Friday, May 16, 2014

The Syrian end game and the moot question

In two weeks, on June 3rd, Syrians will go to the polls to elect a president from three candidates. One is an unknown 46 year-old Communist who represents the City of Aleppo in the Syrian parliament, another is a 54 year-old businessman who is aligned with the Syrian opposition movement, and the third is the incumbent dictator, Bashar al Assad. 
  The main story here is not the fact that Assad will win with the typical Middle East “Four 9” factor of re-electing tyrants – the incumbent always gets 99.99% of the vote. The real story is that these “national” elections are only being held in a fraction of the country – the fragment of area still under control of the regime.
   After 3 years of civil sectarian war, with over 150,000 killed (mostly civilians) and 1.3 million displaced refugees, with whole cities and towns destroyed and over 80% of the country under the control of rival Sunni rebel groups – The Syrian Arab Republic, established by France on April 17th 1946, no longer exists.
   More than anything, the upcoming elections show us that the Syrian “end-game” is now in play. The Balkanization process has begun. The country is, de facto, splitting up along historic sectorial lines.
   In the North east, the Sunni Kurds have, with the help of Iraqi and Iranian Kurdish tribes, successfully fought off attempts by both the regime forces and the Islamist rebel groups to grab villages in their region.  What we may be seeing is an eventual unification of the Kurdish tribes (including those in South East Turkey), into a sovereign “Greater Kurdistan”, with a single ethnicity, religion (Sunni), language and culture.
   In the South the Druze population is cutting its historical ties to the ruling Alawites, once natural allies as two oppressed religious minorities in a Sunni Muslim majority region. 
   The Druze, for the first time in history, are flirting with the idea of actual statehood in the Southwest area of the Syrian Golan, known as Jabel Druze, possibly merged with the four Druze villages on the Israeli Golan Heights. Israel, where Druze citizens serve in the IDF and all levels of government and diplomacy, is encouraging this move.
   Despite recent gains in Homs and Aleppo, Bashar el Assad’s Alawite regime, supported by Iran and Russia, in effect only controls the coastal region between Lebanon and Turkey. This is more or less the historic area of the Alawite homeland that could, if the regime holds on to Damascus, eventually be the area that keeps the historic name “Syria”. 
   As mentioned above, the Sunni Muslim rebels control over 80% of what is currently Syria. They are not unified, with each militia ruling its own area of conquest. The myth of a unified opposition command is just that – a myth.  In the past few months there have been more casualties in the infighting between the jihadist and Al-Qaeda affiliated groups than between the rebels and the regime. 
   The bad news is that the various Sunni rebel militias, some controlling areas very close to the Israeli border on the Golan Heights, also have taken many of the regime’s military bases. These include fully stocked armor, artillery and missile basis. Highly trained Sunni soldiers that broke away from the regime forces and joined the rebels are now operating these weapons.
   Israel, which sees this developing situation as a very serious threat, has reinforced defenses on the Golan Heights and has created and deployed a new territorial combat division along the Syrian front.
   A year ago the question asked was whether Israel and the US preferred an Assad victory over the mostly Jihadist-Islamist Sunni rebels or a Muslim Brotherhood supported Sunni – Islamist victory over Iranian backed Assad.
The former would give us a heavily armed hostile Iranian controlled puppet state, while the latter – a heavily armed, hostile and unpredictable jihadi extremist state.
   With the Syrian end game now in play, the question becomes moot. We’re getting both.
 Agree or disagree, that’s my opinion.

DISCLAIMER: Opinions expressed above the writer’s, and do not represent SWJC directors, officers or members

No comments:

Post a Comment