After nearly eight months of ruthless anti-protest crackdowns by President Bashar al-Assad’s security forces, success of Syria’s opposition movement now relies on a difficult combination of peaceful street protests and urgently needed foreign intervention, says the executive director of the National Organization for Human Rights in Syria, Ammar Qurabi.
Qurabi, an İstanbul based member of the opposition’s Syrian National Council (SNC), believes that the ability of protestors to “send a message to the world” relies on preserving the moral authority won by many months of strictly peaceful protests, and denounces any calls for street protestors to instigate anti-regime violence. Qurabi’s call for peaceful demonstrations echoes the wider sentiment of the SNC, an umbrella organization of Syrian opposition groups who have sought international recognition since meeting in İstanbul in early October.
But as opposition leaders maintain their pledge for peaceful opposition, the long grind of daily violence and the constant search for a new way forward has led Qurabi to draw an increasingly complex picture of what opposition to Assad’s security regime should look like. Now, says the Council member, the opposition must court foreign help both in the task of isolating the regime abroad and securing the council’s admittedly ambiguous demand for “protecting civilians” on the ground.
Qurabi states that intense regime violence has created the need for a ‘safe zone’ which will encourage desertions in the ranks of the regime’s security forces and give refugees a haven from violence. Such a zone will only be possible, says Quarbi, if NATO or a regional power like Turkey directly intervenes in the now escalating conflict. “Unfortunately most of these solutions are military,” Qurabi lamented in an interview with Sunday’s Zaman last week. As regrettable as such a solution may be, the activist states, the increasingly bloody conflict calls for extreme solutions.
Above all, Qurabi believes that the opposition’s most powerful weapon is the peaceful method of its protests. The Council member emphatically stresses that the regime will attempt to draw opposition forces into an armed conflict which will rob protesters of the moral upper hand. Thus, Qurabi argues that the opposition must remain cautious against a regime which is “trying to profit from the situation and to tell the world that ‘We have a military movement and a Sunni-Alevi conflict [on our hands].’ But in all this time, after seven months, there is no such struggle. If they said we have protestors who want freedom, what legitimacy does the regime have then?”
So the far opponents of the Assad regime have used peaceful protest as a means of resistance. But it seems that this has not been successful. Is there any plan to change the method of resistance, for example to armed resistance?
Right now, these protestors are sending a message to the world with their peaceful demonstrations. You can see the situation in Syria on TV around the world. That’s happening thanks to peaceful demonstration. I think that if we were to change from peaceful demonstrations to a military movement we would lose quickly. If we compare power: [i.e.] Who is stronger, the people or regime? Of course the regime is stronger.
So for now I prefer to seek support for these demonstrations from the West, from Arab countries; now we are getting support from [those parts of] the army who didn’t fire on the people, who are making the decision to support the protestors. I am emphasizing the need for the ordinary people to be in the street as part of a peaceful movement. Maybe guns will be used by the army, or the UN and the world if they decide to interfere, but for now we are still peaceful.
No armed groups or gangs behind protests
Assad claims that there are armed groups or gangs behind the protests. Who organizes these protests?
It has been eight months, and each day we discover more of his lies. Recently the Syrian ambassador to the Arab League said we lost 160 soldiers. So we are talking about small numbers of soldiers.
We have reports, not Syrian reports but from human rights organizations, the UN; and all of these reports mention soldiers who have refused to fire against their own people. These soldiers were killed from behind [by other soldiers]; they were not killed in the fighting.
Of course there also are a lot of cases in which people defend themselves, and that’s normal. But that’s not the method; it’s not the plan for the revolution.
What is your opinion about foreign intervention?
We talk about our need to be more realistic. We are finding a lot of obstacles to success in this revolution, because ordinary people are fighting a fascist regime. The regime is fighting the revolution with blood and with fire; when they talk about the soldiers, they don’t speak about the other side, the civilians. All of this is about the regime realizing that they need to surrender power. They will leave when support comes from outside Syria.
There are different scenarios -- lots of people are counting on Turkey. But until now Turkey hasn’t taken a position, and hasn’t offered practical support. We speak of the desirability of having an area like Benghazi [the city which acted as a base for the Libyan uprising], so maybe this area could be protected by Turkey or by NATO. Maybe all of the refugees could go to this area, and from this area we can begin to liberate all of Syria. Maybe if Europe or America were to give weapons to the [Syrian Free Army], maybe if they prevent the Syrian Air Force from using the airspace above Syria -- unfortunately most of these solutions are military.
But I think that will be the end, because up until now the international community hasn’t realized that there is a big problem in Syria, and Russia and China have pushed the people to this military solution.
Which city could become the “Benghazi of Syria”? Not only as a starting point, but as a center for the opposition?
We have 3 choices. We could talk about this are in the north (we don’t talk about cities, we talk about areas) -- 50 kilometers wide by 5 kilometers long. There is also an area in the south between Syria and Jordan. That was the area where the revolution originated. And maybe we could talk about the area between Iraq and Syria, between Kurdistan and Syria. Maybe it will begin when we have these three areas. I am not a military person, but I’m telling you what I hear on the street.
The Sunni elite groups or wealthy Sunnis have remained silent to this day; not showing too much support for the resistance, especially those in the cities of Aleppo and Damascus. Do you expect to see any change soon in their attitude, and could this change generate meaningful support for the resistance?
I think the problem is not between Sunni and Alevi or between Muslim and Christian. But unfortunately the regime portrays the struggle to the world as being between Sunni and Alevi.
The struggle is in fact between freedom and dictatorship. The regime makes it appear to be between different groups. The first to speak of the conflict in this way were Assad’s own advisors. The regime encourages it, they are trying to profit from the situation and to tell the world that “We have a military movement and a Sunni-Alevi conflict [on our hands].” But in all this time, after seven months, there is no such struggle. If they said we have protestors who want freedom, what legitimacy does the regime have then?
Now we have a movement who are standing up against the dictatorship from all the groups and ethnicities in Syria: There are Alevis, Sunnis, Kurds, etc., etc. There are many Alevis among the opposition.
Do you see any risk of a clash between Sunnis and Shias if the regime changes in Syria?
This way of thinking comes from the regime, not from the street. These are the tools of the regime. We know that the regime depends on Iran and uses the Alevi group just as Assad uses everything. We believe that he is kidnapping the Alevi groups. But in fact, Syria is not like that. In the new Syria, we will demonstrate how all of the groups can live together.
Could a regime change affect the triangular relationship between Iran, Hezbollah and Israel? Because regime change in Syria could mean cutting the physical connection between Iran and Hezbollah.
I don’t care about the future of [Iran]; I am interested in the future of Syria. We will deal with any country in terms of our needs. It will depend on how each country behaves toward us. For example, in the future we will extend respect to countries that support the revolution. To those who support the regime, we will not extend our hand in the future. We have repeatedly asked China or Russia to change their behavior. You have to stand with the people, not with the regime.
Russia still supports the Assad regime, mainly due to arm deals and their plans for a military base in Tarsus. What is your stance toward Russia, especially toward their military base plans?
Maybe we can ask them to help redevelop the old army, because our army depends on Russian weapons and methods. We could invite them to build in Syria as professionals, not as a corrupt country. But up until now they [Russia] have refused this invitation, because they still stand with the [Assad] regime.
What will happen to Assad if you are successful and the regime changes?
I think in this revolution, we won’t forget to obey the rule of law. We are asking the regime now to use the law, because we need a civil government. I think the courts will be a suitable place for Assad and his people to meet justice. We need to see what will happen in Syria, and who has been responsible for each drop of blood shed in this country from the beginning. And we won’t forget about all of the violations of the past fifty years.
Turkey still not clear on Syria issue
What do you think about the Turkey’s position on the Syrian resistance?
The picture in Turkey is not clear, because when we compare [Prime Minister Recep Tayyip] Erdoğan’s speech with what has actually happened, in the background nothing is happening. Turkey’s treatment of the [Syrian] refugees was not good: Half of the refugees were turned back. The Turkish soldiers were silent, they didn’t do anything.
Regarding [Col. Hussein] Harmoush, I don’t believe that Turkey caught him and sent him to Syria. Maybe security people from Syria entered Turkey and caught him, and sent him to Syria.
As time goes on there will be a lot of things we will need from Turkey. Of course Turkey hosted the conference [of the Syrian National Council], but as you know Turkey is a democratic country, and has a democratic life and TV and news that does not come from government sources. We respect Turkish society and we respect the political movements in Turkey.
The first conference was in Turkey, but it was organized by civil organizations. When I talk about problems with Turkey I am talking about the government. The prime minister had planned to go to the camps and declare that Assad has to go. But unfortunately his mother died, and now? We are waiting.
Do you have any expectations of the Turkish government?
Sooner or later Turkey will become more involved in the situation. Turkey will wait for an international decision before it intervenes in Syria
There has been strife between this and previous Assad governments and Turkey over the PKK’s presence in Syria, and also over the Kurdish minority in Syria. What is the opinion of the opposition’s leadership on this issue? And also on the issue of Syrian refugees and deserters in the Turksish province of Hatay. Is this a problem between Syria and Turkey?
Because of these issues, over time Turkey will have to change and come to support the revolution more and more. If [the Assad] regime stands, it will cause problems for all countries in the region. He has used Hamas and other movements, and has always caused problems for his neighbors. The first step toward solving the Kurdish question in Turkey is to destroy the regime in Syria.
The wife of Col. Hussein Harmoush claimed that Turkish government handed him over to the Syrian regime. Do you believe that?
I have heard the same story, but I doubt the person who told it. I can’t believe that the Turkish security forces would have done that; maybe the person who said this is Syrian, or paid by the Syrian regime.
But as I said, there are also lies coming from Turkey about this. Especially in the first week, when we asked them, they said he is well, and that was a kind of morphine for us. If you have any information, why tell us he is well? Maybe there was a problem, such as corruption in the security forces or the police. But I don’t think there was a decision on the part of Turkey’s government to arrest Harmoush and send him to Syria.
Is there any deadline for the revolution?
No. In the first months possibly we could have said that, because all of the Syrian people were afraid it would stop. But, no, now no one is afraid, because everyone realizes that this revolution can’t stop, it will continue until the end. We speculate about months or maybe years, because we have paid the price and we are ready to give more. The [Assad] regime has now shown the whole world that it is a bloody regime, so now we have no choice, we have finish what we started.
There so many conspiracy theories about the death of the Kurdish leader Temo. What do you know about his death?
I just heard that the [Assad] regime killed Meshaal Temo. They had threatened to before; but I’m talking about who actually had him killed. The decision was made by the Assad regime. The people who killed him may have been Kurdish or Syrian, there are people for rent all over the world. What is important is who made the decision: Assad. I know some details about what happened: Two stayed in the car and two went into the house. They took guns and opened fire against him and the others. And when his son was coming, they jumped in the car and left. And while people were watching -- who could do that? [Only] the regime.
http://www.todayszaman.com/news-261326-q...egime.html
بحث
قائمة الأعضاء
التقويم
وثائق المساعدة
/
"Das ist Krieg"...Syrer fliehen in die Türkei
