POMED Notes: “Voices from the Frontlines: A Discussion with the SNC”

On Thursday the United States Institute of Peace hosted four members of the newly formed Syria National Council for a discussion of the current status of the Syrian opposition and it’s future. The panel discussion was moderated by Steven Heydemann, Senior Advisor for Middle East Initiatives at USIP. Panelists included: Najib Ghadbian, associate professor at the University of Arkansas, Murhaf Jouejati, professor of Middle East studies at the National Defense University, Ausama Monajed, executive director of the Strategic Research and Communication Centre in London, and Dima Moussa a Syrian-born attorney who has volunteered in the past with the Human Rights Law Institute of DePaul University. It should also be noted that a fifth SNC member, Riad Seif –who is in Damascus- was unable to join the panel discussion via Skype after being recently beaten by security forces and hospitalized and his life threatened to prevent his participation in the panel discussion.

Click here to view or download the full publication as a pdf.

Steven Heydemann opened the panel discussion with an introductory speech in which he noted that the SNC’s recent formation was a big step forward, but the Syrian opposition as a whole still faced tough questions regarding their internal divisions and their continuous efforts to become united.

Najib Ghadbian was the first panelist to speak. Ghadbian opened up with a basic discussion of the evolution of the Syrian evolution starting in 2000 when President Bashar Al’Assad took power. Ghadbian stated that it was important to emphasize that the Syrian revolution is situated within the Arab Spring and as such, the Syrian people have the right to be part of this movement and must be granted their human rights, irrespective of any strategic concerns. Ghadbian described how the road to forming the SNC started with the Damascus spring movement which was an attempt to revive civil society in Syria, followed by continued demands for internal reform such as repealing the emergency laws and allowing exiles to return to Syria. Ghadbian addressed some of the common criticisms he has heard as of late, including the comment that there is no viable alternative to the regime, to which he responded that the SNC has attempted to prove the opposite by producing a vision of a Syria pos-Assad. Ghadbian also noted that 2010 was a very low point for the Syrian opposition and all Arab opposition in general and the Arab Spring caught people off guard. Ghadbian then explained the process by which the SNC was formed, and how after numerous attempts, in August the SNC was formed. He also discussed the delicate balance of creating the broad representation needed for the SNC to be truly representative of all of Syrian society.

Next, Dima Moussa opened up her speech with a discussion about her personal experiences of growing up under Assad rule in Syria. Moussa stated that she was so impressed by the people who took to the streets demanding freedom. Moussa also attempted to address some of the common misconceptions about Syria’s revolution – in particular that the revolution in Syria is led by Islamists and that many minority communities were not included. She stated that this was untrue and that Syria’s revolution is for all Syrians and noted that she herself was a Christian Syrian and noted that there was “plenty of evidence that Christians were going to mosques to participate in the protests.” Moussa also noted that the SNC is important in terms of its ability to reassure all people in Syria, that a future Syria will be for all Syrians and thus all segments of society will be represented within the SNC and pointed out that “there are seats for Assyrians, Kurds, many Christian Syrians from all sects.” Moussa concluded that the SNC continue to evolve: “it’s an ongoing process but we feel we are representing all segments of Syrian society.”

Murhaf Jouejati spoke next and re-affirmed that the Syrian revolution has to be viewed within the context of the Arab spring; “It is a non-ethnic, non-religious revolution against 48 years of oppressive rule.” Jouejati also noted that the rule of Bashar Al’Assad had been one disappointment after another, and how in his first speech during the revolution there was an expectation that Bashar would institute serious reforms and yet he chose to blame a foreign conspiracy. Jouejati also noted that in his opinion “the revolution is more a result of the mismanagement of Assad” then anything else. He also noted that “significant reforms would [have] cause[d] for the Assad regime to collapse.” Jouejati  also cited a recent survey conducted in which 8 out of 10 Syrians surveyed expressed their desire to see regime change and wont be satisfied with reform only. He also affirmed his belief that the Assad regime will collapse; “there is too much blood and the distance between regime and society is too great” but noted that “the Assad family will not go away easily. They are of the view that Syria is their farm and that the Syrian people are their cattle.” Jouejati also stressed that “Syria could be head for civil war…so it is imperative for the international community to help the SNC.” He concluded by noting that the SNC stands for the establishment of a civil democratic government in which everyone is equal before the law.

Ausama Monajed was the last to speak and asked the audience to imagine what a free and democratic Syria would look like and the kind of positive effect such a Syria could have on the region and on the world. He also voiced his disgust regarding the current “autrocities committed so far [which] are beyond the wildest imagination of most.” Monajed also thanked the local coordinating committees fortheir accurate documentation of the current crimes being committed giving the world a sense of the situation in Syria. Monajed cited the following figures: 4,000 dead, of which, over 400 are women and children and 45,000 in prison. Monajed also chided the international community for their silence and asked how many more crimes would have to be committed before the international community responded in a serious fashion to the crisis in Syria. In this vein, Monajed discussed what the SNC needed from the international community in terms of support: 1) immediate recognition from Turkey and other Arab nations of the SNC; 2) Requesting that all regional players cut all communications with the Assad government; 3) Withdraw all ambassadors from Damascus at once to create a complete diplomatic isolation of Assad government; 4) Freezing the membership of Syria in the Arab League; 5) the banning of Syrian satellite television, state television, and privately funded pro-Assad channels; 6) the imposition of further economic sanctions and the cutting of all economic and political ties with the Assad government. Lastlym Monajed expressed the need for another UNSC resolution which would demand that the Syrian government allow a UN mission into Syria. Monajed concluded that such a resolution would ensure a political loss for the Syrian government regardless of the outcome of the vote, or regardless of whether the Syrian government allows or disallows such a mission to enter the country.

Numerous questions were posed to the panel regarding many topics. Several questions focused on the regional implications of the fall of the Assad government and if the panel could discuss potentially how the SNC might re-orient Syria politically in the region. Ghadbian stated that Syrians feel that they have suffered “from the mismanagement of the relationship between Lebanon and Syria” by the Assad government and respect for Lebanon’s sovereignty would potentially be a big issue. He also hypothesized that the strategic relationship between Iran and Syria would end, although he did not rule out having a cordial diplomatic relationship with Iran. Monajed stressed that the SNC still had no unified position regarding “how to deal with the Iranians” in the future.

Another set of questions asked what efforts the SNC were making to reach out to the elements of Syrian society still perceived as loyal or at least “on the fence” about supporting the Syrian opposition- specifically the merchant class that is centered in Damascus and Aleppo and minorities. MOussa stressed that the makeup of the SNC itself should be reassuring to the broader Syrian population as it was in her opinion, very representative of Syrian society. Ghadbian also added that some of “the first fallen heroes in this revolution came from the Alawite and Christian communities.” Ghadbian also noted that in terms of the merchant elite in Aleppo there were several factors why they had not fully joined the revolution and part of it had to do with the fact that Aleppo had also suffered from the brutal crackdown in 1982 conducted by Hafez Al’Assad, and that there is also a heavy security presence in the Aleppo which may be preventing protests from taking place.

Lastly, one question asked whether the SNC would still consider a negotiated settlement with the Assad government or enter into a power sharing agreement with the current government. Ghadbian answered this question but there was a general nod of agreement from all the panelists that while the SNC did not have an official position regarding this, the SNC “embraces the revolutionaries’ position that there is a rejection of negotiations with those who are responsible for killing civilians…[Bashar] He sided with the forces who are responsible for the killings- like his brother [Mahar Al’Assad]. We do extend the idea of negotiation to anyone who is not responsible for killing civilians…The principle of negotiations should not be ruled out, but no negotiations with those who kill civilians.”