The Syrian uprising on its first anniversary

The Syrian uprising on its first anniversary

It has been a year since the breakout of uprisings against the Baathist regime in Syria. The events have not only demonstrated the cruelty of the regime in Syria but have also proved to be a political litmus test both regionally and globally.

In this way, the uprisings also set geopolitics against morality and geostrategy against principles. Syria is no longer a mere political issue in the context of Arab revolutions, it has become a test. History will record those who either passed or failed the exam. 

The domestic political agendas of all powers, who are actual or possible actors in the Syrian issue, will also see a lot of action this year. While the United States and France are rearing up for their elections, Russia has not yet completed its political consolidation. While there has been quite a lot political movement in Iran both regarding the nuclear issue and its domestic politics, China is preparing for a political transition.

Syria is facing the risk of paradoxically becoming bait for domestic politics and a non-issue dealt with indifference due to these domestic political developments for all actors except Turkey. The Bashar al-Assad regime acutely recognizes the political illusion this paradox creates. 

The Baathist regime perceives the void created by the actual or potential actors occupied otherwise with their domestic politics as an opportunity to intensify the massacres. The regime aims to suppress the uprisings in 2012 with this bloody method.

This is nothing but another manifestation of a dead-end and a forcing of the boundaries of that end. What the Syrian regime fails to see is that this space carved between the political occupations of 2012 and geopolitical balances is about to expire. The geopolitical balances can remain quiet only so far in the face of the bloody massacres in 2012.

Furthermore, all the actors of the post-Camp David Order are voicing their discomfort about Syria and are openly supporting the uprisings. The U.S. is making an effort to avoid a directly oppositional stance in its relationships with these new actors in the face of the wave of transformation sweeping through the area. Miscalculations by al-Assad and his supporters can, all of a sudden, make Syria the focus of the election campaign in the U.S.

Unfortunately, it seems like the weeks and months to come will bring more bloodshed and tears as we predicted earlier. The Syrian Army will continue to dissolve. The void left by a dissolving army will be filled by more police, intelligence agencies and the Shabeeha.

This will translate into more massacres. The two external (Russia and Iran) supporters of the Baathist regime are fading into the background, becoming silent in this process, while Iran is also facing the possibility of becoming a target in the election campaign in the United States. This will strengthen Iran’s hand in its attempt to maintain tensions by proxy via Syria. 

The picture drawn, in any case, is pointing to a vicious cycle for the Baath regime. All this does not necessarily translate into an immediate military intervention in Syria. However, it will become increasingly harder for the Syrian regime, which is already under a heavy embargo, to survive politically and economically in the face of intensifying international pressure. Another possibility for the bloodshed to stop would become meaningless.