What the Syrian Crackdown Means

Thursday, May 12, 2011

Welcome to Politics Bites, where every afternoon at It's A Free Country, we bring you the unmissable quotes from the morning's political conversations on WNYC. Today on the Brian Lehrer Show, Anthony Shadid, New York Times bureau chief in Beirut, and Joshua Landis, director of the Center for Middle East Studies, associate professor at the University of Oklahoma and writer of the Syria Comment newsletter, discuss the latest on the uprising and crackdown in Syria.

director of the Center for Middle East Studies and Associate Professor at the 
University of Oklahoma. He writes the Syria Comment newsletter.discusses the latest on the uprising and crackdown in Syria.

The Syrian government is waging a ferocious crackdown on protesters calling for political change as it tries to intimidate people into staying at home.  An estimated 9,000 people have been detained in the two month long uprising, with some people detained multiple times by different security forces. Shadid says that the intense crackdown is actually the Bashar al-Assad government's idea of an exit strategy from the crisis they consider the protests.

Crackdown as exit-strategy

The crackdown is the exit. How he is going to end this crisis is a crackdown. He'll kill as many people and arrest as many people as his government needs to stop these protests from happening on successive Fridays. And there are some indications at this point that he'll be able to do that...We're talking about one of the, if not the most, remarkable bout of repression that the region has witnessed in months or even years.

Shadid says the repression campaign is being carried out in such a random fashion that he gathers its purpose is to restore the sense of fear in the country that's helped keep the government in place. al-Assad is betting that a crackdown will actually sustain support for his government from the business elite, the middle class and minority groups who are afraid of chaosand scapegoating. The economy, which depends largely on tourism and foreign investment, has already begun to reel drastically from the instability, and Shadid thinks that in itself might be more dangerous for al-Assad's regime than the protests.

We're dealing with the arithmetic of fear. Fear of the unknown, recreating fear inside the country which helped the government justify its rule, and fear of countries abroad, namely the U.S. and Europe, of what might follow President Assad.

Army's ties are deeply woven into Syrian government

In Egypt and Tunisia, where protesters succeeded in overthrowing their dictators, there was a real fissure between the government and security forces. Because this is not the case in Syria, Shadid said it might be more difficult for the uprising to succeed.

At least with the elite units when we talk about the Republican guard or the 4th Division and more importantly I think the intelligence services, those are tightly knit into the structure of the government, and that's a government that operates along lines of clan and family loyalty.

Landis agreed, adding that its Syria's deep tribal and sectarian divisions that make it harder for soldiers to join the protest movement. The military establishment is dominated by the Alawi tribe--that of al-Assad--that makes up about twelve percent of the country.

If these people turn on their President and they divide amongst themselves, they're all going to lose their jobs. The Egyptian army could turn on their president and they knew that whoever came next would hire them all back, maybe five or six would be prosecuted. But the Syrian army would crumble. The Baath party, a million and a half people is going to be eliminated. This could mean two million people lose their jobs.

Will the U.S. get involved?

The protests have gained legitimacy internationally because of the immensity of the crackdown, and because the opposition has dominated the media flow out of Syria. Shadid said there is no question the country is experiencing a revolutionary change.

There are people who are joining these protests who would have never joined them in the first place. There is absolutely a new dynamic in Syria that did not exist there before, an earth shattering dynamic in the Syrian context. But the government is not thinking about that long term though, it's thinking about the short term, it's in survival mode.

However, Landis thinks it's doubtful that western powers will step in and call Assad's government illegitimate.

The fear here is that should Syria fall into civil war like Iraq or Lebanon there is no alternative, military structure to step in. Nobody wants another failed state, particularly in the center of the Middle East. If there were four million refugees as there were in Iraq, where are they going to go? They're going to go stampeding into Lebanon and particularly Turkey where there is no Visa requirement anymore, and they're going to go to Europe.

Where does bin Laden fit in?

Bin Laden and the Islamist movements have had minimal roles in the uprisings raging across north Africa and the Middle East. Shadid said the Arab Spring is the new dominant narrative.

The Arab Spring is the climatic, almost definitive epitaph to any role or any influence bin Laden might have had inside the Arab world itself. I'm not trying to dismiss bin Laden's phenomenon by any means but the Arab world is gripped by a dynamic here that is revolutionary, unprecedented perhaps one of the most remarkable movements in modern Arab history and that dynamic has absolutely overwhelmed anything that bin Laden represented.


More in:

Comments [5]


Oh, my -- we are bringing the DU weapons to Libya. Have a little long lived death, illness, and birth defects with your possible new freedom, Libyans!

With the US, you get poisoned, long term. Such a deal.

Cry for these people.

May. 12 2011 02:42 PM

Ah. Another area of our nation's leadership's hypocrisy: Reporters are to be protected. Unless they discomfort the US.

If we don't like what they're doing. Then we send some to Guantanamo or other "detention" areas or take them out willy nilly.

I am concerned about the various reporters killed and those "detained." By any government

But we do it; we did a lot of it. Now, when we want to make our current bogeymen look bad our leaders are so very concerned about the welfare of reporters.

The incongruity of how we treated Al Jazeera reporters in Iraq and how we now show great concern for an Al Jazeera reporter caught up in the Syrian repression.

How many Al Jazeera journalists did we kill in Iraq? I've forgotten. It's not like that gets referenced when our leaders express strong concern for the safety of reporters in Syria...or Libya. Yemen?

(Probably Syria sent the Al Jazeera reporter to Iran because of they relatively close relations between Syrian and Iran and her carrying an Iranian passport. I hope she is well treated and in release soon. She did report she was in Syria on a tourist visa, but was reporting anyway. What would have happened to a foreign reporter in this nation had that occurred? If the reporter carried a passport of a nation with whom we declare we have...animosities. We don't declare war anymore except in the abract. War on Terror. Now, what is it called? So that it can go on and on and on....)

May. 12 2011 11:26 AM
Amy from Manhattan

Wait a minute, a single country can declare another country's gov't. illegitimate?

May. 12 2011 11:18 AM

Syria's leadership is brutal, that is a given.

But...who are we in the US to be calling them "brutal" given our own recent history of killing civilians in our various "nations of interest"?

Have the Assads, even with the father's gory massacre, killed as many people as the US has with sanctions, bombs, missles, and then the residue of radiation from our depleted uranium treated weapons giving death and suffering long after the actual bombs have fallen? And, of course, there's the results of disrupted societies and civil wars.

We kill so many people, yet we don't really try to track how many. Unless they're Number One's or Two's, sometimes Three's on a list we keep somewhere. Our "collateral damage" counts tend to magically stay under 30, since that number triggers an "invetigation." Or used to -- I don't know what does currently.

I just get so uncomfortable about our hypocrisy: Our killing good; their killing bad.

It's not easy on one's conscience to live in a global empire.

May. 12 2011 11:16 AM
Priya from Brooklyn, NY

I read that an Al Jazeera reporter was extradited/ deported by Syria to Iran. How does this reflect what is happening within Iran, as I thought Ahmadinejad had, oddly enough, supported a number of the movements.

May. 12 2011 10:59 AM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.

Get the WNYC Morning Brief in your inbox.
We'll send you our top 5 stories every day, plus breaking news and weather.


About It's A Free Country ®

Archive of It's A Free Country articles and posts. Visit the It's A Free Country Home Page for lots more.

Supported by

WNYC is supported by the Charles H. Revson Foundation: Because a great city needs an informed and engaged public.  Learn more at


Supported by