Sam Heller
Until Bashar al-Assad fled Syria, on December 8, few countries actually wanted the Syrian dictator’s government to fall. This was not because foreign governments liked Assad or approved of the brutal way in which he reigned over Syria. Rather, they were afraid of what might replace him: rule by extremist militants, sectarian bloodletting, and chaos that could engulf not just Syria but much of the Middle East.
That fearful vision was also the Assad government’s argument for itself, that its continued survival kept anarchy and carnage at bay—and many people, including foreign policymakers, were convinced of it. In 2015, when opposition militants came close to toppling Assad, U.S. officials regarded the possibility of outright rebel victory and regime collapse as tantamount to “catastrophic success.”
Now Assad is gone. Syrians are celebrating in the streets of Damascus, opposition groups are attempting to organize a political transition, and the world is about to find out what comes after the fall. Assad remained ruthless and cruel to the end, even as he presided over an increasingly impoverished and dysfunctional state. He leaves a shattered country in his wake, and any new government—never mind a coalition of fractious armed opposition groups—would struggle in these circumstances. But the poor record of Syrian rebel groups when they have ruled significant stretches of territory also makes it difficult to be optimistic.
No comments:
Post a Comment