Syria: Insight to the War

Sorry, I didn't expect to be posting again so soon. I posted most of the things I had in mind (to share) in the recent burst of activity.

I watched this documentary on the night it was broadcast. I just came across an article regarding the documentary.

BBC Documentary, ‘A History Of Syria With Dan Snow’, Was ‘Biased And Inaccurate’ Say Critics

The BBC is being heavily criticised for a “biased and inaccurate” documentary on Syria’s civil war, reports Al Arabiya.

‘A History of Syria with Dan Snow’, which aired last week, has come under fire from a number of prominent London-based Syrians who argue the programme pandered to the regime of president Bashar al-Assad.
Ghassan Ibrahim, chief executive of the London-based news site Global Arab Network (GAN), called on the BBC to issue an apology for misrepresenting the Syrian opposition.

In the documentary, presenter, Dan Snow, framed the current civil war as a struggle between secularism and religion.

He then places this in historical context by comparing it to the struggle between the Muslim Brotherhood and al-Assad’s father, Hafez in the 70s and 80s.

Ibrahim, who is Syrian, argues this takes history “out of context”.

[...]

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/03/17/bbc-documentary-history-snow_n_2896575.html?utm_hp_ref=uk?ncid=GEP

 

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/03/16/cia-may-target-syrian-extremists-with-drones-la-times/

don't be naive into thinking that they are only looking to bomb the "extremists"

 

Brother Farooq, the zionist friends support Iran and Bashar and hezbu shaytan. Bashar is strengthened by no other than Russia/zion.

hezbu shaytan are the right hand of the zionists. Iran is the greatest friend of the Zionists. All you see on the TV is propaganda by shiites that they are the opposite of zionists.

 

the ultimate aim of shiites was to disown the Sunni out of Syria, and turn Syria into a Shiite state, which is worse than a wahabi one.

1) 'Alawites stole and bought land wherever they wished. In the Syrian hinterland, setting up their own alien cities such as Souran, Al Mukharram, Rabi'ah, and towns as Ma'an, and hundreds of villages.

2) Damascus was turning into a Shiite backyard of Tehran.

3) Iran helping twelvers set up more than 500 self'flagellation houses all over Syria, especially in Raqqah and Idlib provinces.

4) Twelvers expanding their villages around Halab, Homs, Idlib, and even in deir az zour

5) Syrians jumped on the wagon of the revolutions, even though they were started by the ikhwan and wahabis

6) The propaganda is Syria is multi-religious, just as Pakistan, with significant communities of wahabis/ikhwanis


if wahabis take over, syrians will fight them, if sahyounis take over, syrians will fight them, what choice do they have? . The syrians i am talking about are Sunni Syrians. Where is mighty "Sunni" Turkey? what is Amir al Mumineen King of Morocco, a Sayyid, doing?

 

This is a pertinent point.

I remember following the situation in Syria from the start. The situation wasn't black & white and I didn't jump in blindly. Although I was drawn to their (protestors) situation and naturally sympathetic there were many questions/concerns to consider before supporting them.

- Who are they (protestors)?
- What do they want?
- What are they calling for?
- Is it Islamically justified?
- Are they informed by faith?
- Are they far from faith?
- Aren't we/they responsible for our situation?
- Shouldn't they change themselves so Allah Almighty changes their situation?
- What is the position of scholars?
- Is this going to benefit Isreal?
- What about the geopolitical factors?
- Is this situation being engineered and/or could it be hijacked?
- Due to the nature of the regime this may get bloody. Can we bear to see the bloodshed?
- Are the people prepared to pay the price for freedom?
- Will this harm the palestinian cause?

I followed the situation for several months and took guidance from Shaykh Yaqoubi's statements and positions. By that time the point of no return had been crossed.

Still I had to be satisfied in my mind and heart that Islamically it was ok to support the uprising. I had to be satsified that God Almighty was on the side of the people.

Several months into the uprising Shaykh Yaqoubi commited to the revolt about the time of going into exile. An uprising is no picnic and even the Shaykh would have to answer to God Almighty. The Shaykh had made sure to try all other avenues but Assad ignored the pleas to reduce the gap between the people and the government and compromise.

It was about the same time I commited to the uprising. The oppression and horror was unbearable. So was the regime prevarication, false pretexts and propaganda. The syrians were facing what was from my worst fears.

It was 2 videos that did it for me. They weren't particularly brutal compared to other videos coming out of syria. One was a young kid (teenager) sat on the floor with rubber tyres arround his torso. It was obvious he was in a state of daze. A uniformed soldier holding an electric cable with an electric charge on the end approaches the boy to electricute him again and the boy weakly screams and cries (in plea) in anticipation of the electric shock. This terrified me.

The second video was an old man perhaps a farmer kneeled down in a field as tall uniformed commandos/soldiers walk about him doing dropkicks on him. That could have been my own father. This had me in tears. That was it for me. Along with the green light from Shaykh Yaqoubi I commited myself. My heart was convinced and satisfied on the correctness of my decision. It was ok to back the people on the grounds of opposing oppression. I had to do something. If I didn't want to face such horrors then I must help the people in whatever I could. I was aware of the formidable propaganda effort from the regime and it's allies and I chose to counter their lies and propaganda.

That's how I became involved.

Returning to concerns about the uprising, at times it has seemed this is an education for the syrian people. They may have strayed and now Allah Almighty wishes to guide them and grant them something better after extracting a price (?). Many have turned to faith for inspiration during this struggle.

I remember early on in the uprising Sheikh Nazim talking about the Syrian people receiving a heavenly whipping soon. If I remember correct the talk was on general morality and women not adhering to Islamic requirements (or similar) but still the point is relevant.

One thing I've witnessed is how many of those who had illusions of the US have now, over the duration of the uprising, realised the hypocricy of the US and the West. They've realised the US wasn't prepared to help and instead put it's own interests and concerns over Isreal first. They've realised the US is interested in seeing both sides weakened. They are thankful that the US didn't help as expected and aren't beholden to Washington and are confident they can overthrow Assad on their own with weapons captured on the battlefield. I've seen this change in recent comments from Syrians online.

 

I haven't posted for a while. I just wanted to update on the current happenings. Of course it is my opinion and perspective.

The users on SP are vastly more knowledgeable, articulate and wiser than me and can check for themselves and form their own opinions.

Some questions were also put forward which I attemped to answer.

Perhaps you could kindly suggest a realistic, viable and acceptable solution to the crisis?

I'm no friend of the Wahaabis but under current (at times desperate) circumstances their help may be needed. Saudi's day will come. My background is the same as the majority of SP users (Sunni-Hanafi-Barelvi-Sufi).

About the situation becoming worse post-Assad. It may well get worse before it gets better. Shaykh Yaqoubi mentioned how the zionists will dominate the region for a time and then the Sufyani will appear and play a role in this context.

The people are capable of rising up against him just like they did against Assad. Don't the Hadith Paak (their authenticity can be argued) indicate opposition to the Sufyani? Otherwise why would he have to rip open the bellies of women? Imam Mahdi (as), it is said, will deal with him.

Shaykh Muhammad al-Yaqoubi on Imam Mahdi and the Sufyani (in the syrian context).

Allah Almighty Knows best.

 

Please spare us the propaganda. Bashar maybe a brutal dictator, but if your Wahabi/GCC/Israeli friends take over the situation will be much worse.

 

The figure of Syrians killed is not 100,000

It is 300,000+ including children dying from malnutrition, cold, diseases, and lack of medicine and treatment, and this figure is increasing on a fast rate.

In 'Iraq more than 600,000 Ahl al Sunnah were martyred by shiites and wahabis.

In Algeria more than 1 million were martyred, almost half of them women and children and old people, entire villages, brutally killed. Babies had their smashed on the walls. Babies had their heads chopped off and thrown in the corners. Young girls were raped and then their throats slit. Women were disembowled, and burnded alive. These were all Arabs and Muslims around the capital Algiers.

In Syria, the same has occurred, but with knives cutting across head and heart of children, women, men, old people. The surprising way of similar killing patterns indicates there is a plan for Muslims.

 

Sayyid Makki (rahimahuAllah) had a huge popular following. When he would return from hajj the city of Damascus would rejoice at his return, and it was through his support particular parties rose to power. It is known that when Shaykh Hasan Habannaka announced that Sayyid Makki will not support the Ikhwan in the elections, the outcome was that the Ikhwan lost miserably.

The Kattani's would supply the Palestinians with weapons in the 1950's and 60's. They had training camps set up in the countryside of Damascus and other places.
Shaykh Abdullah Siraj alDin was someone with widespread influence. There are many others as well like Shaykh Ahmad Habbal: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6U7HlqnXqQ

Shaykh Abdul Rahman Shaghouri: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9EBIHgbSlQ

Also the Gilaani family in Hama.

But I believe these Ulama knew that the outcome of revolution would make things worse. Allah knows best how long it will take to rebuild Halab, Homs, Hama and many other towns and cities.

 

The Ulema did see a need to overthrow the regime/Ba'ath during the sixties and the following decades. Shaykh Makki Al-Kattani who was placed under house arrest in 1963 and Hasan Habanaka who was imprisoned in 1967 are from such Ulema. There were also a number of rallies/movements opposing the regime led by Ulema in that period like the one that took place in the Grand Ommayd Mosque in 1966.

Additionally many other Ulema spoke against the regime and saw the need to remove it from power. However people were occupied with other affairs. The ulema lacked public support. Such scholars included Shaykh Ibrahim Al-Yaqoubi, Shaykh Al-Qura'a in Damascus Husayn Khatab, Shaykh Abd Al-Aziz Uyun Amin Al-Fatwa in Homs.

 

The name of the Shaykh may have been Shaykh Hassan Habannaka, who was an opponent of the Baathists in the 1960's.

Shaykh Yaqoubi mentioned the Shaykh in a statement posted on Sunniport in May 2012

Quote

People ask why the people/scholars didn't rise up before (on SP and other forums). I believe this and many other questions have been answered in previous statements by scholars which have been shared on these forums previously.

More on this same question. The elders/parents had been subdued by events like Hama. They accepted their lot and maintained silence. Perhaps didn't want to risk what little economic livelihood they had either.

Young people are different. Now they got a whiff of freedom having watched Tunisia, Egypt etc....

Also with the drought and widening economic gap many had nothing to lose.

Here is what Manaf Tlass, a defector, formerly Assad's right-hand man, said:

 

Is it true that Sayyiduna Ammar radiyAllahu anhu's grave has been destroyed by the Wahabis?
Already the regime has destroyed the shrine of Sayyiduna Khalid bin Walid radiyAllahu anhu.

This call for protests reminds me of the 'Hijrah Movement' in India.

Of course now its too late and the regime must fall. But I do believe those who initially called for the protests (before the mass killings) had no foresight.

Now Assad must go. Sufi Shaykh's must go themselves and send in their mureeds to fight the regime and the Wahabi Americans.

 

I'll try answering this but I'm relying on memory and my understanding.

Earlier on in the uprising the rebels were buying (at inflated prices) weapons off the black market (eg smuggled in from Lebanon) or buying them from regime forces.

More recently the rebels have been capturing bases and coming across huge stocks of weapons and ammunition. They've even captured tanks and heavy weapons. The groups who capture such stocks tend not to share although this may be changing as groups work together to capture locations and agree to divide booty.

Many rebels have complained of lack of weapons and ammo, in particular heavy weapons. This shortage restricts their ability to maintain prolonged battles and sieges.

Previously Turkey/Qatar/KSA have wanted to provide arms, and in particular anti-tank and anti-aircraft) but US wouldn't give the green light due to fears those weapons would fall into questionable hands and maybe used in future against US/Isreal (or airliners etc).

My understanding is some lighter weapons (guns, RPG's) were still being provided even despite US position. The various countries were said to be supplying certain groups (perhaps Muslim Brootherhood or the moderately Islamic 'Tawheed brigade' in Aleppo).

Only now it seems that the west is getting serious about supplying weapons and the US maybe be preparing to give the green light. They might supply the normal rebels (FSA). Perhaps they are worried at the successes of the hardline groups like Jabhat al Nusra who are doing the heavy lifting. These groups are earning the respect of the people and fellow rebels.

Only recent days the EU refused to lift the embargo on arms to rebels. David Cameron suggested today the UK may go ahead and supply them anyway.

Maybe they can see the end game approaching and feel the need to gain influence for post-Assad.

 

I was looking for a quote by Davis Lesch which I couldn't find however, I came across an interview he did in late 2012.

David Lesch is an author and a Professor of Middle East History. He formed a friendship and close relationship with Bashar Assad (during mid 2000's)and in co-operation with him authored a few books on Assad. Lesch knew him up close and personal and had high hopes in the leader.

This headline from the LA Times gives an idea of the relationship:

Here's an extract from the IPI Global Observatory interview:

WH = Host
DL = David Lesch

Interview with David Lesch, Author of Syria: Fall of the House of Assad

November 20, 2012

[...]

WH: What is Bashar’s own view of what is happening in his country? Did he anticipate that the Arab Spring would engulf him, or does he really believe the official line that this is the work of outsiders and Jihadis and maybe even Washington to topple his regime?

DL: I can almost guarantee you that when the Arab Spring seeped into Syria in March 2011 that Bashar and the ruling circle were absolutely shocked, because for several months, Bashar, as well as the mouthpieces of the regime that actually expressed support for the protestors in Egypt and Tunisia and elsewhere–they were commenting that Bashar was the man of the people.

He was relatively young—forty-five of the time—whereas the leaders in these other countries that had been overthrown, that were in the process of being overthrown, were septuagenarian and octogenarian authoritarian rulers that were unpopular with the people and were lackeys of the United States and Israel–whereas Bashar, of course, had been one of the heads of the resistance forces to what they call the American project in the Middle East, and of course against Israel, and supportive of resistance groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah, alliances against Iran that played well on the Arab street.

So they really felt they could weather the storm, and many people outside of Syria thought they could weather the storm of the Arab Spring, and there were many reasons, beyond the reasons I just listed, that they felt they could weather the storm.

In fact, Bashar had commissioned three separate reports from his national security apparatus early in the year on whether or not the Arab Spring would seep into Syria, and all three said no. So he felt pretty secure about his position at the time, and I think that feeds into the notion of why, from the beginning–his first speech on the issue on March 30, 2011, where he blamed terrorists and external enemies of the state for the unrest–is that he thought he was popular beyond condemnation in his own country, and therefore it had to be outside forces because his people who loved him would not dare rise up against him.

Read more:

http://theglobalobservatory.org/interviews/388-interview-with-david-lesch-author-of-syria-fall-of-the-house-of-assad.html

Some other articles by the author (or referring to him):

The Dictator of Damascus (September 20, 2012)

Bashar al-Assad: behind the mask (June 15, 2012)

 

I saved a comment from Syria Comment in my 'favourites' a few days ago to use on an occasion like this. It gives some context to the uprising.

603. Observer said:

Catch me if you can. This has been the real revolution in Syria. Let me explain

First: no one thought least of all the stupid prethident {mocking Bashar's lisp} that the Arab Spring would come to Syria knowing that Syria was not entirely in the pocket of the Israeli-American agenda as Ben Ali and Mubarak were.

Second: no one thought that the people would ask for regime change. Most of us predicted that they would ask for regime reform without change of the leadership having seen the civil war in both Lebanon and Iraq

Third: no one thought that the peaceful demonstrations would continue knowing the pervasive presence and brutality of the 17 branches of the security house of cards.

Fourth: no one thought that the harsh and brutal crackdown would lead to an armed revolution knowing how massive the security apparatus is and the placement of bases all around the country to nip in the bud any revolution.

Fifth: no one thought that the revolution would not only grow but defeat the units of the regime slowly but surely and with meager resources mostly taken from the regime itself.

Sixth: no one thought that the regime is truly that weak and isolated that it had to resort to only its sect based militia to fight back and now to the use of massive indiscriminate killing and revenge.

When pro regime trolls post insults and " I do not care if 500 000 " are killed it also brings me to

Seventh: the regime has lost both the tactical and the strategic battle. To think that it can win and get rehabilitated and to be accepted again in the region and on the world stage and to continue to do business as usual is clearly not going to happen. It is now in the process of a begging spree with various delegation sent to Tehran and New Delhi asking for wheat and oil and banking help as they are unable to continue to function.

Eight: holding an office building in Kafr Sousseh is no longer equivalent to a functioning state. We are now seeing the slow dissolution of the state structure as well as the dissolution of the country. Who in his right mind can think that a few years can efface the depravity and horror the people are going through? It will take generations to heal of at all.

I thing Syrian Hamster said it most eloquently {pointing out delusions of pro-regime:}

Slavery is Freedom and
Defeat is Victory

Clearly some here have posted that the loss of Raqqa was a trap to destroy the rebels and the post that the local militia in Bab Amr were not well trained is not a defeat.

How on earth can a bunch of young people without formal training and with meager resources and with months of being besieged defeat the army in Bab Amr is just another tribute to the revolution that is bound to succeed.

Eat your hearts out as the regime is being tossed piece by small piece into the dustbin of history.

 

That might be true.

I remember early on it was said that Russia advised the regime to keep the death toll at an average maximum of ~20 a day. This was a manageble level to avoid provoking further international outrage or intervention. This allowed Russia to continue to shield the regime and keep the UN Security Council at bay.

All eyes were on Syria and it would have been difficult for the regime to go Hama style (1980's in which 10's of thousands were massacred) against the people.

Anyway gradually the average rose to over ~50 deaths a day and now it's probably over 100 a day. Everyone's become accustomed to the situation and the regime has avoided an international reaction to the increased escalation.

Unlike Algeria and Iraq, for the first time we have been able to follow a crisis in detail with all the horrors captured on video and image.

 

people also miss that he is a mere puppet whose strings are pulled by others. in any case, it is good that people are opposing the alevi/baathist system itself.

as with anything, the wahabi devils hijack it and mess it up for others

Egyptian, Tunisian and Libyan revolutions were manufactured and the proof is in the pudding - as some people say - if the revolution was truly genuine and empowering the people (regardless if Islamic law was enforced or not), no way would it have been supported by the colonial powers; in the case of Libya even limited military support was provided. according to them, it is just about replacing old and used puppets with newer "democratic" puppets, like the ones in Pakistan (even tahir loves to call himself a "democrat")

there are conspiracy theories that khomeini's revolution too was manufactured by outside powers. Allah knows what the truth is but things are certainly not as simple as we see them. the US for all it's antagonism to iran, is now openly collaborating with the shias of Iraq who merely function as an extension of iranian power, and they know it full well as does the rest of the world.

if the Syrian revolutionaries get the kind of support from the "international community" as the Libyans got, the chances are that it is just about other devils using the masses to install a new puppet in place and capture a newer colony.

similar to how the americans used the good intentions Muslims to get rid of the russians from Afghanistan. back in those days "jihad" was a word the US government didn't frown upon and itself supported; and therefore neither did any house-"Muslim"-scholars. now the house-"Muslims" write elaborate theories about battling with the nafs and purifying the heart



Allah knows best what the situation is, but the cold war between democrats as tahir calls them, and commies was certainly not as damning to Muslim interests as the current status quo is.

-----

one question people never ask is where do rebels, revolutionaries, terrorists etc get their weapons from. this is a complex and messed up situation with multiple devilish stakeholders

 

Brother KS, I understand your frustration and your previously stated concern regarding the harm being done to a bastion of sunni learning, however it's a moot point.

I could talk about how Assad is responsible for the whole situation due to his blunders.

The question is would the situation have blossomed into a full revolution if Assad hadn't over-reacted and forced the issue?

Children had drawn some graffiti on a wall and were detained and tortured. Their families were insulted when they went to ask for their release. There were just stirrings of protests and even then it was about the release of the children. Assad hit hard and then the protests began to spread, calling for reforms. Assad hit harder and the calls changed to demands of overthrowing of the regime.

For 6 months they were peaceful protests with the slogan 'salmiya' (peaceful)adopted by the revolution.

The harder the regime hit the greater the defiance of the people. They had only one thing to hit back with and that was their defiance. Things had changed following Tunisia/Egypt/Libya. The people weren't going to be cowed down again.

The revolution wasn't planned. It just evolved. Assad forced the situation at every point. He forced the militarization of the opposition. His actions made the decision for the people.

The point of no return was crossed early in the uprising and became an existential battle. We are where we are. The people have to see the revolution home now. You know what they say about 'half-a-revolution'.

In the past (70's or 80's) a well known scholar did organise a demonstration in Damascus in response to a book insulting to God Almighty or Islam. The turnout wasn't as large as it could've been. The scholar was arrested. Since then the scholars refrained from calling the people to rise up as they wouldn't respond.

Things were different this time (2011). To everyones surprise, the people made the move and offered the sacrifices which put scholars and everyone on the spot. They had to make a decision whether to back the people or otherwise. I remember Sh. Yaqoubi commited to the uprising probably about 6 months into it after unsuccessfully pleading to the regime to compromise, offer reforms, and choose dialogue in the previous months. As the uprising has progressed more and more scholars have joined the uprising.

Under Bashar the economic gap between the wealthy and poor grew. Corruption increased and he neglected the poor and countryside unlike his father. There was also a drought in parts of Syria in the last decade that hit the people hard. It was this very area, Daraa in the south, from which the uprising began and first spread.

Bashar is just the head of a brutal system. It has shown it's true face during this uprising.

 

these things are not like, hey let us hold a conference.

there is the fear factor and fear of the unknown. in 2011, the world is changed. and people have seen what has happened in tunisia, egypt etc and say, 'if they can do it, why not us?'

this is the reason the world over, governments try to keep the media in their control. perhaps only in the US, decent ordinary and probably sympathetic humans - believed that iraq and afghan wars were necessary.

this is known as manufacturing consent.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-21764557

What I don't understand why the revolution was necessary at a time when things were more stable in Syria? And at a time when America is engineering things in the Middle East?

What I mean is that was it not necessary to overthrow the Assad regime in the 80's or the 90's when the oppression was worse? Prior to the revolution the oppression of Bashar was no where near of that of his father. In his father's era things were worse.

So if it were necessary to overthrow Bashar at that time (2011), why was it not necessary before?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21702546