Although being a long-standing member on the list of countries that sponsor terrorism and despite having a chemical weapons program that dates back to the 1970’s, Syria has managed to stay clear of President Bush’s State of the Union address in January 2002. However, in the last few months and weeks, Syria has been pushing its way up the “axis of evil” list. According to American and Israeli sources, Syria purchased arms for Iraq in violation of the UN embargo before the war, allowed Arab volunteers to enter Iraq to help with its defense during the hostilities and has been harboring Iraqi leaders since Saddam’s downfall.
This development puts into question the decision-making capabilities of Syria’s leader – Bashar Al-Asad. A 37-year-old ophthalmologist, Bashar succeeded his late father, Hafez Al-Asad, some three years ago. It is perhaps worthwhile to examine the career of the father in order to have a better perspective of the son’s performance.
Hafez Al-Asad was born in 1930, a member of the Alawite Shi’ite minority. In 1946, Syria received its independence from France and the young Assad joined the newly formed Syrian Baath party. Parallel to his political activity, Al-Asad joined the air force and rose in the ranks. By 1963, the Baath party – whose main ideological objectives are secularism, socialism, and pan-Arab unionism – had seized control of the country. Consequently, Al-Asad became air force commander. In 1966, he became defense minister and following a 1970 coup d’etat, president. For the following 30 years, he was able to remain in power by ruling with an iron fist and by placing fellow Alawites in key positions. When a Muslim Brotherhood revolt broke out in the city of Hama in 1982, Al-Asad had no qualms about killing thousands of his own people and destroying whole parts of the city. During his long reign Al-Asad became not only very powerful but also very rich. In 1999, he appeared on the Forbes list of the world’s wealthiest people with an estimated fortune of $2 billion (it should be noted that Syria is a relatively poor country).
In the area of foreign relations, Al-Asad managed to quarrel with all of his neighbors. Syria has a long-standing dispute with Turkey over water and territorial issues, and relations with Jordan have remained tense since 1970, when as defense minister, Al-Asad assisted a Palestinian revolt against King Hussein. Al-Asad fought Israel three times: in 1967 (as defense minister), 1973 and 1982. In 1976, Syrian troops entered civil war stricken Lebanon and have remained there until this very day, securing Al-Asad’s hold on the country. Saddam Hussein, himself a Baathist leader, severed his relations with Syria in 1980 after Assad decided to back Shi’ite Iran in its war against Iraq. In 1991, Al-Asad was again in conflict with Saddam Hussein when Syria backed the U.S.-led coalition during the first Gulf war.
Give the gift of hope
We practice what we preach:
accurate, fearless journalism. But we can't do it alone.
- On the ground in Gaza, Syria, Israel, Egypt, Pakistan, and more
- Our program trained more than 100 journalists
- Calling out fake news and reporting real facts
- On the ground in Gaza, Syria, Israel, Egypt, Pakistan, and more
- Our program trained more than 100 journalists
- Calling out fake news and reporting real facts
Join us.
Support The Media Line. Save democracy.
This is the situation Bashar Al-Asad inherited in 2000. Since his rise to power, Syria has improved its relations with Turkey, Jordan and Iraq. However, peace talks with Israel have not been resumed and Syrian troops remain in Lebanon (despite some redeployments) while links with the Hizbullah terrorist organization have been strengthened. Bashar has not abandoned his father’s dream of regaining the Golan Heights, captured by Israel during the Six Day War. In this regard, Hizbullah is seen as a means to serve this end.
Bashar, who was educated in Britain, is much more familiar with the West than his pro-Soviet father. It is not clear what made him choose a collision course with the current American administration. It might be argued that Al-Asad is trying to secure for himself the role of regional leader, enjoying wide popular support on the Arab street. But at what price?
Having dealt away with the Taliban and with Saddam Hussein, the United States is not in a position to launch a military offensive on a third Muslim state. Such an attack would severely undermine American relations with moderate Arabs and Muslims, while key coalition members such as the United Kingdom would object, and world public opinion would oppose any such action. This, however, does not mean that the Bush administration cannot make Al-Asad’s life very difficult. A military campaign is not the only means of exerting pressure — the threat of isolation is a potent one. American military presence in Iraq should serve as a useful reminder for Syria. As far as Israel is concerned, the new United States policy ought to make it more difficult for Al-Asad to continue his support for Hizbullah and other Damascus-based terrorist organizations.
It would be wise for Syria to abandon its defiant role; it stands to gain nothing from it. Such a role would not necessarily strengthen the Alawite grip on power in Damascus, and its diplomatic and economic price might be too high. Any popularity that Al-Asad might enjoy with Muslim extremists is bound to be short-lived taking into account the nature of his regime and his family’s history. If international relations were a game of chess, Al-Asad would be endangering his most valuable tools.
—————
NIR ARIELLI is a senior analyst with The Media Line Ltd.