°®Âþµº

Dr. Azmi Bishara, General Director of the Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies, presented his vision for Syria's transitional phase, its conditions, and the possibilities of its success or failure in an wide ranging interview with Syria TV from Doha on Sunday evening. He emphasised that governing Syria is inherently shaped by the diversity and development of its society, even if it is not democratic. He also highlighted the peculiar reality of the Syrian regime, stating that "one of the oddities of the Syrian regime is that there is no deep state within it."

Bishara appeared cautious when discussing the likelihood of success or failure in establishing democracy in Syria. He described the democratic transition as a difficult path, with no guarantee of success.

He outlined four necessary conditions for any democratic transition, all of which are particularly relevant to the Syrian context:

1) the existence of a strong state that commands consensus, 2) the separation of the state from the ruling regime, 3) a consensus among key societal forces on the peaceful transfer of power through regular elections, and 4) an agreement on principles enshrined in the new constitution, such as citizenship rights, individual freedoms, and human rights.

Building on these foundational points, Bishara concluded that even if the future Syrian government is not democratic, it will have to account for the diversity and evolution of Syrian society, particularly its strides in women's rights and social status.

Based on this, he stressed that the democratic transition is "extremely complex." He warned that if Syria’s state is threatened with partition—especially given Israel’s apparent interest in such an outcome—or if discussions remain focused on sectarian, denominational, and minority divisions, this will lead not to democracy but to a "cold or hot war."

Despite this, he expressed confidence in the Syrian people's ability to overcome the grievances born from the practices of the former regime and the nature of the opposition over recent years, describing Syrians as a "patriotic people committed to their homeland".

Regarding the current situation in Syria, two weeks after the fall of the Assad regime, Bishara noted that terms like "democracy" and "transitional phase" are conspicuously absent.

He suggested that what is occurring in Damascus is a calculated consolidation of power—marked by placating public sentiment and adopting conciliatory rhetoric—while simultaneously securing key positions of authority.

This, he argued, reflects a pragmatic approach by Syria's new rulers, even as they withhold clear intentions regarding democratic governance.

When asked about the potential success or failure of Syria's transitional phase, Bishara emphasised that "historical inevitability does not guarantee the victory of democracy unless its conditions, such as national consensus and the resolution of grievances, are met." He added that "there is no inherent contradiction between democracy and Islam, provided religious individuals interpret and apply Islam in ways that do not conflict with democratic principles."

Bishara called for caution and an understanding of the complexities of transitional phases, acknowledging the uncertainty surrounding the intentions of Syria's new rulers and whether the current phase will lead toward democracy or something else entirely.

He noted the absence of a clear declaration about the general direction or the nature of the system the ruling forces aim to establish.

Addressing the possibility of a counter-revolution to restore the ancien regime, Bishara remarked on the peculiar lack of a deep state in Syria.

He observed that many state employees had quickly returned to their jobs under the new authority, indicating an absence of entrenched elements resisting the new rulers.

However, he warned against reactionary opposition to discussions about secularism, women's rights, and equality, cautioning against hostile responses to protests or gatherings advocating these causes.

Syrian national conference

On the subject of a proposed Syrian national conference as part of transitional preparations, Bishara dismissed claims that former Vice President Farouk al-Sharaa had been invited to participate.

He clarified that a visit by two individuals from Ahmed al-Sharaa’s office to Farouk al-Sharaa was merely to inquire about his health, with no invitation extended. Bishara emphasised the importance of figures like Farouk al-Sharaa in any national conference.

For the transitional phase, Bishara proposed forming a transitional governing body comprising the main ruling forces, possibly chaired by these forces, along with diverse societal representation to establish legitimacy through their conduct.

This body, he suggested, should issue a constitutional declaration clarifying its operational framework, outlining the envisioned governance system, and calling for a national conference to task legal experts with drafting a constitution reflecting Syrian values, culture, and aspirations.

Transitional justice

Bishara underscored the necessity of transitional justice—comprising truth and accountability—as an integral part of any transitional phase. He advocated for creating a specialised body to address past issues, rewrite history, and prevent the destruction of documents and evidence.

This body should conduct public trials for major criminals without targeting society as a whole, thereby fostering reconciliation and coexistence. He acknowledged crimes committed by elements within the opposition, emphasizing the need for balanced justice.

Bishara stressed the importance of rebuilding the Syrian army with the same conscripts and new officers, integrating defected officers and some faction leaders while disbanding factions altogether.

Without this approach, he warned, Syria would face multiple competing armies and hierarchies, akin to the situation in Iraq.

He emphasised that a state must monopolise the use of force, suggesting the police force’s reinstatement alongside new recruits and former faction members. Without such conditions, the process, in his view, would amount to mere power consolidation, hindering national unity and resistance to foreign interventions.

Bishara downplayed concerns over lifting sanctions on Syria, noting that these were primarily targeted at the regime, despite their impact on the populace.

He suggested that Syria’s new rulers could present their transitional program, emphasising rights and freedoms not as external conditions but as part of building a "new Syria," thereby earning international respect. He noted that sanctions like the "Caesar Act" are renewed annually and could simply not be renewed.

When asked about the possibility of an Islamist experiment in Syria, Bishara expressed skepticism, citing failed Islamist experiments in Sudan and Egypt.

He expressed hope that Syrian Islamists would account for Syria’s societal diversity and development. He anticipated pragmatic adaptations but expected ideological elements to persist.

Bishara opposed military conflict between Turkey and the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), advocating for peaceful resolution. He predicted challenges for the SDF, particularly if U.S. forces withdrew, and suggested they might seek alternative alliances, potentially with Israel.

Bishara attributed the Assad regime's collapse to factors including internal corruption, crippling sanctions, and external interventions. He highlighted the regime’s reliance on Russian support, which waned due to other priorities like the Ukraine war.

He also pointed to the role of organised opposition forces, particularly Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, in capitalising on the regime’s moral and structural decline.