Report from Behind the Lines in Syria: An Interview with Dr. Jonathan Spyer
Dr. Jonathan Spyer, GLORIA Center senior fellow, has just returned from Syria where he met with oppositionists, members of the Free Syrian Army, and local inhabitants. Here’s his first interview on his experiences and observations.
Barry Rubin: Dr. Spyer, please tell us about your visit to Syria, what you saw and your impressions.
Jonathan Spyer: Well, I spent a week in Idleb province, traveling between a number of different towns. The most striking aspect was the extent of de facto control that the opposition and Free Syrian Army (FSA) have in this area. A number of towns are now entirely under their control, with FSA roadblocks at the entrance and the rebel flag flying everywhere. At the same time, it’s of course clear that the government still has intelligence networks inside the “liberated” towns, and will reconquer them if possible at a later date.
Barry Rubin: Many observers claim that the Bashar al-Assad regime will fall soon. What do the opposition activists think and what is your view?
Jonathan Spyer: The many opposition activists and fighters that I spoke to seem to be rather torn in their attitude. On the one hand, I heard none of the facile optimism that one heard among some analysts in the first months of the uprising, describing Bashar’s fall as imminent. The opposition activists understand that with the support of Iran, Russia, China and Hizballah, the regime can continue for some time to come, even if it is bleeding resources and losing manpower to the rebel army. The opposition is acutely aware of its own international isolation compared to the regime, and repeat endlessly the call for a buffer zone, and for the beginnings of Western support for arming the FSA.
At the same time, looking more broadly, the oppositionists are optimistic that they will ultimately prevail, but a number of them told me that without international assistance to their side to balance and offset the international coalition behind Assad, the situation could drag on for months or even years.
Barry Rubin: How important are revolutionary Islamists in the opposition? Can you explain about the larger — perhaps largest — group, traditional Sunnis?
Jonathan Spyer: In Idleb province, where I was, there was an undoubted presence of Salafi Islamists among the FSA fighters. But they were not a majority, and I certainly had no indication at all of the presence of foreign Islamist fighters. These were clearly local men. The regime, of course, has been keen to say that the opposition to it consists of al-Qaida. I would advise skepticism toward any claims made by the Assad regime.
However, Idleb province is a very traditional, religious Sunni area. There is undoubtedly a strong sectarian element to the fury and hatred that people have toward the Assad regime. People stress that this does not extend to ordinary Alawi or Shia Syrians, but I would counsel caution regarding this. So I don’t think Salafi Islamism is dominating the revolt, even in very traditional and religious places like Idleb. But at the same time, there is a strong religious and sectarian motivation among the rebels. You won’t be surprised to learn that the number of secular humanists in Idleb province is rather small.
Barry Rubin: What were your observations about the Free Syrian Army?
Jonathan Spyer: The FSA is really a name for what is in fact a large number of independent militias organized around local strongmen. No one seems to regard the notional FSA leadership in Antakya, Turkey, as the actual center of the organization. Rather, the militias operate according to their own interests and vary in numbers and qualities from town to town. In Sarmeen, where I was, for example, the FSA is commanded by a 25-year-old former lieutenant in Assad’s airborne forces, and gives the impression of being a serious force. In Bini’ish, a neighboring town, the impression is one of a more thrown-together, improvised force.
In terms of weaponry, they have rifles, heavy machine guns, RPG-7s and mortars. These weapons would have great difficulty standing up to a frontal assault from Assad’s advanced Russian armor. Many FSA men that I spoke to understand that they would be unable to defend the ”free zones” if these were attacked in force, and they talk more in terms of a long-term strategy of guerrilla warfare to wear down the regime.
Barry Rubin: Why is there a debate in the opposition about whether or not to engage in armed struggle?
Jonathan Spyer: There are voices in the opposition who from the beginning had been concerned that armed struggle was an arena in which the rebels couldn’t win, and it would enable Assad to portray them as terrorists, al-Qaida, and so on. But such voices are heard less and less. Most people understand that whatever the merits of such an argument, it is too late. The people in insurgent areas regard the FSA as their protectors, and have a very clear and evident emotional loyalty to the Jaish al-Hurr (Free Army) which they don’t feel toward the political opposition, which is more or less irrelevant.
Regarding armed struggle, then, this issue is now a done deal. The armed opposition to Assad is in many ways the most significant element of the uprising. In terms of power on the ground, when the government forces leave an area, the people who get to make decisions are the ones who control the armed element, for obvious reasons. It’s worth remembering that this is Syria. The way the current regime came into existence in the first place is because many years ago the military element in the Syrian Baath Party started to wonder why it was taking orders from the civilian political element and decided to stop doing so. Hence the Alawi officers Salah Jadid and then Hafez al-Assad came to run the country. I am not trying at all to say that the FSA is emerging as a contender for power, but merely that the militias on the ground fighting Assad are a fact, and there is no question of them ceasing activities voluntarily while Assad remains in power.
Barry Rubin: Please explain why the opposition is asking for international help to create a “safe haven” and how this might work.
Jonathan Spyer: The opposition is asking for a buffer zone where refugees can flee and from where the FSA can organize. Precedents would include northern Iraq in the 1990s and Libya recently. Such a zone would be almost certain to involve the deployment of Western air power, again as in Libya, as well as a program of Western support to the FSA to turn it from a collection of militias into a serious force.
Of course, it is unimaginable that the UN would approve such an initiative, since Assad’s ally Russia would prevent this. At present, there stands a de facto international coalition behind Assad, including Iran, Russia, China and Hizballah. The question now is whether this coalition will ensure that Assad will maintain his grip on power, or whether a Western-led counter-coalition will offer support tor the FSA and help create a buffer zone, thus making the dictator’s fall more likely. The future of Syria may well depend on the answer to this question.
John Batchelor reported last night (http://www.wmal.com/showdj.asp?DJID=9992) that there have been reports of the Syrian army using nerve gas against the rebels. I wonder of Jonathan could confirm this?
Given what the elder Assad did in Hama, and how ruthless the Syrian regime has been to any dissenters in the past, I’m just shocked that there has been such sustained opposition, and quite frankly, how weak the government’s response has been. Bashir’s been in power for a decade now, shouldn’t he have consolidated power by now, not seen it fractured?
The contrast between the bravery and tenaciousness of the Syrian people in their uprising against Assad and the performance of their army during the wars against Israel is instructive.
In a recent interview with an Israeli journalist from Yediot Aharonot (Ynet, but the Hebrew version) a commander from the FSA made it quite clear that Israel will be next. He said the fall of Assad will strengthen the struggle against Israel and that Israel is still Dar al-Harb. I don’t know how representative are his views.
I think this is an interesting snapshot, but just that: a snapshot, that does not reflect all the dimensions of the conflict, sectarian alliances/hatreds, and the under current of jihadist influence, despite Mr. Speyers claim to the contrary.
Here’s another snapshot, that somewhat refutes what Mr. Speyers has seen in Idbed province, but it’s just a different perspective, distorted by whatever lens you choose to use.
http://www.blackfive.net/main/2012/02/another-view-of-the-syrian-revolt.html
The only thing I feel certain about, is that to give any of these folks anything more that prayers and good wishes is a mistake. Sorry if that sounds harsh…but this has “blowback” written all over it.
Iran – A-Jad is open to immediate negotiations with no preconditions.
Russia – Putin is doing photo-ops as a Russian bobsledder while his underlings try to stir up Anti-American sentiment as the elections approach.
Hizbollah- Is trying to get an new Arab “godfather” as even they think Assad’s days are numbered.
Syria- The Free Syrian Army controls increasingly large chunks of the country.
China – The VP is out schmoozing with the G-8 members.
I’d say we’re making progress. Rome wasn’t built in a day.
My erflexive reaction is Hooray! Bringing down Assad sure sems like a great thing.
But who are these “rebels,” and what will come in Assad’s place?
They won’t be friendly to Israel, I’m certain.
Any talk of a “buffer zone” should be concentrated on such a zone to protect Israel. If any “no fly” zone is to be effected, it should ring Israel, with a U.S. aircraft carrier and support group just offshore doing the needed policing. Let these Muslim/Islamist fractious factions inside Syria and elsewhere continue to kill each other without further meddling by us Americans. Maybe we can help increase these intra-mural divisions.
In that manner, they’ll (the factions) remain unable to blame America after we’ve spent zillions more of our dollars needed domestically. No more American blood spilled in West and Central Asia. They are simply not worth the further sacrifice. How soon before they, as is their wont, turn against us?
Massed U.S ground forces should be out of the question for all of West Asia and Central Asia. We mustn’t allow ourselves be set up to be on the receiving end of all of those thrusting, ever-ready Muslim/Islamic middle fingers.
Thank you for providing a good exposition of the structure, disorganization and strategies of the inside opponents to Assad, in sharp contrast to the fulminations of Michael Ledeen, who is livid at the lack of overt U.S. support for them. It is quite clear that the Free Syrian Army and its loose affiliations are all Muslim Jihadists, obsessed with a determination to eradicate the blemish of a Jewish state in Allah’s territory.
In short, Dr. Spyer has made it clear that to encourage the Free Syrian Army efforts is to give comfort and support to dedicated enemies of Israel, and that a “democratic” secular humanist element in their ranks is virtually non-existent. It is the same old, same old romantic “Arab Spring” fantasy of a surge of a Twitter-inspired conversion to Western governance and law.
Is there more germaine advice than not to interfere when our enemies are fighting each other?
Isn’t Zawarhi calling for over throwing Assad?
Aren’t Sunni jihadis entering Syria from Iraq?
Could it be another quagmire like Afganistan for Russia?
As long as the Syrian insurgency survives, Iran is taxed, Hezbo is making enemies, the MB is preoccupied, Turkey is split from Iran, Russia hurts its relations with the Gulf states.
What’s not to like?
If we get involved two things may happen, we may get out in front of the revolution, make friends and establish democratic institutions, or they all might unite against us. just. not. sure.
Let someone else bet, it doesn’t cost anything to “check.”
If the status quo is working in your favor (as it is in Syria, not Iran) don’t “fix” it.
That does’t mean that Hillary couldn’t waste some words on the heroic Syrian people.
It’s clear the the Syrian Baath Party/military rule regime in Syria is about the last secular Arab regime, and soon to fall–Russian/Chinese support is dragging it out for some time, no doubt–but the flow of history is toward a Sunni-based Caliphate. Islam is returning to power. Secularists of any stripe, nationalist, moderate, whatever, need not apply.
Egypt has fallen to the religious hard core, and is demanding ransom money, just like the Barbary pirates of before, and the various Arab/then Turkish regimes milked the Byzantines of tribute money.
Some wacko illegal Muslim immigrant got an inoperable Ak-47 from undercover FBI agents and was going on the attack in DC. And our Homeland Security people are after the Rotary Club “extremists” in our midst.
Israel will truly be surrounded.
And the United States is governed by fools, traitors, PC idiots, whatever you want to call them.
What a true, absolute, total, full-fledged SNAFU-mess.
An Préachán
I can’t believe how far America has shrunk in the last 30 years.
Everywhere I read about Syria, there is dread and hand-wringing and fear of Islamists and who might take over next.
People, wake up. What’s happening in Syria right now is not a crisis to be “managed” or a muslim battle to be watched from the sidelines. It is an *opportunity.* Syria under the Assad dictatorships has been a strategic threat to the U.S. and Israel– a puppet of Tehran, base of support for Hamas and Hezbollah, overlord to what would otherwise be a very pro-Western Lebanon, and a gateway for instability all around. We have a truly indigenous revolt in Syria that threatens to bring down the Dictator and all we Americans can do is either fret and moan or turn our backs and “stay out of it.”
Is America so lame and stupid that we can only conceive of two options: empty sloganeering by diplomats or all out invasion/occupation? There are so many ways the U.S. could influence events in Syria in our favor without sending in the troops or even providing air cover. We don’t have to pour billions of dollars into Syria either. But there are many covert methods that can be used to at least try to ensure that a strong, pro-Western faction is sitting at the table when it comes time to either divide up Syria or establish a new government.
For example, we should have skilled covert operators on the ground in Syria right now trying to find some of these Sunni military commanders that Spyer talks about who might be willing to accept anonymous military and humanitarian aid in exchange for keeping the Islamists in check. At the same time, we start forging relationships with the Kurdish Syrians and the Christians along the same lines. To the extent that these factions are willing to resist Islamist elements, they get more and increasingly sophisticated backing. The key for the U.S. in all of this is to never back only one horse. Checks and balances. Build up a coalition of anti-Islamist forces that together will keep the Islamists from gaining power but, at the same time, will keep each other from getting too powerful either.
We need to have a vision of Syria (and Lebanon) that is at the very least a neutral entity that does not host militant Islamists and is not an active threat to Israel, Iraq or Jordan. They may not be friendly but if they are only weak and internally divided, that is an enormous, potentially game-changing development in the region. This is the problem with U.S. foreign policy, it seems. No long-term vision. We don’t seem to know what we want to see happen in the Middle East, to say nothing of how to get there.
@ TS Alfabet
There were couple of other indigenous revolts in the world – for example communist revolt of Che Guevara and revolution in Cuba, Iranian Khomeinist revolution, recent Egyptian revolution – none of these revolts were pro-American or even neutral. “Indigenous” does not mean “pro-American ” or “pro-West”
It is nice talking about “anonymous military and humanitarian aid in exchange for keeping the Islamists in check” But that problem is how can you know which militia is neutral or anti-Islamist? How on earth can you build a coalition of anti-Islamist forces when secularism is linked to Assad and the West? It is not Islamic Assad that is an enemy, it is a secular Assad that is an enemy.
Both Assad and Islamists (Muslim Brotherhood, muslim preachers) teach that West is an enemy. And not only them, al Jazeera also teaches that USA is an enemy of Muslim world. In such situation one has to be very careful.
I agree that USA should start to help some of the militia as well as some Kurds but it has to be done very carefully. So many people went “Ah, indigenous revolution in Egypt, pro-Western, fantastic, hurray” and then the same people couple of months later started to cry “Oh, horror, Islamists, salafists, burning churches, killing Copts, terrible, so terrible”
If majority of the people were mistaken about “easy to get access to” Egypt why are you surprised that Americans are reluctant to involve themselves in Syria and prefer to adopt policy “wait and see”
The winners of two world wars drew all these borders. The people who live there are about to redraw all of them. Gobble, gobble.
I wish total victory for both Assad and the FSA