‘Shallow analyses of Syria could lead to embarrassing mistakes’

Stienen, who worked as a senior diplomat in the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs in such Arab countries as Syria and Egypt, is the author of “Dreaming of an Arab Spring: A Dutch Diplomat in the Arab World” (in Dutch). She is one of the most sought after people when the subject is Syria as she is highly respected for her objective analyses and also deep knowledge of the region.

Stienen shared her take on the conflict in Syria as well as her predictions for the country’s future with Sunday’s Zaman readers.

How did your story with Syria start?

My first encounter with Syria was in the Netherlands via Dutch lessons to a Syrian refugee from Aleppo. This man, let’s call him, Faisal, was a member of a banned party and had spent years in prison. I met his family in Aleppo in 1990 when I visited Syria for the first time. Over the past decades I travelled several times to Syria, and I worked and lived in Damascus for almost five years from 1999-2004, when I was posted there as a Dutch diplomat. My main files were human rights, political reporting and asylum and migration.

What kind of impressions do you remember? What were your likes and dislikes?

Syria has two faces: that of a beautiful country full of history and great food with warm, hospitable and wonderful people, and that of a dictatorship that runs the country as if it were its own family business. As a holiday destination Syria has many hidden gems in Damascus, Aleppo, the mountains and the deserts. I have always been impressed by the resolve of numerous individuals to change the situation from within. Many of them paid with their lives, in the 1980s and 1990s; thousands and thousands of people disappeared. Human rights abuses and torture are very common in jails and detention centers of the secret services.

Can you tell me about differences between Assad the father and his son?

Don’t be mistaken by the so-called Western side of Bashar al-Assad due to his 18 months study of ophthalmology in London or his previous position as head of the Damascus Computer Society. Bashar al-Assad is the son of his father and a product of his upbringing in a family that believes it owns Syria. His father had a reputation of being a shrewd negotiator and somebody who was ruthless when met with resistance. In a way Bashar has been smarter in his way of keeping the wall of fear intact. Unlike his father, who arrested or killed thousands of people in one go (for example in Hama in 1982), Bashar was very selective after the Damascus spring in 2001, and he arrested a few individuals of all the different opposition “groups” in Syria. Also in international policies Bashar al-Assad has been playing his cards smartly, that is to say, in the eyes of those who want to keep the Assad regime on the throne. After 9/11 he was first quite helpful to the US in finding terrorist suspects. But he definitely is no ally to the West, which became very clear by his attitude towards Iraq in 2003, the reluctance to withdraw from Lebanon and the continuous ties with Hezbollah, his hosting of Hamas and the Islamic Jihad in Damascus and his closeness to Iran

Is he a reformist?

It really depends who you ask this question. Many businesspeople feel that Bashar al-Assad has reformed the economy a bit in order for them to make better business. But on the political front many observers have not seen any sincere attempts to really reform the political system, which is still based on the supremacy of the Baath party in combination with the absolute power of the upper echelons of the army and the security services.

Is ethnicity a problem?

Syria is indeed a mosaic of cultures, religions and different ethnic groups. In a way it is one of the beautiful sides of Syria. At the same time there are definite tensions among the groups as some groups have better access to power than others. It is, however, much too simple to say that Syria is ruled by an Alawite minority and that the rest have no influence. The tensions also have to do with the unequal division of wealth in the country and social and class differences. The last months it has been the regime itself that has been focusing on ethnic differences, basically to instill fear among the population for a repetition of the Iraq scenario: real civil war based on ethnicity. At the same time most of the demonstrators don’t emphasize the ethnicity issue at all. All they want is the departure of the regime because it has been so brutal towards its own people.

What do you think about the Syrian economy? What is the potential?

Syria is a lower middle income country. (The average salary is $200 per month; the GDP [gross domestic product] is around $55 billion.) At the moment the Syrian economy is in total disarray. A high unemployment figure among a young population is a potential source of unrest. As most of the economy is state run and privatizations haven’t yet brought great successes, real reform is needed. In particular, foreign investment is still very limited. As for the negative international reputation, foreign donors are also reluctant to assist Syria. Syria has also been suffering from serious droughts that have affected the important agricultural sector. The dwindling oil reserves are a problem as well, as there are no other industries that can replace the income from the oil sector. The tourism sector has great potential, but due to the recent crisis all travel companies have cancelled their trips to Syria.

What does Turkey mean to Syrians?

After very tense relations in the 1990s, relations have become very close over the past decade. For many Syrians, Turkey is a role model: a country that modernized while keeping its own autonomy and Islamic identity. The relationship is good at the governmental level as well. Turkey is, of course, a potentially important market for Syrian exports, but at the moment Turkey is exporting more to Syria. One of the most important issues will remain the shared waters of the Euphrates (Fırat) River. And Syria has its own Kurdish issue as well. The relationship has recently become volatile again after the influx of Syrian refugees into Turkey.

Can Turkey play a constructive role?

Ankara is obviously following the developments in Syria very closely. The speech of Bashar al-Assad on June 20 has not satisfied the concerns in Ankara over whether he is really reforming his country. By now the EU and the US have recognized that Ankara could play a crucial role in pressuring the Syrian regime. The Syrian demonstrators are hoping for an attitude from Turkey similar to the one it showed towards Hosni Mubarak.

Do you see any mistakes by Turkey?

Turkey is admired for its assertive foreign policy, but there are limits. There are still many people in the Arab world who “suffer” from the “Ottoman Empire complex.” So Turkey would make an enormous mistake using language or inclusive policies that are in any way to be perceived as expansionist.

What will happen to Syria now? What is your good case scenario and bad case scenario?

The best scenario for Syria is a transition period where Bashar al-Assad hands over his presidency to a transition council that consists of a representation of all the forces in the country. The emergency law should be annulled, political prisoners should be released and security services should be dismantled. A genuine space for political debate among all parties should be created; the transition should ultimately lead to a process of democratization.

The worst case scenario is clear: a bloodbath instigated by a regime that would rather ruin Syria than give up its claim to the throne.

Please provide your personal comments for the coming days.

Syria is really a complex country with many layers. It strikes me that the majority of analysts stay at the surface in their analyses, and I fear that policies based on those analyses will lead to embarrassing mistakes. I also feel that the international community can easily win points by at least speaking out about the enormous courage of the Syrian demonstrators to continue to demand their rights.

More on Petra Stienen

Stienen studied Arabic and Middle Eastern studies in Leiden and London and lived for many years in the Middle East. Due to her genuine efforts to understand a conflict zone and her orientalism-free approach, she is highly respected in the region. Today she is widely regarded as one of the few experts from the Western world who has an objective outlook on issues regarding the Middle East. Stienen was a participant of the “Europe is failing its Muslims” debate, which took place on Feb. 23, 2010 at Cadogan Hall in London, in association with BBC World News and the British Council. Arguing in favor of the argument that Europe is indeed failing its Muslims were Tariq Ramadan and Stienen; against them were Douglas Murray and Flemming Rose. According to Stienen: “Reading the Arab human development reports, they sum it up very precisely: There is still a lack of freedom, there’s a lack of knowledge and the lack of participation of women is really worrying in those societies. The question, though, is, are those wrongs really connected to Islam? … So, I’m wondering, are we actually addicted to our own stereotypes? This is the impression I get at airport bookstores, when I watch TV, over and over again we hear the same warning; while we’re sleeping Europe will turn into a certain ‘Eurabia,’ Islam is about to take over. I believe that this one-sided, one-dimensional story is really failing Muslims in Europe miserably.”