Syrian uprising poised on the edge of a knife

The Middle East has taken a radically new approach towards Syria but there is no guarantee that this will work, as the Damascus regime continues to slaughter its own citizens for taking a stand against the government.

First, it was the Arab League’s bold suspension of Syria. The move was welcomed by many in the international community, particularly the western countries, which have been trying to put the squeeze on Syria through the United Nations Security Council, but to no avail.

Then, Jordan’s King Abdullah called on Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to step down and “make sure whoever comes behind ... has the ability to change the status quo”.

King Abdullah’s candid remarks marked the turning point in the region’s approach to Damascus. He said that if Assad has the interest of his country at heart, he should not only step down but also “create an ability to reach out and start a new phase of Syrian political life”.

He added that the increasingly isolated Assad has “reform in his blood”. That, of course, remains to be seen. But for the time being, it doesn’t appear to be the case. The Syrian leader has not given any indication that he is about to reform and open up the country’s political system, much less step down from power without a fight to the bitter end.

The eight-month-long Syrian uprising has left 3,500 people dead. Most of the victims were anti-government protestors. But some were members of Syria’s security forces, who had defected.

Through a spokesperson at its embassy in Washington, the Syrian government said the legitimacy of Assad’s rule comes from the Syrian people and suggested that this ongoing conflict concerns the Syrian people only, not outsiders.

However, in the same breath, Syria wants the international community, namely its neighbouring Arab states, to adopt “a more constructive role to help Syria overcome this crisis”.

It’s obvious that Damascus is not interested in what its neighbours are saying, as the cold shoulder to King Abdullah has demonstrated.

Apparently, the regime thinks it is in a good position to survive this uprising. Its strategy appears to be that of playing one faction against the other while at the same time using the might of the state security apparatus to immediately crack down on the opposition whenever it moves towards cohesiveness.

But the opposition is not the only force Assad has to reckon with. The decision by Arab states to turn against the Damascus regime could further damage Syria’s economy at a time when it is already unravelling. The move could pose a graver challenge to Assad’s survival than the uprising itself. Unemployment is rising and government income is taking a beating. Tourism, a major industry, has come to a complete halt.

Besides the economy, the regime’s pride has also taken a beating. For decades the regime prided itself as being the champion of Arab nationalism. In fact, it is this banner that has permitted the regime under the leadership of the Al-Assad clan – from a religious minority – to run the country for so long. It was a common denominator provided by the concept of Arab nationalism that permitted the minority Shii’tes and the majority Sunni to co-exist.

But unravelling the Assad regime should not be reduced to, or equated to, a clash between ethnic and religious groups. The battle is still very much between an opressive regime and pro-democracy demonstrators who want greater freedom and liberty.

Just days ago, the European Union expanded its sanctions against Syria to include 18 more individuals associated with the Assad regime. The EU has also obstructed any Syrian access to the European Investment Bank.

To what extent the economic downturn can be attributed to sanctions is not clear. But one thing is clear: the squeeze is on and something will have to give. Either the regime will collapse or the protestors will be broken by any means necessary. In other words, the future could be bloody, and the world community will have to take that into consideration and think about the kind of measures it might be willing to take in response.