[Midden-Oosten] Leila Al-Shami on Syria and George Floyd protests: the lessons

[Jeff]

The US protests: Lessons from Syria
June 6, 2020 by Leila Al Shami

https://leilashami.wordpress.com/2020/06/06/the-us-protests-lessons-from-syria/

Originally published at Al-Jumhuriya

PHOTO: Mural by Aziz Asmar and Anis Hamdoun in Idlib. In solidarity with 
protesters in the US. 1 June 2020
    
https://www.aljumhuriya.net/sites/default/files/styles/cover_portrait/public/floyd-mural.jpg


      Over the past few days, an uprising has raged in Minnesota and 
elsewhere in the United States in response to the murder of George Floyd 
by police. In the spirit of solidarity with those on the streets, I was 
prompted to think about the lessons from the Syrian revolution that 
might be applicable to the US context.


People rise up when they can no longer breathe

      In Syria, the first protest to take place was a direct response to 
police brutality. On 17 February, 2011, some 1,500 people gathered in 
the Damascene neighborhood of Hareeqa following an incident in which 
traffic police beat up the son of a local trader. Yet the wider context 
for the uprising was four decades of political repression and 
socioeconomic injustice under the Assad dictatorship, and the impetus 
given by the transnational revolutionary wave that was emerging across 
the region. Protests grew exponentially in response to further acts of 
violence by the state against protesters. The brutal killing of 
13-year-old Hamza al-Khateeb, who died in police custody after being 
detained at a protest in Daraa, caused thousands to take to the streets. 
The more vicious the state’s response to the protests, the more it 
galvanized the Syrian people. Soon demands for “reform” became cries for 
“revolution.”

      The brutal killing of George Floyd also acted as a catalyst for 
protests in the US. It comes, however, on the back of long-term, 
systemic societal and institutional racism; the social, political, and 
economic marginalization of black communities; and a long history of 
police brutality which disproportionately targets black men. The 
response of the state to the current protests will be one factor 
determining the future direction the movement takes.


Social movements are diverse and contain many different currents

      The Syrian revolution was characterized by its diversity. It 
contained men and women from all of Syria’s different localities and 
ethnic and religious groups united around the aims of freedom, 
democracy, and social justice. Undoubtedly it also contained diverse 
political currents, as beyond these immediate aims no political program 
for the future of Syria was articulated; it was assumed that would be 
worked out through an electoral process. Whilst the movement certainly 
contained many contradictory elements, extremist Islamists did not have 
a visible presence initially, despite propaganda to that effect by the 
state and its supporters. Extremist Islamism grew over the years in 
response to the violent chaos wrought by the state, following the 
trajectory of the peaceful protest movement towards armed struggle. Free 
Syrians then had to battle on two fronts; against both the Assad regime 
and extremist Islamist elements which tried to hijack the movement.

      By contrast, in the US, far-right elements are visible on the 
streets from the outset, trying to capitalize on and hijack the protests 
for their own ends. Their presence is not a reason to reject the whole 
movement. Progressives should stand in solidarity with progressive 
elements and communities most impacted by state violence. Through 
solidarity, we give strength to those who reflect the values and ideals 
we hold, and support them to grow and effectively challenge their 
opponents.


The state will slander a movement as extremist, while targeting 
progressives and letting extremism flourish

      In Syria, peaceful protesters were smeared as “Islamist 
extremists.” This tarring of the movement was used as justification for 
the state’s escalation of violence and acts of repression, and aimed to 
justify its crackdown on the opposition to both internal and external 
audiences. At the same time as the state began rounding up thousands of 
peaceful pro-democracy protestors for probable death-by-torture, it 
released Islamist extremists from prison. Some of those released from 
state custody in 2011 and 2012 went on to form the most hard-line 
Islamist brigades, such as Zahran Alloush, the former head of Jaysh 
al-Islam; Hassan Abboud, the former head of Ahrar al-Sham; and numerous 
figures who became part of the leadership of the al-Qaeda-linked Jabhat 
al-Nusra, as well as ISIS. Assad also encouraged acts of violence by 
shabbiha (sectarian regime-aligned militias) in order to galvanize a 
violent response from the opposition and encourage a spiral of violence, 
in which the state—being better-armed—would always have the upper hand.

      In the US context, numerous videos have emerged of police targeting 
peaceful demonstrators with tear gas and arrest, as armed fascists roam 
the streets unmolested and appear to provoke acts of violence. Donald 
Trump has already declared the anti-fascist movement (ANTIFA) as the 
main threat, accusing it of responsibility for all acts of violence and 
looting, and announcing his intent to designate it a terrorist 
organization. Trump supporters and far-right groups are using tactics 
designed to instigate a violent response.

      Democrats will always be the main threat to authoritarian regimes, 
as they embody the alternative. Framing the opposition as “terrorists” 
enables the state to justify an extreme crackdown on the opposition, 
portraying its actions as a security response (a “War on Terror”) 
designed to re-establish stability. It further allows the state to 
dehumanize its opponents, to encourage support for their liquidation. 
Assad labeled Syrian protesters “germs;” Trump sees protesting Americans 
as “thugs.”  The threat of violence will be used to try to deter people 
from protesting. Both Assad and Trump threatened to use the military to 
crush the movement (Assad followed through on his threat).


Opponents of the movement will accuse protesters of being 
outside-agitators or hirelings of foreign powers

      Syrian revolutionaries have been denied all agency for instigating 
an uprising against a repressive regime. From the outset, the regime’s 
public response to the protests was framed by conspiracy theories. State 
media spoke of “infiltrators” and “armed gangs” causing chaos, and of 
“foreign powers” and “Salafist terrorists” inciting violence. In Assad’s 
first televised address to the People’s Assembly in response to the 
protests in March 2011, he warned that Syria’s “enemies work every day 
in an organized, systematic, and scientific manner in order to undermine 
Syria’s stability.” The Syrian state was cast as a victim, despite 
holding an absolute monopoly on violence. Over the years, both the 
regime and its supporters have stuck to this narrative. Syrian 
revolutionaries have been slandered as agents of the US, Israel, and the 
Gulf states, notwithstanding the absolute idiocy of the claim that the 
CIA could somehow mobilize hundreds of thousands of people from Qamishli 
to Daraa, or that Syrians would be content to have their children 
tortured to death until some clever white man told them to do something 
about it.

      In the US, Minnesota’s governor Tim Walz has claimed that the 
majority of those looting and destroying property are from outside the 
cities, bent on “attacking civil society” and “instilling fear.”  
Insinuations have also been made that the protest movement is supported 
or indeed instigated by Russia. On CNN, former National Security Advisor 
Susan Rice said, “I would not be surprised to learn that they have 
fomented some of these extremists on both sides using social media … I 
wouldn’t be surprised to learn that they are funding it in some way, 
shape, or form.”

      In times of uprising conspiracy theories will flourish. They are 
meant to distract from the fact that there are real people involved with 
real grievances, and their aim is to support the state by discrediting 
the opposition. At some point the conspiracies will inevitably take on 
an anti-Semitic turn and lead back to George Soros and “the Jews.” 
Conspiracy theories may be spread by people formally seen as allies. The 
best way to guard against this is to listen to the voices of those 
directly involved in the movement on the ground and constantly check the 
accuracy of sources.


The legitimacy of government resides in the people

      Syrians have been repeatedly told by outsiders that they should 
abandon their struggle, and accept being tortured, raped, gassed, 
bombed, and starved because Assad is the “legitimate” ruler of Syria. 
This is said despite the fact Assad has never once won a free and fair 
election, but rather inherited the dictatorship from his father. Indeed, 
holding elections was and remains the key demand of the opposition to 
the regime. Apparently, Syrians are not ready for democracy, and, should 
Assad fall, what would take his place would be worse than the current 
genocidal regime. Yet in areas liberated from the regime, Free Syrians 
held the first democratic elections in four decades; set up local 
councils to self-govern their communities; and fought hard to defend 
their autonomy despite repeated attacks on these civil structures by 
both the regime and authoritarian Islamists.

      The US, by contrast, is a democracy, and Trump was elected 
president. Given the grievances of a large section of the population, 
however, this is not a reason to oppose the current protests. People 
always have the right to challenge and change their leaders, elected or 
not.


Whether foreign states support or condemn a movement (or the state) will 
solely be based on their own interests

      Many states rhetorically supported Syria’s protest movement, but 
few gave practical support. The US itself, for example, issued many 
statements calling for Assad to go, but prevented the armed opposition 
from receiving the heavy weaponry it needed to defend communities from 
the aerial assault which was the main cause of Syria’s destruction, 
massive death toll, and waves of displacement, and which could have 
changed the balance of power on the ground. The US’s support was driven 
by a desire to force Assad to the negotiating table, rather than 
overthrow the regime. When Washington did eventually intervene 
militarily in Syria, it was only in the context of the “War on Terror” 
against ISIS. By contrast, foreign powers such as Russia and Iran gave 
significant military and diplomatic support to the regime. Russia’s 
interest was likely determined primarily by a wish to provide a 
counter-balance to US interests in the region (rather than by any love 
for the Syrian regime), as well as to test out new weaponry on the 
Syrian people. Iran has always seen the Syrian regime as an ally 
providing a link between Tehran and Iran’s client Hezbollah in Lebanon.

      As for the US, figures from the European Union have stated they are 
“shocked and appalled” by the killing of George Floyd, and have 
reiterated their support for peaceful protest, in language very similar 
to that used in response to Syria’s protests over eight years ago. 
China, furious at Washington’s support for the pro-democracy movement in 
Hong Kong, and criticism over its handling of the Coronavirus, has been 
more outspoken. It has rhetorically backed the protest movement, saying 
it highlights the country’s “chronic disease” of racism, never mind that 
the Chinese state is currently holding more than a million Uighur 
Muslims in concentration camps.

      Of course, states are not our allies. Thankfully, Americans are not 
in a situation where their state is using weaponry designed for 
inter-state conflict against protesting communities, rendering them more 
dependent on outside assistance to protect themselves from annihilation. 
Despite their declarations, at the end of the day states will work 
together to support state stability and crush any popular demands seen 
as too radical or threatening the existing order in a way they cannot 
themselves control. What is important is that people stand together, 
shoulder to shoulder, in solidarity against authoritarian regimes, 
police brutality, racism, patriarchy, and socioeconomic injustice. In 
this regard, the US protest movement has so far attracted the solidarity 
of people and communities across the globe. Free Syrians were not so 
fortunate. Through people-to-people solidarity we can exchange views, 
tactics, and experience of struggle. Having lived nine years and 
counting of revolutionary struggle, Syrians have a lot to offer to 
Americans in this regard. Together we are strong.


An authoritarian state will target the media

      Under the Assad dictatorship, Syria has never had a free media. 
During the revolution, journalists became key targets for arrest and 
assassination due to their witnessing and reporting on state brutality. 
Countless Syrian citizen journalists have lost their lives trying to 
report the regime’s crimes to the world. They have been targeted not 
only by the state but also by other authoritarian groups that have 
clamped down on independent voices and civil society. Foreign war 
correspondents, too, have been deliberately assassinated by the regime, 
such as the American journalist Marie Colvin, killed while covering the 
2012 siege of Homs. Meanwhile, the regime and its supporters attempt to 
control the narrative through state and sympathetic media.

      In the US, there have been multiple examples of police deliberately 
targeting journalists during the protests for George Floyd. Sometimes 
these have included a clear racial element, such as the arrest of a 
black CNN reporter while his white colleagues were left alone. According 
to a report by independent open-source investigators at Bellingcat, 
“journalists have been shot with rubber bullets, targeted with stun 
grenades, tear gassed, physically attacked, pepper sprayed, and 
arrested.”

      It’s important to give as much support as possible to independent 
media, and especially citizen journalists, who are on the ground and can 
give better-informed analysis of the situation as it unfolds, providing 
vital context and links to those most immediately affected by events.


Everyone will have an opinion, including people who know absolutely 
nothing

      When an uprising breaks out everyone will become an “expert” on the 
country overnight. And, with that, I’ll finish this piece. Because 
whilst I’m fortunate enough to speak English and have some contact with 
people on the ground participating in the current protests, allowing me 
limited access to information regarding what is happening, I’m no 
expert. I’ve spent a total of only six weeks in the US, and have never 
been involved in political organizing there, nor have I spent years 
researching and studying the country, its politics, economy, and 
culture, which might enable me to give an informed opinion. Now really 
is the one time we should be centering American voices and listening to, 
and learning from, the people directly affected.



Leila Al-Shami is a Syrian writer, human rights activist, and co-author 
of Burning Country: Syrians in Revolution and War (Pluto Press, 2016). 
She tweets @LeilaShami.