Recently, millions of Syrians celebrated the decline of Bashar al-Assad’s dictatorship, driven by the rapid advancement of Hayat Tahrir al Sham (HTS). Journalist Anand Gopal discussed the origins of the Syrian uprising, the Assad regime’s brutality, the rise of Islamist factions, and the implications of Assad’s potential fall for Syria’s future. Although hope looms for change, significant challenges persist as various factions compete for power in a potentially fragmented landscape.
This week, millions of Syrians are witnessing the decline of Bashar al-Assad’s oppressive rule. The rapid advance of Hayat Tahrir al Sham (HTS) and the faltering of the Assad regime have prompted discussions about HTS’s ideology and the future for minorities in Syria. Journalist Anand Gopal, in an interview with Jacobin’s founder Bhaskar Sunkara, explores the deep-rooted issues leading to the 2011 revolution and the subsequent civil conflict in Syria.
The Syrian regime’s foundation was laid by the Baath Party coup in the 1960s, which implemented land reforms that initially garnered support from the peasantry. Hafez al-Assad’s takeover in 1970 shifted the regime’s focus away from radical land redistribution, building a ruling coalition between the Alawite security forces and the Sunni bourgeoisie. This governance model traded limited welfare services for total political repression, fostering a social contract where dissent was violently suppressed.
Bashar al-Assad inherited a fraying regime in 2000, as the economy faced turmoil due to his neoliberal reforms that dismantled the established welfare state without offering appropriate political changes. By triggering the 2011 uprising, a mainly peaceful movement of the working and middle classes emerged in response to the regime’s neglect. This provoked a brutal crackdown by Assad’s forces, leading previously peaceful civilians to take up arms in defense.
Originally, the Assad regime’s loyal base predominantly consisted of Alawites and the Sunni bourgeoisie. As the revolution escalated, it capitalized on fears among minority communities, resulting in a broad, albeit precarious, social backing for Assad concentrated in these groups. This fear persisted through the regime’s enduring reliance on Russian and Iranian support, alongside manipulated sectarian sentiments, which allowed Assad to maintain power throughout the conflict.
The military opposition witnessed a shift toward Islamism, particularly after decades of Baathist repressive tactics that decimated leftist groups. Even though the revolutionary fervor initially sought secular democracy, Islamic discourse had gained appeal during the regime’s neoliberal pivot, leading to varying ideological expressions within the uprising. The contrast between groups advocating for political freedoms and those pushing economic needs led to differing trajectories within the revolution, with Islamists gradually gaining prominence due to their perceived effectiveness and corruption-averse governance.
Assad’s inability to secure legitimate support faltered recently due to pronounced weaknesses stemming from his regime’s corruption and ineptness. Events such as diminishing backing from Hezbollah and Russia have emboldened resistance forces, while internal disarray among Assad’s ranks has eroded morale. Assuredly, the regime’s failure is rooted not in opposition strength alone but rather the persistent decay of Assad’s rule.
The fall of Assad may herald a new chapter for Syria, although the exact future remains uncertain. The intensity of suffering endured during thirty years of civil war evokes hopes for reconstruction and recovery. Nonetheless, challenges loom as various factions vie for power, and the potential for renewed conflict persists, particularly as factions like HTS may not prioritize democratic governance. With the regime’s exit, the long-suppressed urge for political engagement is finally awakening among the Syrian people.
The recent collapse of Bashar al-Assad’s dictatorship marks a pivotal moment in Syrian history, offering prospects for renewal after years of repression and violence. While the dominant role assumed by HTS suggests ongoing challenges, the opportunity for a newfound political discourse and action grows, ushering in a broader quest for democracy. However, the future remains precarious, necessitating vigilance and commitment to protect against potential fragmentation and renewed conflict.
Original Source: jacobin.com
