Unintended Consequences

2004 - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/3616712.stm

"Nepal's prime minister has appealed for calm following violent protests in the capital against the killing of 12 Nepalese hostages in Iraq.

 Correspondents say it is the first time in living memory that the Muslim minority has been targeted in Nepal"

When assessing outcomes of political events, what is often left unsaid are the potential unintended consequences of such events. These may occur immediately, or in the medium to long-term (with long-term potentially being years or even decades later). Said events may be government policies, or the acts of individuals and/or groups of people.

A single event, or series of events can unfold in various ways. In purely "tribal" terms (or perhaps Asabiyya as used by Ibn Khaldun), individuals or groups within a particular nation, ethnicity or religious sect may be spurred on to commit violent acts against another in response to the "other" having perpetrated a crime of their own. It is obviously grossly irrational to assume that individual acts carried out by small groups of people are actually representative of some sort of philosophical essence inherent in anyone and everyone of the same identity (of whatever fashion), yet we are what we are and history bears this out in bloodshed and massacres over the ages.

One suspects that "unintended consequences" is not really on any one government's mind, especially given the current standards of international politics and diplomacy, which is mostly amoral and self-serving in the extreme, particularly focused on immediate to short-term gains, with little thought as to what happens next.

Israel comes to mind. The first generation of Israelis were admirable in their ruthlessness and bloody-mindedness in achieving their stated goals, with land theft, murder and expulsion of hundreds of thousands of Palestinian Arabs.Without wishing to gloss over history's darker corners, the revolting anti-semitism extant in Europe had little equivalent in the Middle East and wider Islamic world, until the modern state of Israel emerges in 1948, which claimed (and continues to claim) to act and speak on behalf of world Jewry. No leap of intellect is required to understand how many within the Arab and wider Islamic world would then start to associate the state of Israel's crimes with Jews and Judaism in general. Ever since then, as a direct result, vulgar anti-semitism is rife and commonplace throughout the Muslim world, often drawing on gross caricatures created in Europe all too recently, giving them a life beyond 1945.

I suspect that violence directed against French Jews, usually by male youths of North African origin, can be partially traced to the general atmosphere of anti-semitism engendered by the events described above. This is not in any way making the slightest justification of violence towards innocents of whatever group, but merely an illustration of a point. Conversely, when Arab or Mizrahi Jews in Arab-majority countries were forced to leave, either as a direct result of discriminatory government
policies or due to growing general intolerance, many of them went straight to Israel and it is no accident that many Mizrahi Jews vote for the most extreme racist parties in Israel even today.

I also think of Assad's deliberate destruction of an entire country. What is relevant here is that a significant percentage (possibly a majority) of the Alawite sect continue to support him despite everything. Even if Assad were able to win, Alawites would still have to live with a Sunni majority, except who are now filled with burning hatred towards them. I pray that sectarian strife does not come to pass when Assad falls (and despite everything, it is a testament to the Syrian revolution that actual massacres of Alawites have been very few), but the possibility is there for widespread attacks,
massacres leading to ethnic cleansing of Alawites and Shi'ites. Again, this should never happen, but if it does would you be surprised?

I suspect that governments take into account multiple scenarios occurring after, say, military intervention or imperial occupation (be it Iraq post-2003 or earlier British and French empires), but they will only look up to a certain point in time (I suspect only in years). I wish that they would consider effects over not just decades, but even centuries. Even supposedly innocuous changes can have grave implications over time. I can only weep when I think of how European powers swept away the old order(s) in Middle Eastern countries only to replace them with shaky new ones lacking legitimacy, swept aside all to easily by the curse that is the "national army".

I know that I am conflating multiple categories and types of event/response into one essay rather than dissecting them out (if I wasn't lazy), but no-one ever seems to focus or even talk about this! I will end with a quote by Robert Fisk (although in recent years he seems to have lost his wits entirely...)

"After WWI the British and French created the borders of Northern Ireland, Yugoslavia and the Middle East.

 I've spent my entire professional career watching the people within those borders burn"

Homs

Homs lies destroyed.

I remember thinking, as many Syrians did, that Bashar Al-Assad would not dare to do anything comparable to his father's ravaging of the city of Hama in 1982. With smartphones, social media and the eyes of the world watching, how could he? We were wrong.

Homs, a city of 1 million, is now devastated, with most of its residents long having fled the violence, eking out a miserable existence at the mercy of hostile governments in neighbouring countries. You only have to type the city's name in Google for a litany of images of a ghost town, with not a single building intact or undamaged.

We thought Assad would not dare, because we were under the erroneous impression that the outside world, however you would define it, would not tolerate it, yet tolerate it they did.

I'm sure many Syrians feel the same as me, as if I'm screaming in the dark. The apathy, the denials, the outright lies all stick in my throat and my rage and bitterness is without end. I could post a thousand pictures of dead babies, abandoned cities, aerial bombardment on Facebook without a flicker of interest. Yet as soon as I change my profile picture, 50 likes and 50 comments. I apologise for the profanity, but fuck your mothers.

Syria is the cradle of civilization. We are descended from those who helped bring light to a once dark world, and we deserve better than this. Is it because we are now Arabs or Muslims, cursed from birth with the disdain of Western capitals and peoples? Or is our suffering inconvenient in that it may force you to actually do something about it, and so you ignore it?

My Sectarian Heart

During my time in Syria, sadly there was a great deal of bitterness evident towards Shi'ites (interestingly the word "Shia" came first to people's lips before "Alawites" did). I think this can be partially put down to the fact that there are few Alawite communities in the countryside of Aleppo or Idlib, unlike that of Hama or Homs, where they are much more numerous.

The towns of Fua and Kfarya, in Idlib, and Zahra and Nibol in Aleppo are majority twelve Shi'ite towns which currently act as regime strongholds in these areas. Many people I spoke to mentioned these places by name and the anger and bitterness was all too evident, the bitterness of betrayal. I heard, over and over again, how before the revolution there were no differences between them, and how they'd happily visit each others' towns without incident, and also on how Syrians opened their doors for Iraqi and Lebanese refugees, only for Hizbullah and the Iraqi government to actively aid Assad as he destroys the country.

I remember sitting with a group, and one of them made a flippant remark on Shi'ites, at which I point I mentioned how I knew many Iraqi Shi'ites back in London, all of whom supported the Syrian revolution (although I had not spoken to them for a long while, and who knows? they may well have changed their minds - one good friend told me he could no longer support the armed rebellion in view of Al-Qaeda now being present and qualms about rebel crimes, mentioning Abu Saqqar). He didn't seem very convinced.

But who am I to criticise? I, who did not have a particularly religious upbringing, by a mother completely and utterly against sectarianism in all its forms, am no better. At times over the last few years, I won't deny being consumed with sectarian anger, towards brainwashed Shi'ite sheep firmly lodged in the rectum of their clergy, murderous Alawites happy to butcher children with knives and fence-sitting Christians too cowardly to follow the example of Christ. If Syrians of all stripes had stood together, maybe this terrible juncture would never have been reached, and ISIS would have no place now in Syria.

It all sounds so primitive and irrational, and it is. Yet try as I might, I could not reason my way out of it. And I am sitting in comfort and ease thousands of miles away, thankfully with none of my close family having been harmed the last three years. So imagine what people inside, suffering terribly, are thinking. I'm sure that many, many young Syrian children are now brimming with burning hatred to Shi'ites and Alawites, and will grow up and pass this on to their children. I've come to wonder that such sectarian and chauvinist sentiment is inescapable, and may even be necessary, acting at times as a protective mechanism for the "group".

I have always despised the Saudi regime and the Gulf's treatment of Shi'ites. No-one was happier than me after 2006 where Hizbullah managed to hold their ground against Israel. I would watch Nasrallah's speeches to improve my Arabic and trawl through the net for material on the Party of God. I would say to myself that I would be the last person to abandon support for Hizbullah, and now I find myself  hoping that their soldiers get killed in Syria.

I have never lived in Syria, but I do not think that the ridiculous sectarianism which is de riguer in the Gulf was an issue in Syria before the revolution. It is now, and will continue to be so for decades at least. The idiotic Shi'ite political powers in the region have now ensured its place, giving the Saudi royal family the best gift they could possibly wish for.

Obviously many, many of the beloved "Sunnis" are just as capable, probably even more so, but now the perception is there that Assad's supporters from minorities do so out of sectarian tribal sentiment. It is dangerous to indulge such generalisations with all their flaws and limitations, but let us not lie to ourselves either.

So what is the way out? how to cleanse Syrian hearts from entirely understandable and expected hatred?

Even the most disgusting vile shabih may have tiny, innocent children who have done no wrong, and do not deserve to partake in their father's entirely justified punishment and excoriation. The Alawites of Syria need this revolution more than anybody else, far more than the "Sunnah" - the Assads have ensured that Alawi identity is firmly tied to them, with the expectation that they will have a shared fate.

Jeel Al-Huriyeh (The freedom generation) is coming - are they to be brought up as free men and women, able to speak their mind and living in peace with Syrians of all stripes, or are we to start yet another cycle of hatred? (I do not like it when famous brigade commanders refer to Alawites as Nusairis, almost as if reminding them of a time when they were firmly in this shit and under the boot of the majority, for centuries.)

I cannot deny that I have precious little love for those Syrians who did nothing as their countrymen got slaughtered or even actively participated for it, but I refuse to transfer this to the next generation. To paraphrase Bobby Sands, our revenge will be the laughter of our children. All our children.

Lest you think what irrational nonsense this is, you are no better - come and live in Syrian shoes - I am trying, desperately hard, not to cave in to anger and bitterness, because then I would be no better than the thug from the coast who has been incubating that selfsame bitterness for far too long.

Black Flag

I'm sure many Syrians outside in the diaspora, only able to follow events on the ground through the medium of the internet, have noted, with no small amount of worry, the seeming lack of Syrian revolutionary flags, and the prominence of various types of "Islamic banners", be it those brandished by rebel brigades or in whatever peaceful demonstrations still occur in Syria despite it being a time of war now (sadly).

While I am certainly not an "Islamist" in the conventional sense, I would not consider myself a secularist or liberal either (I'm still working it out), so popular religious sentiment doesn't bother me (on the contrary) as it might do for more secular Syrians, be they inside or outside the country. Regardless, it worried me as well initially, because it raised the possibility that the original goals of the revolution were being lost, that of freedom for Syrians of all stripes, to be replaced by a widespread call for an "Islamic state" (a vague concept even for its most vociferous proponents, who haven't bothered to flesh out what it means or entails).

I recently spent a week, working in liberated areas in Idlib and Aleppo governorates. I cannot say that I saw many revolutionary flags, and various flags and banners with the shahadah were much more prominent, at rebel checkpoints or in people's shops or houses. In a large town near Aleppo, the black flag, as I call it, was everywhere. On the walls of people's houses and shops, or flying from lamp-posts and so on.

I would tell you a bit more about the town. During the fight against the regime, most of the population fled, with someone telling me how it was reduced from 25,000 to 2,000, with FSA rebel fighters hiding in the hills on the outskirts of the town. Despite great odds, and precious little help, they managed to liberate the whole town, and capture the town's huge military base for themselves. Thankfully, the townspeople returned, and the population has now swelled to 50,000, what with the obvious influx of refugees.

I'm sure you can imagine how difficult and hellish that period of their lives must have been. Thankfully the town is tens of kilometres from the front against the regime in Aleppo, and the town is entirely liberated and free. While obviously the situation is far from perfect, it is in better shape than most other places, praise God.

The Syrian revolution started out as peaceful protests to try and induce this rotten regime to change, to allow for the freedoms they have denied us for so long. In response, Assad has turned the country into fire and ash, sending it into hell. To me, the revolution is now about something much more profound than simple political reforms and basic freedoms, although these are obviously still essential goals. It has now become a struggle about who we are as a people, and what values we hold. Are we slaves to willingly accept the boot of the thugs and murderers, who happily rape women and butcher children with knives, in response for mere "security"? Or are we to live as free men who refuse to compromise our dignity, and our belief in the sanctity of the lives of people whose only crime was to speak their minds?

When the revolution has now turned into a struggle over the most basic or even primordial rights (for lack of a better word), what will Syrians hold on to? Islam's affirmation of the sanctity of human life is a direct affront to this rotten regime, and to all the other rotten governments of the region, all of whom happily torture and execute unceasingly. In such an existential struggle, are we really surprised that Syrians would turn towards their religion even more than before (Especially in the conservative towns and villages of northern Syria)?

I met and spoke with many people of all stripes, and not once did I hear or get the impression that they were now fighting merely to impose an Islamic state - it still remains a struggle for freedom and dignity, albeit now with much greater urgency. Young men, younger than me, who are married with young children, all go and fight regardless of the risk to themselves. I met someone who fought on the frontline 4 days after getting married, and lost an eye, and he simply, pardon the language, didn't
give a fuck.

Interestingly, after having befriended some people and becoming "friends" on facebook, one thing which is noticeable is that the photos or posts they have on their pages earlier on in the revolution sport the tricolour revolutionary flag, but more recent ones feature the black "tawhid" banner - in the process, they hadn't suddenly become "fanatics", I can assure you.

After my limited time there, with hours and hours of conversation, I finally understand. The one souvenir I took from Syria is pictured below, which I will hang on the wall of my flat alongside the traditional revolutionary flag. It has earned its place.

ADDENDUM

One more thing, I saw the supposed "Al-Qaeda" flag sported by ordinary Syrians, those who absolutely despise the ISIS / Da3esh bastards - remember that that particular flag is an actual banner of the prophet, so don't automatically assume that anyone who waves it is automatically an ISIS supporter.

Possibilities of the Syrian revolution.

It has turned out far worse than we had imagined. I though that when this started, things would be over very soon and I would be able to visit Syria within months, without having to fear whatever bastard's bad mood at airport security.

It has turned very bloody indeed. The regime is now attacking and shelling Damascus and Aleppo, after having subjected the rest of the country to murderous repression. They are willing to turn an entire country to fire and ash.

I know that Assad's end is coming, although when that will be is not clear. Unfortunately, what comes next will be very difficult. From the smaller Jihad to the greater one. However, I wish to strike a note of optimism, no matter how hopeless things seem now.

In the minute-by-minute updates, be it on social media, newspapers or news channels, something has been lost. It is no doubt viewed by many outside of the Middle East as yet another blood-stained chapter in the region's history. I imagine many also feel that the region's problems are due to complex forces that are difficult to understand or untangle.

Whereas, say two generations ago, Syria figured much more strongly in people's imagination (at least in the West) due to its essential importance in the history of early Christianity, current secularisation has relegated the Levant in popular imagination to just another Arab backwater.

It has never been a backwater.

As one writer put it, the coastal ports of Syria served as its link with the wider Meditteranean, while its "desert ports" would recieve the winds blowing all the way from Central Asia, India and China. It lies at the juncture of three continents and ecological zones - No doubt its position, with an overlap of peoples, ideas and abundance of food contributed to it becoming the Cradle of Civilization.

I wonder what it must be like for other Arab countries. Syria has ancient ties simultaneously to the Arabian Peninsula and North Africa, as well as bearing host to a diverse array of people, be it inhabitants or travellers. I have Armenians, Kurds, Assyrians and Circassians in my cultural frame of reference that, say, an Egyptian or Yemeni would not. Syria is also important in early Islamic history, with many Muslim pilgrims visiting it from all over the Muslim world.

The point is this. Whatever happens in Syria will reverberate far and beyond our borders. While the average person on the street doesn't recognise this, foreign diplomats do. Much as they would all love to intervene to sway things in their favour, however, the potential disastrous complications that would result stays their hand.

But even the diplomats are blind. Chuang Tzu once said that the final stage of human degeneracy was the development of politics. They are only interested in what they can secure in their "national interest". I can assure you, they don't give a flying fuck about us or our martyrs.

Some journalists have cottoned on to this. Here's Jonathan Freedland in the Guardian:

"It's an optimistic prognosis for a region that could be about to explode in bloody violence. But the fate of Syria will be decisive either way. If Assad holds on, then the Arab awakenings of 2011-12 will only ever have been a partial success. But if the Syrian rebels succeed, they will have achieved a sweeping victory. They will have effected a revolution without the full-blown foreign intervention required in Libya and more completely than in Egypt, where the security apparatus remains in place. That the revolt will have taken so long may even be a sign of strength, proving a depth and resilience that overnight insurrections elsewhere could not match."

Or Rami Khouri

"This leads me to conclude that the bigger story that links Syria with the other Arab uprisings and recent Middle Eastern developments is that the will and actions of indigenous Arabs, Iranians and Turks will always have a greater impact than anything done by powers abroad. The striking inability of the Americans, Russians and their assorted allies to shape events in Syria follow similar serial failures in recent decades in their attempts to promote Arab-Israeli peace, democratic transformations, economic trajectories or other such strategic issues.

Only when local people across the Middle East took matters into their own hands did conditions change, and history resume. The sentiments of ordinary people such as those in Bab al-Hawa, Midan, Deir al-Zor and Deraa are far more significant that the pronouncements of the world’s powers. The sooner we learn this lesson, the better off we will all be."

What is mentioned above by these two commentators is right. But I wish to draw attention to something else.

Syria is now undergoing a tremendous crisis, straining our society to breaking point. I do not doubt that the struggle to rebuild our country will be very difficult. However, something wonderful indeed may come out of all this. Syria is tremendously diverse, yet mostly conservative and religious. If a society such as this can be at the brink of the abyss and be able to pull itself back, then the ramifications could last for a very, very long time.

Europe tore itself apart in the wars of the Reformation, no doubt contributing to its subsequent secularisation in part. It's a very common theme, in Europe at least, that religion divides peoples and foments violence and strife. I wonder sometimes that perhaps the notion of objective truth itself has been devalued as a result of this (Postmodernism - the refuge of self-righteous anti-imperialists), with the idea that perhaps any idea held too strongly held can lead to murderous violence.

If our revolution succeeds, and we do not collapse into sectarian civil war, then from now on, when history books are written, I would hope that the Syrian uprising be the thing that gives lie to the above secular viewpoint. We can say to others that we succeeded where Europe failed. That we can hold the deepest faith while refusing to descend into mindless violence. That the Humanism inherent in the Semitic narrative of Adam and Eve will not be smothered by stupidity, anger and pain.

One cannot deny that sectarianism is taking root in Syria, owing to the regime's deliberate efforts in combination with the short-sighted support of the openly religious leaders of Iran and Hizbullah. If extremist militants are indeed present in Syria, there is the future risk of bombings and attacks against minorities (particularly the Alawites). Despite all this, I remain optimistic. We have undergone a trauma which may have pushed less resilient nations into much more savage violence. I hope that in the midst of such savagery, we remember who we are, and Syria will prevail.

Khalil Gibran

" The man who enjoys neither hostility to evil nor support of what is good, will not know how to destroy what is evil in himself nor safeguard what is good.

I love him who was crucified by the moderates. When he bent his head and closed his eyes, certain among them said, as though comforted: 'At last this dangerous extremist is no more'

And I love those who have been sacrificed by fire, excecuted by the guillotine for a thought that invaded their heads and enflamed their hearts.

I love you, O extremists, you who are nourished by unfathomable ardours. Each time I raise my glass, it is your blood and your tears that I am drinking.

And each time I look through my window at the sky, it is your faces that I see.

And when a storm rises, it is your singing and your praises that I hear"