Sowing Sectarian Chaos in Syrian + Lebanese Option Gathering

A web site I'm sure to visit every weekend is Counterpunch. The perspective is Left and the reporting is nearly always a refreshing departure from what I consume in the Gray Lady every day. This weekend there are three excellent stories on the Syrian civil war: Gilad Atzmon's "Israel is Losing in the Syrian War," Franklin Lamb's "US Zionist Lobby Reels From Resistance al-Qusayr Victory," and Shamus Cooke's "Syria's Fake Sectarian War." All are worth reading.

Cooke casts doubt on the standard Western view that Syria is rapidly succumbing to sectarian chaos that is also spreading to Lebanon:

Will Sunni Muslims in Syria — who are the majority — suddenly begin attacking their Shia countrymen and the Syrian government? Unlikely. A compilation of data from humanitarian workers in and around Syria compiled by NATO suggests that: 

“…70 percent of Syrians support the Assad regime. Another 20 percent were deemed neutral and the remaining 10 percent expressed support for the rebels.” 

The pro-Assad 70 percent is mostly Sunni. This data flies in the face of the constant barrage of western media distortion about what’s happening in Syria. Previous polling compiled last year by Qatar had similar results, and was likewise ignored by the western media. 

The above article quoted a source familiar with the data: 

“The Sunnis have no love for Assad, but the great majority of the community is withdrawing from the revolt… what is left is the foreign fighters who are sponsored by Qatar and Saudi Arabia. They are seen by the Sunnis as far worse than Assad.” 

Syrian Sunnis are likely disgusted by the behavior of the foreign extremists, which include a laundry list of war crimes, ethnic cleansing, as well as the terrorist bombing of a Sunni Mosque that killed the top Sunni Cleric in Syria — along with 41 worshipers and 84 others injured. The Sunni Cleric was killed because he was pro-Assad. 

The recent calls for Jihad by the Saudi and Qatari Sunni leaders are likely in response to the Syrian government scoring major victories against the rebels. The rebels are now badly losing the war, in large part because they’ve completely lost their base of community support.

Cooke's argument is supported by Alia Malek's opinion piece, "The Syria the World Forgot," that appears in today's New York Times Sunday Review:

While sectarianism has become the vehicle of the Syrian conflict, it was never its impulse. But distinguishing what caused the uprising from what sustains it is crucial, so that proposed interventions and resolutions aren’t as woefully ineffective as they have been thus far. 

The conflict began with grievances about corruption. Beginning in the 1980s, economic policies reflecting the interests of the government and economic elites forced most Syrians to depend on state largess and subsidies. After 2005, subsidies were slashed, leaving most Syrians in dire straits. Severe drought made matters worse, displacing hundreds of thousands of families and creating an army of angry and politically disaffected Syrians in the countryside and small towns who incited the popular uprising in 2011, together with small numbers of longtime activists in the cities. 

Although individual Alawites close to the Assads’ inner circle have been the biggest beneficiaries of corrupt policies, most of Syria’s economic elites are actually urban Sunnis. And many Alawites not tied to the regime are poor. 

But such details have been ignored. For those seeking to maintain or gain influence in the Middle East, the most proven and expedient method is to invoke and provoke sectarianism and the existential fears that come with it. It’s a reliable way to win willing recruits and a constituency — and set the place on fire. 

And it’s always been easier than developing an actual political philosophy. Likewise, sectarian chaos has proved more exploitable for outside countries looking to gain a foothold in the political, economic and social affairs of other states. 

This is not to deny that sectarianism exists, but blurring the distinction between what caused the conflict and the ugliness it has spawned limits our capacity to imagine viable solutions.

CNN is reporting that Hezbollah shot and killed a member of the Lebanese Option Party during a protest in front of the Iranian embassy in Beirut. Information though not overwhelming is available on the Web about the Lebanese Option Gathering. It is a Shiite political organization led by Ahmad al-Asaad the second, scion of a large feudal family from southern Lebanon. His father, Kamel Asaad, was a speaker of the Lebanese parliament. The Lebanese Option Gathering is anti-Syrian and anti-Iranian. They seem to be a confection of the March 14 Alliance, a pro-Saudi and pro-Western grouping, though not officially part of it. It doesn't smell right.