On Wednesday, 11 December 2024, the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS) held a seminar as part of the monthly activities of Salon Ibn Rushd, titled ‘Challenges of transition in Syria to an alternative to the fascist regime,’ coinciding with the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime and the beginning of a new phase in Syria’s history. The seminar hosted Dr. Sari Hanafi, Professor of Sociology and Head of the Islamic Studies Program at the American University of Beirut, and Dr. Hazem Nahar, Syrian intellectual and researcher and editor-in-chief of the magazine (Rowaq Maysaloon) for cultural studies. The discussion was moderated by Tunisian human rights activist Messaoud Romdhani.
The two guests began the discussion by acknowledging the role of some armed groups, including Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham, in toppling the Assad regime. Dr. Hazem Nahar expressed fears about the extent to which ideological groups in general, and not just Islamic groups, adhere to the concept of the democratic national state in the contemporary sense, and the realization that such a state is a neutral entity regarding class, sect, ideology, party, race, customs, among other issues. Nahar added that these groups will most likely attempt to color the state with their ideology, whatever it may be. Dr. Sari Hanafi found somewhat positive indicators in the discourse of the leaders of Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham, with a noticeable change in the nature of its discourse compared to Jabhat al-Nusra (Nusra Front), especially in addressing ethnic and sectarian minorities, and the discourse related to women. Hanafi hopes that Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham has absorbed the lessons learned from the Arab Spring in the countries of the region, and that this discourse is being translated into tangible actions.
However, the jihadist background of Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham is not the only challenge facing Syria’s future now. According to Nahar, there is another set of challenges, the first of which is the absence of institutions. Unlike other countries that witnessed revolutions that toppled regime heads and then devoted themselves to purging and restructuring their institutions, in Syria, there are no institutions at all. There is no national army to defend its borders, Naher continued, no security institution to protect its citizens, no judicial institution to guarantee justice and accountability, and not even educational, health, or social institutions to absorb the amount of devastation affecting all sectors and leaving millions of victims. According to Nahar, the most dangerous aspect is rebuilding the concept of the ‘Syrian people,’ these scattered groups that lived in isolation in a geographical area called ‘Syria,’ and are suffering alone and facing oppression. Now they are expected to share and come together under one national umbrella, in addition to the challenges of foreign policy. For years, Nahar added, Syria’s foreign policy was based solely on serving Assad’s interests. Now it has become necessary for Syria to outline the features of its foreign policy based on the national interest, especially in regards to Turkey and Iran. Based on all these challenges, the tasks required of the transitional government are much greater than the capabilities and problems of Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham. Nahar added that forming a transitional government that only represents Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham is a ‘strategic mistake,’ even if it is temporary. Nahar continued, ‘Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham must collaborate with all Syrians as equals and not just sects and minorities in need of protection and reassurance.’
Hanafi warned of the disaster of forming a sectarian regime in Syria. Hanafi affirmed that the success of the Syrian opposition forces depends on imposing conditions for building a national state: a non-sectarian state based on citizenship, and democratic, neutral, and national, meaning that its interests are tied to the best interest of its people only. According to Hanafi in regards to foreign policy, relations with all countries (with the exception of Israel) including Turkey, Iran, the United States, and the European Union, are necessary and important, especially during the construction and reconstruction phase, without any regional or international party imposing its conditions and interests. Nahar further affirmed, ‘It is not in Syria’s interest to enter into a state of hostility with any country now, with the exception of Israel. There is a need for balance in regional and international relations, without Syria being a pawn of one camp at the expense of the other.’ Nahar added, ‘We must build new rules for a foreign policy based on the national interest.’ The problem is not in the existence of a role for Turkey or others, Naher continued, but rather in the nature and limits of this role and its benefit in reconstruction and building, not in ruin and destruction, and the ability to invest in the interest of Syria.
As for Israel, Hanfi expects that the transitional government would have a clear position on its expansions, warning against Israel’s settlement and expansionist efforts, and its exploitation of the current state of instability. Nahar interpreted Israel’s movements beyond the buffer zone as an attempt to explore the rules and limits of engagement with the new regime, after there were clear and fixed rules and limits for engagement with the Assad regime over the years, which guaranteed the stability of his rule. Nahar stressed the importance of adhering to the Security Council resolutions in this regard and working to expand the circle of international condemnation for Israel’s expansions and crimes, whether in Gaza, Lebanon or Syria.
In conclusion, Nahar warned of the danger of giving this victory to Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham, and affirmed, ‘This victory is for all the Syrian people. Everyone paid the price, there is no favor, reward or prize for anyone…. it is for everyone.’ Syria now needs to form national political forces that derive their legitimacy from the national interest of Syria, far removed from ideologies and sectarian, religious or political affiliations. Nahar continued by underscoring that Syria needs an effective and genuine civil society that contributes with all its efforts to reconstruction and building cadres. In addition, Syria needs an independent Syrian committee for justice and accountability that helps in collecting evidence, documenting crimes, and bringing perpetrators to justice. This matter is not only about retribution, Naher emphasized. Achieving justice is healing for millions of Syrian victims, enabling them to engage again in building Syria, and would act as guarantee that such crimes will not be repeated with any future regime.
Watch the seminar online here:
Share this Post