Assad Falls in Syria
By Prof. (Dr.) D.K. Giri
(Secy General, Assn for Democratic Socialism)
The 13-year civil war in Syria ended with the fall of Basher Al-Assad, the President of Syria on 8th December. As the rebels took control of Damascus, Assad fled to Moscow. An interim Prime Minister with a small cabinet was installed by the rebel groups to provide minimal governance to the strife-torn country. This dramatic development along with the war in Gaza will alter the power equations in the oil-rich Middle East. The change will deeply influence India given her proximity with Assad’s regime.
What brought about the downfall of Assad government? Basher Al-Assad who took the family baton in 2000 was expected to be liberal and tolerant, compared to his father Hafez Al-Assad, who had seized power in a coup in 1971. Basher trained as a doctor and worked as an ophthalmologist in the United Kingdom for eight years. Thus, he was exposed to the democratic politics in Britain. However, as per the aphorism of Lord John Acton, “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. Basher turned out to be dictator, inheriting the shameless trait of his ruthless autocratic father.
The famous Arab Spring in 2011 brought down quite a few dictators in the Middle East – Ben Ali in Tunisia on 14 January 2011, President Mubarak of Egypt on 11 February. Just four days later, some school children in Daara, a small city of about 140,000 people in Syria, wrote just two lines on the walls of their school; “Doctor, it is your turn! Down with Basher Al-Assad”. The terrified headmaster summoned ten boys and handed them over to the security forces. The boys were tortured. Parents protested. Eventually, some boys were released and the dead bodies of the rest were handed over to their parents. That was the beginning of the end of Assad. The fire of rebellion raged across the country.
The prolonged civil war gradually weakened Assad, robbing him off any credibility as an effective ruler. The elections of 2021 rigged by Assad denied legitimacy to his government. The UN had declared the elections illegitimate. His two main backers, Russia and Iran could not prop him up any longer due to the shift in geo-political dynamics affecting both countries.
Russia, which had heavily invested militarily since 2015 in support of Assad, became saddled in its war with Ukraine. Iran was weakened by the death of General Qassem Soleimani, who was tasked with extra territorial and covert military operation; also, by the air strikes by Israel in Syria and against Hezbollahs in Lebanon. In 2014, the Islamic State seized Raqqa and Assad began to lose more territory. Assad naively believed that he could hold on to power with the support from Iran and Russia – Iran with Hezbollahs fighting for Assad and Russia supporting with air and naval forces. With Iran-Russian support withdrawn, Assad’s fall was a question of time.
Who are the forces that have taken over from Assad? It is a motely army of forces owing allegiance to external powers. The dominant group is HTS – Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham, a Sunni Islamist political and para-military organistion. It was initially formed as Al-Nusra Front by Al-Qaida in 2012. It broke away from Al-Qaida in 2015 amid violent clashes and renamed itself as Jabhat Fatah Al-Sham (JAFS). In 2017, JAFS joined four other rebel groups to form HTS. The other group is Syrian Democratic Force (SDF), a Kurdish-led coalition of ethnic militia and rebel groups, backed by the United States. The third group is Syrian National Army (SNA) which is backed by Turkey.
In any war, there are losers and winners. In this civil war too, it is no brainer to determine them. Russia and Iran are obvious losers. Russia, hampered by Ukrainian war, could not maintain the support to Assad and finally gave him asylum. In the process, it suffered a big blow to its prestige with the fall of Assad. Iran had built the so-called ‘axis of resistance’ – Iran, Syria and Hezbollah against Israel and its ally the United States. It is another thing that Israel called it an ‘axis of evil’. Hezbollahs are being battered in Lebanon, Assad their proxy in Syria fled. Worse, Iran lost a strategic conduit in Syria which was used to transport arms, ammunitions, and other material to Hezbollahs. There is also a perception that Iran might have cut a deal with the rebels. Tehran may be hoping to build a new axis with Turkey and Qatar.
The winners for the time being are Israel and Turkey. Israel has moved into the buffer zone on its border with Syria, in fact, towards the Syrian side. Israel is in a better position to strike at the military capabilities of Iran. Turkey is expecting the Kurdish clout and power to diminish. It has about two million Syrian refugees who may go back to Syria easing the pressure on Istanbul.
How does India react? India-Syrian relations were strong with Assads in power. Assads have been supporting India on Kashmir. New Delhi has reciprocated by endorsing Damascus’ position on Golan Heights. India has invested substantially in Syria. The IMEEC – India-Middle East-Europe Corridor is to pass through Syria. New Delhi has put great hopes in the establishment of this route as a counterbalance to BRI – Belt and Road Initiative of China. India-Syria relations go back to ancient times during the reign of emperor Ashoka, the Silk Road, and Syrian Christians coming to India in the first century led by St. Thomas. However, New Delhi, banking only on Assad, a dictator puts its interest and image at risk.
New Delhi has given a run-off-the-mill reaction as follows, “We underline the need for all parties to work towards preserving the unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Syria. We advocate a peaceful and inclusive Syrian-led political process respecting the interest and aspirations of all sections of Syrian society”. Indian observers are commenting that Abu Mohammad Al-Jolani, the leader of the pack of the rebels is not a rational actor. It is a military takeover not a political one. India should learn from Afghanistan. A similar situation lurching towards fundamentalism and conservatism may emerge. New Delhi should watch the unfolding of the peace-building process in Syria.
However, it offers an opportunity for New Delhi to pause and re-test its foreign policy in view of the shift in power dynamics in the Middle East. Russia cannot protect its proxies. USA, although less consistent in its support, is a democracy. There is more than one point of entry into the US decision-making. Israel is a steady ally of India, so will be the other allies of USA in the region. New Delhi should redraw its lines of friendship and partnerships in the Middle East and elsewhere. — INFA