needs, rose to
2 million. About 62% of the people living in poverty are from rural areas and
live in food insecurity or are vulnerable.
“In 2007,
several clashes between the police and demonstrators took place in Aleppo, Homs, and Damascus. In 2008, demonstrations were held
by workers in the port of Latakia, and Dhabia and Zabadani near Damascus. In 2009 and 2010, the regime also
faced protests, until the beginning of revolution this year. Wealth gaps and
inequality had continuously increased these last few years.”
We can be
optimistic that, especially with the aid of working-class-based revolutionaries
in Egypt and elsewhere in the region, and with solidarity from around the
globe, Syria’s own revolutionaries will find a way to articulate the economic
grievances of the masses in a way that makes clear to the country’s workers
their potential to run society for their own benefit once Assad is ousted and
the imperialists kept out. This clarity would fortify their efforts to unify
and strengthen the local committees in which workers and the other exploited
and oppressed are a majority.
Potential
regional solidarity
Finally,
there is the potential represented by the Syrian revolution’s regional, indeed
global, significance.
This
significance is manifested on the one hand by the eagerness of U.S. and European imperialist powers to
use the country as a proxy battleground with its competitors in Russia and China. In fact, Syria is just a salient in the line of
battle, the point along that line which at the moment is enduring the fiercest
fire. The entire region is being fought for.
The
awareness of the region’s masses that this is what is at stake reinforces, and
is in turn reinforced by, their knowledge that the “anti-imperialist” Assad has
every bit as much blood on his hands, and is every bit as much the enemy of his
country’s working masses, as any of the other dictators recently overthrown or
facing a mass movement seeking his overthrow.
Khalil
Habash, cited above on the economic roots of the revolt, also hit the nail on
the head concerning its regional implications and potential: “Israeli Foreign
Minister Avigdor Lieberman was right to say that post-revolution Egypt is a larger threat to Israel than Iran, and this can also be applied to Syria. A free, progressive, democratic
and truly independent Egypt and Syria are infinitely more dangerous to
the Zionist apartheid state and its occupied territories than the repressive
Syrian and Islamic Republic.
“The Syrian
revolution is part of the revolutionary process taking place in the Arab world,
and should not be separated. The Syrian people are struggling like Egyptians,
Tunisians, Bahrainis and other democrats, socialists and anti-imperialists in
the region.
“The Syrian
people are the true revolutionaries and anti-imperialists, and not the regime
of Bashar Al-Assad. It is the Syrian population who welcomed Palestinians,
Lebanese and Iraqi refugees when they were attacked and occupied by the
imperialist powers such as Israel and the U.S. The victory of the Syrian
revolution will open a new resistance front against the imperialist powers,
while its defeat will strengthen them.”
But in the
meantime, Palestinian refugees living under Assad face the same butchery as
their Syrian sisters and brothers; over 150 Palestinians have been killed in
attacks by Assad forces, 700 injured, and more than 35,000 detained. This makes
the regime’s demagogic use of the Palestine struggle particularly
embittering—but also particularly motivating for Palestinians wherever they are
to organize solidarity with the Syrian revolution.
This
solidarity has in the past been shown in war against corrupt and reactionary
regimes—including against that of the Assads. California State University at
Stanislaus professor As’ad Abukhalil recently reminded his readers of the
counterrevolutionary role of Hafez Al-Assad in 1976, when a chance for the Arab
Revolution to take a huge step forward in Lebanon, as Lebanese battled side by
side with Palestinians, was crushed by Assad. “The Syrian regime,” he wrote,
“intervened to smash a promising revolutionary movement that would have changed
the map of the Arab East” (from Al-Akhbar English, reprinted at jadaliyya.com
on June 22).
That
promise can be realized again, and the chances of its doing so soon are
increased by the continuing march of the revolution in Egypt, the steadfast
resistance in Yemen and Bahrain, and by the foretaste of the next Intifada seen
in the late June-early July days of revolt by Palestinians against their
own corrupt “Palestinian Authority” for having invited Israeli Vice Prime
Minister Shaul Mofaz (the man responsible for the 2002 massacre in Jenin) to
Ramallah for negotiations.
People in
the United States have an important part to play, by
redoubling efforts to demand that Washington keep its hands off the revolution
in Syria and everywhere throughout the
region.
> The
article above was written by Andrew Pollack, and is reprinted from the July
2012 print edition of Socialist Action newspaper.
No comments:
Post a Comment