Image by Alex Shuper.
To most people who read or otherwise consume western media, the fall of the Assad government in Syria was unusually quick and even surprising. For most of this demographic, it seemed that Assad and his rule was fairly stable, albeit somewhat ruthless. Unknown by most, however, was that the relentless attacks by Israeli and US forces together with the ongoing civil war fought between the Syrian military and various militias supported by Tel Aviv, Washington, and Ankara were taking a heavy toll on the Syrian people and the Damascus government of Assad. When one added the cruel sanctions enforced on the Syrian economy, it becomes clear that it was just a matter of when the regime would fall. The other question was which warlord (or militia leader, if you will) would end up leading the final charge.
Now, barely three weeks after Assad took a plane to exile in Russia, the situation in Syria remains mostly unclear. Indeed, the only certainties that exist are these: Israeli forces are bombing parts of the country and expanding their military occupation beyond the Golan Heights; US forces are also bombing parts of the country, seemingly reinforcing their hold on the areas they currently occupy either with US forces or in a shaky and dangerous (for the Kurds in Rojava) alliance with Kurdish forces historically related to the PKK. Other certainties include the Turkish desire to guarantee its hold on northern Syria. The fate of Russian and Iranian bases and military support remain up in the air. This latter fact is related to the continuing questions about any new government that is forming in Damascus. Regarding that, the current focus is on a man who goes by the moniker Ahmed al-Sharaa—a member of the now defunct organization Al-Nusra Front, which was an affiliate of Al-Queda until it wasn’t. Although his name remains on a list of wanted international terrorists, his rise to the top of the mish-mash of Islamist militias and mercenaries that made up the anti-Assad fighters in the Syrian civil war, he is the man of the hour. He has said all the right thing for this to happen. Furthermore, he seems to have no problems with Israel and is in the process of forcing Palestinian resistance groups out of Syria.
As writer Nilantha Ilangamuwa points out in his just-released book After Assad: Is Syria the New Libya in the Mediterranean?, these statements should come as no surprise given the military and financial support given to his al-Sharaa’s militia in its battle against Assad and the Syrian military. This book, barely one hundred pages, is a quick and serious discussion of the Syrian nation, especially in the years since 2011 when the so-called Arab Spring spread across the Arab world. As the title suggests, despite the claims of defending human rights, the underlying point of the war waged against Syria since 2011 as far as the US is concerned was to defeat a relentless opponent of US and Israeli plans for the region. Furthermore—as occurred in Iraq and Libya—if the government that eventually sits in Damascus is unable to reconcile the numerous interests and parties involved into a government Washington and Tel Aviv are happy with, then the state of chaos currently existing in Libya will be replicated in Syria. It should be obvious to most readers that the amount of misery and death that the latter scenario would involve matters little to the imperial capitols named in the previous sentence.
In part, the author frames the history of Syria as one between “the ancient vision of Israel’s promises and Greater Syria’s dream of national cohesion…. represent(ing) not merely historical visions but modern political ambitions. These ambitions are shaped by ancient scriptures, modern military strategies, proxy warfare, and imperial interests. The battle between these two visions is not simply a question of ideology or territorial claims—it is a struggle for survival, legacy, and geopolitical control. The West Asia remains an unfinished story, marked by ancient promises, military ambition, and dreams of unification.” (63)
To be clear, Israel and the United States are not the only outside players in the future of Syria. Turkey’s seeming desire to revive the Ottoman empire is another. Under the guise of denying the Kurdish people a sovereign state, Ankara has kept itself in the geopolitical game that Syria represents. At the same time, Turkey is a member of NATO. It is in both of these roles that Ankara’s place becomes even more important. Ilangamuwa addresses this in a manner that explores both of these roles; their potential contradictions and their commonalities in terms of the US role in West Asia. Given the brevity of the book and the uncertainty of the immediate future, his discussion of Turkey’s role emphasizes history over speculation. Personally, I find this a welcome turn from the plethora of puerile speculation found in most of the mainstream media regarding this topic.
After Assad: Is Syria the New Libya in the Mediterranean? is more than a one-off pamphlet. Indeed, it is a look at the history of Syria and its historical role in the world. It is also a discussion of the geopolitics involved and an interrogation of the involvement of colonial and imperial forces in those politics and the nation’s history. Ilangamuwa, who edits the Sri Lanka Guardian and was the editor of the human rights journal Torture Magazine during its existence, puts his understanding of international politics to use, resulting in a text highly recommended for those trying to navigate through the misinformation and outright nonsense being put forth in the empire’s mainstream media.
The post Syria After Assad appeared first on CounterPunch.org.
