Article

2005-03-04 Syria-Lebanon-Iran

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by tipper 2005-03-04 09:41|| || Front Page|| [6 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 wow! Great read! More articles by this guy, please :-)

This gave me more optimism than I have had to date. It was an interesting insight into the way that Syrian's see this whole conflict. What I took from it was two things - 1. Unlike Westerners, who respond more to "convictions" or "what's right", Arabs shamelessly respond to power. Times have changed and the way power is weilded in the 21st Century has greatly changed and the more intelligent of the Arab world are making an assessment to deal with it. Kind of reminds me of fighters in Afghanistan who, depending on how the battle went - could just surrender and change sides. No shame it in, it's just plain smart.

The Syrian regime today should learn from Hafez al-Assad and do what it takes to maintain "Syria first", even if, sadly, this would be at the expense of its interests in Lebanon, Iraq and Palestine. "Syria first" means bowing before the storm that is heading toward Damascus at monumental speed, and at this stage, doing what it takes to please the neo-conservatives in the White House. Some might call it weakness, others might say it is abandoning Arab nationalism, but to the average Syrian, it would be great conventional wisdom. It is the average Syrian who will suffer if war breaks out in Syria, therefore, they are the ones entitled to say what suits Syria most. "Syria first" they are saying all over Syria, and apparently, Assad has heard their calls, and is responding promptly.

A lesson from history
During the first Arab-Israeli war of 1948, the leaders of Syria faced a dilemma that greatly resembles the one facing Assad today. They asked: do we accept the reality that we are unable to face the storm heading toward Syria? Meaning, we abandon our commitments to Palestine, accept the United Nations partition plan of 1947, and raise the slogan "Syria first". Or do we live up to our history of Arab nationalism, and the legend we created for ourselves, and gamble with Syria's future by sending its army to war in Palestine?

snip

Some argued in 1948 that they did not want history to say that Israel was created without the Arabs putting up a fight against it, regardless of whether they won the war or not. But in fact, history today does not mention the bravery of the Arabs for going to war in 1948, all it mentions is their weakness.

Pan Arabism has officially failed. May in rest in peas.

Posted by 2b 2005-03-04 10:26:04 AM|| 2005-03-04 10:26:04 AM|| Front Page Top

04:14 Iwillrapeyourmother
00:01 Sobiesky
23:59 CrazyFool
23:52 DMFD
23:45 Alaska Paul
23:40 Alaska Paul
23:36 Phil Fraering
23:36 BH
23:34 BH
23:23 Zhang Fei
23:10 Sock Puppet of Doom
23:07 Bomb-a-rama
22:58 JP
22:58 Sock Puppet of Doom
22:46 Sock Puppet of Doom
22:44 CrazyFool
22:42 Sobiesky
22:33 Classical_Liberal
22:13 CrazyFool
22:11 CrazyFool
22:08 JosephMendiola
22:02 Sheik Abu Bin Ali Al-Yahood
21:58 Bomb-a-rama
21:49 JosephMendiola