Bassam Haddad legt auf
Jadaliyya dar, worin sich das syrische Regime von dem in Ägypten, Tunesien und Libyen unterscheidet und warum
al-Assad trotz brutalem Staatsapparat gewisse Sympathien in der arabischen Bevölkerung genießt. Unter anderem sei dies auf die syrische Haltung gegenüber der israelischen und US-amerikanischen Politik im Nahen Osten zurückzuführen.
Discussions of Syria’s vulnerability to internal protests often posit Damascus’s resistance status to explain why Syria will be spared: i.e., that because of Syria’s confrontational stance toward Israel and the United States’ brutal policies in the region, the regime enjoys a form of Arab nationalist legitimacy. In particular, Syria’s support for Hezbollah and Hamas is considered a unique and legitimate tool for manifesting such confrontation to imperialism. After all, President Bashar al-Assad polls quite well throughout the region compared to other Arab leaders, and enjoys significant popularity among various segments of Syrian society.
Syriens US- und israelkritische Haltung wird die Bevölkerung jedoch nicht ewig ruhig stellen können.
Still, overemphasizing the regime “resistance legitimacy” is problematic on two counts: first, even in Egypt, where Mubarak was viewed as a U.S. protégé and Israel’s accomplice, the demonstrators did not make that point a major issue. Second, the region is entering a new era in which Syria’s confrontational stance might become less unique, as Egypt and other Arab governments take more independent positions and withdraw from the strong U.S. orbit.
Keine Kommentare:
Kommentar veröffentlichen