Bashar and the Mounting Pressure

The pressure that the Arabic countries and the international community have exerted on the Syrian regime last week is the precursor of a continuously mounting pressure that will culminate shortly by UN Security Council decision declaring that the regime has committed crimes against humanity and submitting an indictment of its leaders to the International Criminal Court, and thus leading to the regime’s downfall. These developments indicate that Bashar lacks completely the sense of the reality, resilience and shrewdness.

Although I did not agree with the way with which Hafez Assad governed Syria, I found that his survival instinct is better than that his son has. This survival instinct was not possible without having some kind of sense of the reality, resilience and shrewdness. When Salah Jedid was irritating Israel by firing artilleries from the Golan Heights onto the Galilee Valley, which was one of the reasons for 1976 war, Hafez Assad understood that was a dangerous strategy. Hafez Assad stopped these immature acts. When Turkey put >30000 soldiers on the Syrian border in 1998, Hafez Assad did not move any. He did not panic. However, he understood that he should hand over Ojlan. As can be seen from both examples, Hafez Assad had certain sense of the reality, resilience and shrewdness.

On the other hand, Hafez al-Assad showed a deficient vision for Syria. He viewed Syria as a means for his vain glory. He viewed Syria as a regional power not for the sake of Syria and its people, but for the sake of his own self-image. Indeed, he destroyed the Syrian economy and social cohesiveness in order to consolidate his power internally and achieve the image that he conceived for himself externally. What Hafez Assad did not understand was that no regional or international power can be real or persists for long time with getting its strategic depth from the creativity of its individuals, the cohesiveness of its society and the strength of its economy.

Needless to say that Bashar does not only lack all kind of vision, but also all qualities required for survival. Indeed, he has no sense of the reality; he does not know his strengths and weaknesses; he does not know what provokes other people's anger; he does not understand what could be done what could not. He did not understand that his strength was the educated-man image that he tried to bestow upon himself early on in his presidency. Instead, he transformed himself into ruthless ruler persecuting his political opponents and killing his own people, which revolted claiming dignity and freedom. He did not know that killing unarmed demonstrators would bring upon him the indignation of the international community. He did not know that killing people in the month of Ramadan will take all the cover that the Arabic governments has provided to him till now. Further, Bashar has no resilience: once he takes a line of action he is too stiff; he is not able to change or retreat in the right moment; his discourse is always the same; if people do not respond favorably to his words, it means for him that they are the ones who do not understand (not his words are not the right words). When the regime decided to give the Syrian people a lesson by blockading and ransacking Dara’a, the Syrian people did not kneel. Instead of changing this failing policy, Bashar continued to bombard and seize more cities. When he described the demonstrators as infiltrators in his first speech, the Syrian people mocked of that description. Instead of changing that repulsive language, Bashar ended in his third speech by describing the Syrians as microbes.

Indeed, for all the reasons mentioned above, Bashar lacks social intelligence and shrewdness; in other words, he does not understand the signs of the times. Therefore, he interprets wrongly the meaning of the explicit and implicit messages that he receive and the significance of historical events that he experiences, making him, unlike his father, completely deficient of the survival instinct and leading him to utter political and personal failures, thus putting in danger not only his presidency but also his life as a free man and the future of his kids, who do not merit to be named the children of a criminal.

The Final Declaration of National Salvage Congress

Under the slogan "For civil, democratic and pluralistic Syria ", the National Salvage Congress was held  in Istanbul on July 16, 2011 AD in the presence of national personalities and activists, representatives of the youth and the coordination committees of Syrian revolution and  representative of the national action factions. However, due to the fact that a number of Martyrs have been killed in the neighborhood of Qaboun (Damascus) at the site reserved for the conference that was to be held in Damascus to coincide with the Istanbul one, the Damascus Conference was cancelled. 

The participants started the meeting with a minute of silence and the recitation of Al-Fatiha, in tribute to the martyrs’ souls.  Moreover, the attendees condemned the massacre committed by the regime in the neighborhood of Qaboun, calling for the establishment of International Investigation Committee on this massacre and the previous massacres committed by the regime, and expressed their appreciation for the sacrifices carried out by the youth of the revolution. Further, the participants commended the officers and members of the military who have aligned themselves with the choice of the people for freedom and dignity.

In addition, all the attendees concurred that the killing, the displacement of people and the seize of cities and villages carried out by the regime, made it lose its popular and political legitimacy. Plus, they stressed the right of the people in the revolution to achieve their legitimate demands for freedom and dignity and to ensure a bright future for civil and democratic Syria that is for all its children; and they considered that the National Salvage as a step in this direction and consistent with the sacrifices offered by the Syrian people. 

 The Conference called upon the Syrian people and their national forces to achieve the following objectives: 
1 – The escalation of the peaceful democratic struggle to which all the factions and spectra of the Syrian opposition forces have contributed through long years of struggle and work with all opposition parties to topple the Syrian regime and develop a national political alternative, rejecting any foreign military intervention. 
2 - The peaceful transfer of power to a transitional national government that will disintegrate the security state, establish constitutional life and organize parliamentary and presidential elections. 
3 – The establishment of a pluralistic democratic civil state based on citizenship that originates from a modern constitution that embodies the Syrians’ ambition for shaping a free and safe future and the emphasis on the importance of the role of youth and women in it. 
4 – The emphasis on the full equality of all the sons and daughters of the Syrian people, the respect for their religious and ethnic particularities, the peaceful coexistence and national cooperation between all the Muslim and Christian sects of the Syrian people and the participation of all ethnic groups, including Kurds, Assyrians and Turkish, and all other minorities, in the building of a civil, democratic and pluralistic state that is based on the ideas of social contract and alternation of power and guarantees the rights of freedom and dignity for all.
5 - The emphasis on the full equality of all the sons and daughters of the Syrian people, the respect for their religious and ethnic particularities and the peaceful coexistence and national cooperation between all the Muslim and Christian sects of the Syrian people.

Finally, the conferees in Istanbul have established a national commission made up of 25 members, from across the spectrum of the opposition, and authorized to elect an Executive Office that will consist of 11 members; further, the participants in Damascus will elect 50 members for the National Commission and 13 members for the Executive Office.

The members of the National Commission elected in Istanbul are:

1. Najib Ghadhbian

2. Christina Abraham

3. Adib al-Shishakli

4. Iyas al-Maleh

5. Muhamed Sirmini

6. Eid Abassi

7. Fateh al-Rawi

8. Ahmad al-Jaborri

9. Hamdi Othman

10. Farhad Ahmad

11. Marah al-Buka’i

12. Hassan Hashimi

13. Khalid Khoja

14. Moteea Al-Botein

15. Ali Auzturkman

16. Faraj Hammod al-Faraj

17. Mahmmod al-Faisal

18. Ommar al-Shwaf

19. Jamal Al-Wadi

20. Ahmad al-Asa’ad

21. Mahmmod al-Dughim

22. Marwan Da’as

23. Mariam al-Jalabi

24. Jamal al-Ward

25. Ibrahim al-Hariri

What did the opposition achieve by the “National Salvage Congress”?

To a large extent the “National Salvage Congress” was a success. Through this conference the opposition, and consequently the Syrian revolution, has been able to achieve many objectives.

First, the opposition exposed the hypocrisy of the regime. The regime promised reforms. The “president” announced that he was “cancelling” the state of emergency. However, when the opposition decided to hold a meeting concomitantly in Damascus and Istanbul, the regime response was so violent, killing more than 24 persons in front of the hall in which the Damascus section of meeting was supposed to be held. This response revealed the real face of the regime and exposed its hypocrisy to the Syrian people and the International community. Till recently the American Administration had a small glimmer of hope that the regime could be faithful with its promised reforms, but after this massacre this glimmer of hope has surely completely faded.

Second, the meeting was an excellent political exercise for the opposition in which they proposed conflicting ideas, discussed with respect and open mind and reached compromises and consensus. This was a rare scene in Syrian politics. The Syrian opposition has infamously known for its division due to personal and ideological differences. In this meeting, the opposition showed us that it can transcend its trifling personal conflicts and it can overcome its destructive ideological rigidity, when the interest of the country requires that. For long time, the Syrian regime played on these differences to paralyze the opposition; today, the opposition pulled that card out from the hands of the vicious regime. For long time, the Syrian opposition brought to itself the ridicule and distrust of the international community (as clearly shown in the Wikileaks documents); today the opposition redeemed itself. For long time, the opposition made us worry about its narrow mind and fragmented condition; today, the opposition calmed and exalted our concerned mind.

Lastly and most importantly, the opposition has put, in this meeting, a plan of action to carry out the political fight against the regime. Although this plan still primitive, it is an important step in the right direction. Since the Syrian revolution started four month ago the development on the ground has been rapidly progressing, with additional cities and larger number of people involved every week. However, the various political solutions proposed came unviable or timid at best. In this meeting, the opposition with a united voice elected a “council of national salvation”, which will actively conduct the political fight at the national and international scenes, to bring the regime down. By far, this is the most mature and workable solution for the current Syrian crisis.

In my opinion the “National Salvage Congress” has succeeded to a great measure. However, it is important to see the extent to which the opposition can be effective in its fight with the Assad regime. Further, it is important to see whether the international community and the Syrian people would perceive the unified, active and pragmatic opposition as a viable alternative to the dying regime.

What Kind of Leading Entity Does the Syrian Opposition Need?

The discussion regarding the political entity that Syria needs in this moment is a very important one, because it will have a decisive impact on the war with the regime and on the transition period thereafter. Does the Syrian opposition need a shadow government of technocrats or a leading body composed of politicians from the opposition?

What we need now is a political entity that is composed from politicians who are able to lead the political fight against regime and to navigate through the transition period till a free election is held. We need a political entity that is composed from people who can counteract the propaganda machine of the regime. We need a political entity that can connect and communicate with Syrian people. We need a political entity that can inspire and encourage the people protesting in the street. We need a political entity that can bring to the revolution the people who are neutral till now. We need a political entity that can lay out a vision for the future of the country. We need a political entity that can address the international community. We need people who have good understanding for life. We need people who have good understanding for society. We need people who have can understand human beings around them. We need people who can talk coherently. We need people who know to speak to human minds. We need people who can bring a nation together even if this nation contains groups with different tendencies and culture.

At this time, we do not care whether these people are physicians, engineers or having any high professional degrees (technocrats). Most leaders who lead great nations in difficult time of their history did not have high degrees. To mention few, Churchill during the second world war, De Gaulle during the war and the years that just followed it and Mandela during the apartheid regime. All these people succeeded not because they possessed high –degrees, but because they understood the needs of their respective nations at that particular time. They succeeded, because they understood the dynamic of international relationship at that time. They succeeded because they have courage and stamina. They succeeded because they were not slaves of immature needs. In other words, they succeeded because they have the vision and the charisma.

In fact, we do not need at this time a shadow government of technocrats. We need a governing entity that is composed politicians from the opposition that can lead and inspire our great people though this difficult time.

The Urgency for a Transition Council in Syria

It is obvious that regime is destined to die. This is basically because the regime does not have the essential pillars of a functioning government. First, the president has no potential to be a president. He is immature, egocentric, apathetic, doubtful, indecisive and erratic. Second, the government institutions are dysfunctional, irrational and disharmonious; further, they are governed by corruption, idiocy and lunacy. Therefore, this regime is destined to die. This is similar to a cellular process called “Programmed Cell Death”. In this phenomenon, a healthy cell that suffer from an extreme injury or a sick cell that undergo a minimal stress will start a series of biochemical reactions that lead to the final demise of that cell. Once this series of reaction starts, nothing can stop it; cell death will surely ensue. The Syrian regime is like a sick cell, it needed only a minimal trigger to initiate its death. Ironically, the trigger was simply few young teenagers writing graffiti on the wall, and it is clear nothing can stop its programmed death.

Indeed, the regime is panting and feeling that its end is coming closer. However, it is fighting back by more oppression, persecution and killing. For long time, the regime was restricting the people’s claim for their basic rights by threats, oppression and persecution. For long, the regime thought it was successful doing so. But, when the people started to demonstrate asking for freedom and dignity, the regime was startled. The only answer it has was more oppression, persecution and killings, because this is the only the language the regime knows. Further, because the regime madness the persecution and oppression transformed into massive killings and crimes against humanity.

Thus, to reduce the death toll among the Syrian people, it is imperative to accelerate the regime demise. In my opinion, the best way to reach this goal is by forming a “transition council” that can lead the political fight against the regime inside the country and at the international scene. This council must be composed by politicians from the opposition and not by technocrats as it was proposed. These politicians must have the vision and charisma that permit to them to communicate and convince the Syrian people and the international community. One may ask: “how this transition council would help accelerate the end of this regime?!”

First, this “transition council” will help formulate concrete political objectives for the popular uprising. This formulation will further ignite this revolution and provide the demonstrators with additional courage and persistence. The demonstrators will feel that they are making history and a positive outcome for their sacrifices is looming.

Second, there is still a sizable portion of the Syrian people that wishes the end of the regime, but it is not participating in this popular uprising. This hesitation is mainly because this portion feels that the revolution is “faceless” and wonders concerning the political alternative that would replace the Assad regime. The presence of a thoughtful political face (a transition counsel) for the combative body (the people who protest in the streets) that can lay out a clear perspective regarding the future of the country may encourage this segment of the Syrian people to at least align with, or fully join, the revolution against the vicious regime.
Third, the formation of a “transition council” will increase the regime panic, leading it to commit more mistakes and to further exhaustion of its energy, which, consequently, will accelerate its demise. We saw such panic with every political move carried out by the opposition, as it happened during the Damascus Spring and after the formation of “The Damascus declaration for Democratic Change in Syria”. Despite is panic the regime was able to curb the first by closing its political forums and to impede the second by persecuting most of its leaders living inside Syria. What differs this time is that the regime is already overwhelmed by the demonstrations taking place almost in all Syrian cities, making this council a heavy burden that could break the regime’s back.

Fourth, the formation of such council will address many of the international community worries and concerns. This council will have the diplomatic mission to visit many countries in the world, including Russia, China, EU and USA, to convey the aspirations of the Syrian people and explain the opposition political vision as how it will work to fulfill these aspirations and to build a country that is respected and has good standing in the international arena. If this mission is successful, that would answer many of the international community concerns regarding the future of Syria post Bashar al-Assd and would put the last nail in the regime’s coffin.

Undoubtedly, the end of the Assad regime is approaching. But, the faster the regime dies, the less suffering the Syrian people will experience. For this reason, all efforts should be committed to accelerate regime’s demise and it is upon the Syrian opposition to make a historic decision by forming a “transition council”.

P.S. This paper was sent to the Antalya Conference on April 29, 2011

The Syrian Opposition Lacks the Sense of Responsibility and Political Maturity

The struggle of the Syrian people against the regime has two dimensions:
1. The demonstrations on the ground, in which the Syrian people showed great courage and determination and for which it deserves a score of 10/10.2. The political struggle with the regime to be carried out by the opposition politicians and for which I give the opposition politicians a 1.5/10 rating.

In order that I can evaluate the performance of the opposition, I should define first the objective of this political struggle:
1. To formulate the aspirations and demands of the Syrian people.
2. To represent the Syrian people in possible negotiations with the regime.
3. To convey the aspirations and demands of the Syrian people to the neighboring countries and the international community.
4. To communicate and to connect with the Syrian people

After having defined the roles that the opposition must fulfill, I will now evaluate the success of the opposition in carrying out these tasks.

First, the opposition has succeeded only partially in formulating the aspirations and demands of the Syrian people. It is true that all the opposition groups have called for a state that is based on the principles of "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity", the principles that are the key demands of the Syrian people. However, there are opposition groups, unlike the Syrian people, who were not clear as to the need to eliminate and submit to justice the persons who commit crimes (especially crimes against humanity).
Second, at this time no group from the opposition can claim that it is representative of the Syrian people. For the opposition to represent the Syrian people, it must be united. By "united" I do not mean that it should form one political party, but I mean that the opposition should form a temporary alliance that speaks with one voice until the regime falls and a free election is held. For this purpose, all the opposition groups that are inside the country or abroad should meet together in one conference and propose a “national action plan” on which the opposition needs to explore the views of the Syrian people through the media. In addition, the opposition must elect a "national action committee" or "council" that will be the official representative of the united opposition and consequently the Syrian people. Indeed, this is the only entity that can really represent the Syrian people and have a real mandate to negotiate with the regime on behalf the Syrian people.

Third, it is necessary that the opposition lead a political fight against the regime in the international arena. No group from the opposition could say at this point that it can represent the Syrian people in this field. Radwan Ziadeht and his friends’ visit to Moscow was good, but I have doubts that its results would be powerful enough to put real pressure on the regime. This is simply because the group is not an official representative of the opposition and therefore does not officially represent the Syrian people.

Finally, the Syrian people need leaders from the opposition that can connect and communicate with them. The brave Syrian people deserve leaders who talk to them directly. When the "president" has appeared on television, he called them microbes. This great nation needs to hear a different discourse from its leaders. These wonderful people need leaders who respect, encourage, and reassure them regarding the future of their country. Unfortunately, no one from the opposition does directly address the Syrian people. These poor people are like "sheep without a shepherd", left alone without defence or resource to the wolf to eat them without mercy.

Briefly, the opposition so far has failed to demonstrate a sense of responsibility and political maturity necessary to qualify as a credible representative of the Syrian people.

The Illusion of Dialogue

The dialogue that took place on July 10 &11, 2011 between representatives of the Syrian government, independent personalities, “visitors from abroad” and some members the opposition will lead to nothing. This is simply because the opposition figures who participated in this dialogue (and of course the other participants, too) have not understood the demands of the Syrian people. The Syrians have taken the decision to close a page in their history and open a new one. The Syrian people correctly have understood that "No one puts a piece of new cloth on an old garment." It seems that these opposition figures have not felt well the pulse of the Syrian street. In other words, these figures have no sense of reality. With these words, I am not trying to judge them personally or judge the manner in which they make their decisions in general, but it is an opinion on certain decisions and particular political choices.

In fact, this lack of sense of reality is not unusual and is not particular for a small group of people, but it is indeed the fundamental challenge for all humanity. For that history is full of sad stories and disappointing events. This is why Edward Gibbon wrote: “History is indeed little more than the register of the crimes, follies, and misfortunes of mankind ".  However, I am confident that the Syrian people will prove that the sentence of Edward Gibbon mentioned-above is not relevant to its revolution. In addition, I hope that the rest of the opposition will continue to work to unite in one front to bring the regime down without being affected by this dialogue, because dialogue is just "much ado about nothing."

The Syrian Opposition from Absurdity to Nothingness

The problems between the different parties of the opposition are at the same time real and unreal. They are real, because they have grave and probably long-lasting consequences. However, we can consider them unreal, because they exist only in the heads of the members of the opposition. In fact, these problems do not have substantive base or origin. They are rooted in erroneous perceptions, subconscious fears and baseless prejudices. In the head of the concerned persons, they are enormous and giants, but in reality they do not exist. They are like a very giant balloon that occupies a lot of space, but empty from inside. Thus, we can consider these problems are irrational or rather absurd. Albert Camus considered the absurdity as the origin of nothingness (the exact word in French “le néant”; there is no accurate translation for this word in English, but the closest meaning is “the nothingness”). Indeed, the opposition is preoccupied by nothingness. The opposition is very busy, although it is ineffective and sterile.

I believe in order to overcome this impasse, you should eliminate as much as possible the erroneous perceptions, subconscious fears and baseless prejudices between the opposition parties. Is this is difficult?! In fact, the relationships between the different parties of the opposition are like a field full of mines. This is not only my opinion, but also it is the opinion of other people related to the opposition. Indeed, you need a person who is skilled to detonate these mines. You need a mediator that has good knowledge of human beings. This mediator should be neutral and has no political ambitions.

Response to the Call to Hold a Meeting for the Opposition in Damascus

Although your invitation came few months later than it should be, it is still a valid call and worth discussing and acting upon. Your call for an opposition meeting in Damascus appears to be crucial and appealing; however, there are many hurdles that may impede the realization of this call.

First, I understand the reason for which you are calling to hold the meeting in Damascus. Likely, it is because you rightly believe that most of the key opposition figures reside in Syria and they can’t travel outside the country. However, do you think the regime would let you carry out such meeting inside Syria? A close look at the regime’s behavior reveals that the regime is extremely insecure and paranoid.  We saw such paranoia and insecurity with every political move carried out by the opposition, as it happened during the Damascus Spring and after the establishment of “The Damascus Declaration for Democratic Change in Syria”. During the first, when the regime’s “attack dogs” were not able to keep up with the ideas discussed in the forums, the regime closed these forums hastily and unleashed its “dogs” to impugn the nationalistic credentials and physically assaulting the opposition figures. Also, the regime felt that its existence was threatened when “The Damascus Declaration” was established, therefore it responded to it by persecuting its leaders, putting them in prison, restricting their movements, and stripping them from their passports. Hence, the regime was able to paralyze the Damascus Declaration (Frankly, the leaders of the Damascus Declaration” were naïve to think that regime would behave in a different manner). Therefore, I will ask you: Is it realistic to think that the regime would every let the opposition hold a meeting for the in Damascus?!!

Second, taking into consideration the current state of the opposition, do you think a meeting that encompasses the whole spectrum of the Syrian opposition would be successful? The Syrian opposition is so fragmented, dispersed and preoccupied by trifling differences. Indeed, the Syrian opposition is deeply divided along its ideological lines. There is nothing wrong about having different opposition groups with distinct ideologies, however it is bad to reject others merely because they hold different believe than us; we call this phenomenon “ideological rigidity” or “ideological intolerance”. In fact, “ideological intolerance” is against the basic understanding human nature and consequently it is against the principles of democracy. Alarmingly, since the Syrian opposition groups are too adamant as regarding to their respective ideologies and do not look at the existence of multitude of belief systems as a natural human phenomenon, they project at their counterparts a label of lack of faithfulness to the nation. Furthermore, this “ideological intolerance” makes me worry not only as regard to the ability of the opposition to unite a common cause, such as fighting the regime in this critical time of the history of Syria, but also about the future country once the regime falls. In my opinion, before inviting the opposition for a general meeting, the opposition need a “mediator” who can exert a “shuttle diplomacy” (I am so sorry to use of Henry Kissinger expressions. Although I dislike his Machiavellian principals and his disrespect for human life, I admire his diplomatic ingenuity) to will work hard to reduce their mutual sensitivity and mistrust. This person should be neutral and have good understanding of politics, the art of diplomacy and human psyche.

The Syrian Opposition Should Unite to Fight the Regime

Dear all:

Rami Makhlouf’s statements to the NY Times today are a declaration of an open war on the Syrian people. In fact, I was not surprised; this regime is inherently evil. Therefore, the Syrian people’s combat with this regime should be relentless. Regarding this matter, I think I can provide some help. I have some ideas that I can discuss with you. I can lay them out to you.

Furthermore, I think the most important blow (and hopefully the final) to the regime would be to bring the opposition together (at least on the common goal of ousting this nefarious regime). I can help with that, too. I am used in my work to bring people together to do common projects, even if they have different opinions. Furthermore, since I am a new face with no political past and a neutral person as regard the different opposition groups and I have no future political ambitions, maybe I am in a good position to carry out that task. I have some ideas as how to approach this matter that I can share with you, too. I can try that, even if there are deep differences between the different groups. I think this is something that is worthwhile to do at this juncture, at least for the sake of the Syrian people.

I feel the urgency to do something, because I feel that this regime won’t hesitate to literally kill all the Syrian people in order to survive. Indeed, I am particularly sensitive to losses in human lives.

Best regards,

Haytham

This message was sent by e-mail to Dr. Radwan Ziadeh, Dr. Najib Ghadbian and Mr. Ausama Monajid (on May 10, 2011) in order to explore the possibility of unifying the Syrian opposition efforts to fight the nefarious regime.

Response to the National Initiative for Change

Dear signatories of the National Initiative for Change in Syria:

Toronto, April 30, 2011

Plato once said “One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors”. For this reason, I always do my best to exert my political rights and responsibilities. Consequently, as a good Syrian citizen, I carefully read your initiative and formulated my input about it, which I will lay out in this message.

Indeed, your initiative came in a very critical moment in the history of Syria. The developments on the ground, people’s discontent and demonstrations, are ramping up very fast. In the meantime, there is severe lack in the political process that can lead this unrest to produce its favorable results. This lack of political process is from both the government and the opposition. The government tried to make some “reforms”, but these “reforms” came too little, too late. Further, they appeared timid, unconvincing and hypocritical. This means that the government will undoubtedly fall sooner or later under the public pressure. Here comes the important question. Where is the political initiatives of the opposition?!. Without any political alternative, the country will go into chaos, enormous unrest and maybe civil war. Thus, your initiative came to fill up to certain measure the lack of serious political process in Syria. However, I have some comments on this initiative.

First, in your proposal you are counting on the president to understand the reality and to step down now for the sake of the country. Unfortunately, I think this won’t happen. I know Bashar personally. I know well what type of personality he is. Bashar was a “nice” person, however superficial and has no good understanding for real life. Consequently, Bashar could have had good wishes, when he started his presidency, but he has had no ability to achieve them. This failure is inherent in his character that lacks charisma and social intelligence. Thus, he has not been in control and he won’t be; he has had no courage, and he won’t have shortly. In brief, he is immature and has no personal assets that permit to him to have appropriate psychological growth. As you know, people when they can't progress personally, they regress (please refer to Karen Horney in “Neurosis and Human Growth”. In other words, they become worse, more dysfunctional and consequently more evil. This particularly applies to immature people in power, because during their reign they become extremely entitled, arrogant, narcissistic, ruthless and paranoid (please refer to Eric Fromm in “Anatomy of Human Destructiveness”). Bashar is no exception. He by now believes that he was born to be president; even, he is the best of them all. He is the savior of Syria and probably the whole Arabic World (as his father used to believe). Do not think that for them these are empty words, they simply try to bluff us with. Not at all, these are deep beliefs in their minds; they are called in psychology self-delusions (please refer to Cordelia Fine in "A Mind of its Own"). However, he knows inside himself that without presidency he is nothing; nobody will respect him; nobody will glorify him; nobody will adore him. Therefore, do not count on him to quit the presidency merely for the sake of the country. He won’t leave the presidency easily. He won’t give up before reaching the point of psychological breakdown (I can elaborate more on this point, if you wish). On the other hand, he will quit at the end when the demonstrations grow up. He will give in not because he loves the country, but because of his psychological breakdown.

Second, before the president steps down officially, encouraging any army officer, even if it is the Defence Minister or the Chief of Staff, to take any political move seems to me reckless, because such move will lead to a schism in the army. It will result in a civil war similar to the Libyan one. As you know, in the army there are many units that are loyal to Maher al-Assad, which will obey him till the end. Maher will not relinquish his position easily, even if Bashar steps down. As long as Bashar is still officially in power, Maher’s units will be legitimate and will fight till the end to keep the status quo. On the other hand, when Basher resigns these units will be rogue, if they do not obey the person who then will be then the Commander in Chief. In brief, If any of the highly-ranked officers attempts any political move in the current status, we will see situation similar to that occurred in 1984 when Rifa’at Al-Assad put his tanks in the street of Barzza (Damascus) confronting the tanks of the rest of the Syrian Army. Furthermore, I do not prefer, personally, any participation of the army in the political process. I believe firmly that Bashar will resign due the increasing public demonstrations, leading to his psychological breakdown.

For all the above-mentioned reasons, I feel that your proposal is not a viable solution for the current crisis, although it stimulated our minds and made us think about the political dimension of the crisis. Do I have any alternative proposal?!. The answer is simply “no”. But, I have some ideas to exchange with you:
1. We (I am talking from my position as a common Syrian citizen) need more ideas and proposals from you and the other opposition groups. I hope these groups will share their ideas with other opposition groups and the Syrian people (at least through the media outlets that reach most of them) till there is a certain consensus among a reasonable percentage of the opposition groups on a common plan of action.
2. The opposition groups should start to lay out not only their views regarding how to resolve the current crisis, but also their visions for the future of the country. This should include what happened wrong in the past (of course, without accusations or blames) to avoid them in the future. This exchange of ideas, if civilized, will accelerate the demise of the regime, fortify the opposition, encourage the Syrian people in their revolution and make the coming transition period much easier.
3. If the situation continue for more than a couple of months like it is now with everyday bloodshed, the opposition groups should meet together and try to start a common vision for the country. They should do this with unofficial meetings first and finally in an official conference. A unified opposition will break the regime down and accelerate its demise. I know how difficult such meeting would be. In fact, my knowledge about the opposition groups in Syria is very limited.

4. At the end, if the people continue their demonstrations and the government pursue its crackdown without any political solution in the horizon, the opposition should form a government in exile, which would gain the recognition of all the western governments. At that time, the regime will lose all its legitimacy and fall sooner than we think. Further, that would make the transition much easier and the people more confident in their struggle.

I am sending these ideas to you as a common Syrian citizen who cares about performing his duties and taking the opportunity to practice his rights. I have no political inclinations. I am a physician and researcher; indeed, this is the only work through which I feel I can fulfill my human potential.

Best regards,

Haytham Khoury

P.S. This was my answer to the National Initiative for Change. It was sent by e-mail to Dr. Radwan Ziadeh, Dr. Najib Ghadbian and Mr. Ausama Monajid on April 30, 2011, the one day after they published their initiative on "http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=184086641639119&comments". Furthermore, since my initial response to the initiative, I gained more knowledge regarding the situation of the Syrian opposition and changed my opinion as to the viability of the establishment of a government in exile.