A Window Of Opportunity For Peace In Syria

In a world which has lost appetite for dethroning dictators and despots, in a matter of a few days, a fifty-year-old powerful regime has been brought down in Damascus. It is surprising that a historically marginal-ised community – Alawites – could repress a country for so long. Thus, it is clear that in power games played by vested global interests, govern-ments, especially dictators, get to reign as long as they enjoy the patron-age of some or other external power.

The fall of Bashar al-Assad, who ruled for 24 years, is definitely an epoch-al moment in Syrian history and a watershed event in global politics, more so in West Asia. However, the irony of it all is that while a despotic regime met with its ultimate end, power seems scarily poised to pass on to a Abu Mohammed al-Jolani-led Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), previously the Syrian branch of al-Qaeda, al-Nusra Front. Transfer of power signals a potential rout of Damascenes thought to be close to the Assad regime.

Initially hailed as a beacon of hope for Syrians longing for liberty and re-forms, following his ascension after the death of his dictator-father’s (Hafaz al-Assad), Bashar al-Assad, a London-returned doctor, was soon swayed by the lure of limitless power. His presidency turned to authori-tarianism, cronyism, and brutal suppression of dissent, which only exac-erbated sectarian tensions. With help of external powers, he withstood the waves of unrest that swept dictator regimes in 2011 during the Arab Spring.

Assad, who secured asylum in Russia, literally waged a war on his own people. As the hapless sections, driven to the wall, revolted, global pow-ers started dabbling in Syrian affairs. Bashar was propped up by Russia, Iran and militias from Iraq, while the West and Turkey backed the rebels. It is distressing to note that over 6,00,000 people perished in the battles and millions were displaced.

Syria under Bashar touched the nadir, and wallowed in poverty and dis-eases amidst widespread destruction. Livelihoods were destroyed and thousands fled to other countries. Gradually, unable to bear any longer his atrocities, vast swathes of repressed populations either joined the ranks of various rebel groups or rendered aid to them.

What would be implications for geopolitics in the region? A western-backed regime could be unsettling for Russia which staunchly stood by Assad and actively rendered air power. Israel which shares a short border with Syria hitherto maintained neutrality. Assad did not bother it much. But fundamentalists in power could be worrisome for Tel Aviv. Turkey, which helped the rebels, may try to intervene and crush the Kurds with the help of new regime. Iran loses its leverage in West Asia; Houthis and Hezbollah are already weakening.

Unless a coalition government takes hold and brings in reforms with in-clusivity and mass prosperity as all overarching goals, Syria will continue to face volatile times where fear, pain, hunger, disease and death plague the war-weary people. The world community should come forward to ex-tend liberal aid for the reconstruction of Syria, a nation ravaged for over five decades. It is good that the US vowed to stay back and avert the rise of Islamic State or al-Qaeda.

Authoritarianism is surging and democratic foundations continue to be shaken, especially in small and poor nations. A few names come to mind: Mali, Myanmar, Chad, Guinea, Sudan, Burkina Faso, Niger, Gabon, North Korea etc. However, the regimes there would not survive without at least one external power’s support. Only a coup or a revolution can bring in the alternative in those countries. Autocratic regimes know it is either prison or execution if they lose power. Hence, repression is an existential requirement for them. It is sad the world is yet to collectively debate how to deal with the dictators.