To Professor Burhan Ghalioun

by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem

Let me begin by reminding Professor Burhan Ghalioun that he has long held the view that academics — as distinct from mere lecturers, that is, those who put their scholarship to work in confronting real challenges — are people of penetrating insight, working to address problems through a scientific methodology, and that governments and decision-makers must therefore turn to them for guidance. I had assumed that the professor would not lose sight of his own views, yet I find him immersed in meetings with politicians, giving little attention to scientific standards as a basis for seeking a solution to the situation in Syria. In truth, I see Professor Burhan as having strayed far from the idea of the independence of developing peoples from their colonizers, and equally far from the scholarly circles that could provide diversity in political and social analysis.

What follows are some important points that were put to Professor Ghalioun, and of course I do not know whether he has reviewed and weighed them:

First: as a matter of principle, we do not seek help from those who have wronged us in order to lift that wrong from us. That is, we do not seek help from colonial powers or from despotic Arab regimes in order to save ourselves. There is a lesson for us in the Palestinian leadership, which sought a solution to the Palestinian cause from those who created the problem in the first place. Our flight from injustice and tyranny must not blind our hearts, minds, and eyes. Whoever has wished harm on the Arabs and the people of Syria, and continues to inflict harm upon them, cannot possibly be on their side. Just as a reminder: it was France that destroyed the Syrian kingdom and killed Yusuf al-Azma at the Battle of Maysalun; it was France and Britain that partitioned Greater Syria, and it was they who worked to impose the Mandate on the lands of Syria and Iraq through the League of Nations. It was France that principally armed Israel after 1948, that gave it the nuclear reactor, and that paved the way for it to steal the missile boats and to develop heavy-water production. It was Britain that struck the people of Palestine and undermined their remaining on their land; as for America, there is no need to elaborate. America, together with all the colonial powers, has worked to support Arab despots from the Atlantic to the Gulf.

Second: we do not seek the help of one despot against another, because a despot does not support a movement against another despot except for the purpose of consolidating his own despotism at the expense of his rival in despotism. In other words, despotic Arab regimes cannot possibly support those seeking freedom unless their aim is to achieve something that has nothing to do with freedom.

Third: the Western states cannot wage war on Syria, and the NATO experience against Gaddafi will not be repeated against Assad, because of the strength of the Syrian army. NATO, or the United States, would suffer heavy losses were they to decide to attack Syria.

Fourth: the Arab regimes are not combat regimes, and it is not expected that Saudi forces would launch an attack on Syria. These are regimes capable only of smuggling weapons by way of Western security agencies, providing funds, and inciting people through the media.

…would risk war against Syria, given the domestic Turkish repercussions this would entail, and the friction it would cause with Iran. But Turkey can contribute by smuggling weapons and fighters into Syria.

Sixth: the Syrian regime is backed by a number of elements of strength: its social base inside Syria and in the Arab world beyond it, its capacity to absorb sanctions, Russian-Chinese diplomacy, and the military strength of Iran and Hezbollah.

Seventh: the Syrian regime is weak from a security standpoint, and weak on the domestic front. The weakness of its security apparatus allows for the smuggling of weapons and money and the entry of fighters, and the weakness of the domestic front has accumulated because of the absence of human freedom and the persecution of citizens by the security agencies. This is clear from the fact that the regime awoke to find broad armed sectors inside Syrian cities and rural areas.

Eighth: if the Syrian regime is overcome, it is expected that the Muslim Brotherhood, not Burhan Ghalioun, will win the elections. America and the Western states do not want the Muslim Brotherhood, despite attempts to make contact with them in Egypt, Jordan, and Tunisia.

Ninth: the greatest opportunity before the opposition for changing the regime lies in a decisive military coup. Is this possible? Bearing in mind that the Arabs have tried military coups before, and they have brought them no good. The second opportunity lies in waging a long-term guerrilla war — one to which the regime will not surrender, and during which the colonial powers will not halt their support for the fighters.

In light of the points above, where are we heading? We are heading toward the destruction of Syria, because the crisis is no longer internal but has become internationalized in a way that does not lead to a decisive resolution of the conflict, but instead leads to the exhaustion of the Syrian people, along with both the regime and the opposition. America does not want Islamist rule, and neither do the Arab regimes; nor do they want Syria to remain in an alliance with Iran and Hezbollah. And so the crisis must be exploited to prolong the fighting toward the destruction of Syria. Did not the Arabs and the Westerners alike feed the Iran-Iraq war in order to exhaust both Iraq and Iran? What is wanted is Syria’s head, regardless of the means.

It does Professor Ghalioun no honor to sit in a conference alongside despotic regimes and colonial powers. And if he is looking for a way out, the way out is internal to Syria, or Arab through the leaders of Arab thought — not through the regimes. I have previously put forward a list of names of Arab thinkers, zealous for the Arab nation, who could be entrusted with the task of seeking a solution and stopping the bloodshed in Syria. I hope that Ghalioun’s experience over recent months has confirmed for him the lies of the Western states and the deception of the Arab regimes.

Source: Translated from the original Arabic, “إلى البروفيسور برهان غليون” by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem.