“I remember every friend, every person who I protested next to, every friend who was tortured to death. They didn’t die in vain to get this. They died to get freedom. They died to get democracy. They died to have a Syrian people live free. But instead, look what we got. Instead, look, even the people who their brothers and their daughters and their loved ones, they came and loaded up a washing machine from Suweyda or my mother’s wedding ring [and stole it].” So spoke Rami Emad, his voice cracking, fighting not to break down in tears. Rami is a secular Druze from Suweyda, and he had just finished describing the pogrom against his people which was carried out by Bedouin militias in collaboration with members of the Syrian army just a few weeks earlier in July.

Is this what the Syrian revolution fought for? 

When Assad was overthrown in December of last year, millions of Syrians poured out into the streets to celebrate. They were celebrating the end of this long, long nightmare. They were celebrating the downfall of this government of looting and corruption, mass murder, and mass torture. They were celebrating the apparent victory of a long, hard struggle for democracy.

And it wasn’t only the Syrian people. Every socialist worthy of the name, in fact every decent and aware human being around the world, joined the Syrian people in celebrating.

It is natural, it is nearly inevitable, that when such a victory is accomplished that there is a tendency to view that victory uncritically, that people will be reluctant to see that that victory might be turned into something very different from what those who fought and died for it in the first place envisioned. But in order to honor those who struggled so hard and sacrificed so much, in order to assure that they did not die in vain, we cannot shrink from openly viewing some extreme dangers, and even some ugly truths.

Ahmed al-Shaara came to power in Syria resting on the Sunni Arab nationalist Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS.) He may have tried to rise above HTS’s Sunni Arab nationalism, or it may have been his intent to carry out their ideology right from the start, but that doesn’t really matter. What matters is that his government is now descending into Sunni Arab sectarianism. Consider what is happening:

Alawites
Let us start with the Alawites, whose main population is on the Syrian Northwest coastal region, principally in Latakia. A recent BBC Frontline report as well as Haaretz document what happened there. As we know, the previous Assad regime based itself in part on support from a layer of Alawites. So the historic oppression of the Alawites, who are predominantly Shia, as opposed to the majority of Syrians, who are Sunni, combined with a general resentment against them for that reason. In early March, some remnants of the Assad regime attacked and killed some soldiers of the Sharaa

Top two photos: Calls for “jihad” against Alawites. Bottom: Alawite men forced to crawl and bark like a dog.

government. Frontline shows what happened next: Within days Sunni clerics were preaching to their followers, calling for “Jihad” against the Alawites. “By God, we belong for fighting and for killing them” one said. Another said online “the Alawite pigs will get what they deserve”, and another said online “no one from the Alawites should be left alive”. This was going on for several weeks, so it cannot be said that Sharaa was unaware of what was developing. But he did nothing to prevent it. The result was that thousands of militia men joined the government forces and descended on the coast. Frontline shows Alawite men being forced to crawl long distances on the ground on their stomach and forced to bark like dogs while they were being beaten. This was followed by a massacre of men, women and children carried out by government soldiers, and/or militia men who are grinning, and saying “this is the happiest I have been since liberation”. Over the course of several days an estimated 1200 Alawite were killed.

After it was over, Sharaa did criticize the slaughter and said it would be investigated. To this date, the results of such investigation and appropriate punishment have not been announced. It sounds a little like the “investigations” that the Israeli regime carries out after they are caught red-handed and can no longer deny some particular atrocity or another.

Druze

The Syrian army in Suweyda. They are accused of carrying out executions of Druze.

The case of the pogrom against the Druze in Suweyda is another example. This pogrom was carried out by Bedoiun militia in collaboration with government army forces. There had been a long-standing rivalry between the Druze and the Bedouin in that particular area. Much of that rivalry involved conflicts over land use as the Bedouin in that area were historically somewhat nomadic herders while the Druze in that area had tended to rely on agriculture. This sort of rivalry has arisen time again throughout the world. As is also often in the case, it also involved religious and cultural differences. The Druze have their own particular religion, which incorporates elements of Islam, Hinduism, and classical Greek philosophy. Among their prophets are Jesus, Muhammad, and Moses. So Islamic fundamentalists would consider them to be infidels at best and outright heretics at worst.

So, according to Haaretz, “in April, a WhatsApp recording went viral in Syria, allegedly featuring a senior Druze Sheikh insulting the Prophet Muhammad. The sheikh denied having made the statement and claimed that the recording was fabricated to inflame tensions and divide communities. The Sharaa government itself declared the recording to be fake, but jihadist groups had already begun mobilizing. Armed militant arrived in Suweyda and despite efforts by local leaders to defuse tensions, violent clashes broke out.”

Israel intervenes
In Israel, the Druze are close to the Israeli regime, including volunteering for combat in the Israeli army (the IDF). And in the Golan Heights, although the Druze there were somewhat separate from both their Israeli counterparts, and the Israeli regime itself, they had started to draw closer to the Israelis. And so the Druze in Suweyda called on the IDF to intervene on their behalf, which the IDF did. They carried out several bombings, including a bombing attack in Damascus as a way of warning al Sharaa to back off from attacking the Druze in Suweyda. Following that, the situation somewhat calmed down, and the Syrian government called for disarming of the Druze militias. Some Druze, however, refused to disarm.

Then on July 11, a group of Bedouin gunman attacked and robbed a young Druze man who was traveling to Damascus. This happened on the road that was supposed to be under Syrian army protection. This then lead to a broad wave of kidnapping targeting Druze civilians by Sunni Muslim Bedouin tribes. Druze militants responded in kind against several Bedouins. The military, claiming it was a peacekeeping force, actually collaborated with Bedouin militias in attacking the Druze in Suweyda.

In this video interview, Rami Emad, whom we quoted in the opening of this article, gives a graphic and horrific description of what happened next. The Bedouin militias in collaboration with the al Sharaa soldiers, entered Druze villages in the region and went house the house looting, burning, pillaging and murdering entire families. According to Emad, over 1000 Druze were murdered.

Role of al Sharaa
What was the role of al Sharaa? In the case of the pogrom against the Alawites, he did nothing to prevent it, but then turned around and criticized it. In the case of the pogrom against the Druze, he did make mild efforts to quell the sectarian divisions by denying the validity of the insulting supposed WhatsApp post of the Druze sheikh against the Prophet Muhammad. But then he turned around and allowed his army to participate in the pogrom.

There is no explanation for this role of the government soldiers other than that al Sharaa is resting on his original Sunni Arab nationalist political base. He cannot escape their influence, whether he wants to or not. In case there is any question about that, consider relations with the Kurdish people in Syria:

The Kurdish YPG. They are a substantial military force.

Kurds
The Kurds are still under the protection of the United States, and with a large, well armed, and experienced and motivated military, and being a much larger portion of the population of Syria than the Druze or Alawites, it is not possible at this point for the al Sharaa military to collaborate in carrying out a pogrom against the Kurds. So al Sharaa had to try to reach a compromise with them. However, make no mistake about it, according to that same BBC Frontline

Impoverished day laborers in Rojava town of Qamishli. Rojava remains under capitalism and cannot eliminate extreme poverty. See: https://english.enabbaladi.net/archives/2024/11/day-laborers-in-qamishli-worse-off-with-winter-arrival-low-wages/

documentary, about 150,000 Syrian born Kurds cannot own property, cannot get a marriage license, or even get a passport. Nevertheless, despite a generally cautious attitude, the head of the Rojava, government, General Mazlum Kobani, met with al Sharaa to try to reach an agreement. Among other things, al Sharaa agreed to explicitly recognize Kurdish rights. He also agree that rather than  calling state the “Syrian Arab Republic” it would be called “Syrian Republic”. That agreement was greeted by general celebrations in Rojava. Two days later al Sharaa issued a new constitution calling the country the Syrian Arab Republic and the new constitution had no recognition of Kurdish rights nor protections of minority rights in general. Article 3 of the new constitution says “the religion of the president of the republic is Islam and Islamic jurisprudence is the principal source of legislation.” The original agreement with Mazlum had said that Islam would be a source of law not the source of law. In any case, whether Islam is “a” or “the” source of law, that still automatically makes the Druze, as well as Christian and Jewish Syrians, second class citizens. There were protests in Rojava, and the Kurdish authority sent a letter to al Sharaa stating that they rejected the new constitution. To date the al Sharaa government has not replied. Instead, on July 18, government forces arrested five Young Kurdish men in Damascus for speaking Kurdish in public.

What do we make of the strategy or role of al Sharaa? On the one hand, he seems to understand that if Syria descends into a communalist sectarian nightmare, that will rule out any chance for Syria to attract foreign investment, which is his strategy for developing the Syrian economy, and Syria as a whole. On the other hand, he cannot escape the influence, the power, of the Sunni Arab nationalist base upon which he rested in his rise to power. That is the only explanation for why he did not stoke the worst sectarian and communalist hatred, but also why at best he did a little or nothing to restrain them and why his constitution plays to those forces.

al Sharaa on right with Saudi Arabia’s bin Salman and Trump. He cannot escape either his political roots nor his international entanglements.

This dual and conflicting role also reflects al Sharaa’s international connections. According to the Atlantic Council, both Saudi Arabia and Turkey have strong connections to al Sharaa. Turkey supports the new government partly because they would like to see a stable Syria so that the approximately 3.2 million Syrian refugees in Turkey can be sent back to Syria. They also support the Syrian government as an alternative to the Kurdish government in Rojava. TheAtlantic Council writes: “both Turkey and Saudi Arabia would like to see a unified and stable Syria that isn’t a terrorist hub. They both also want to prevent Iran from regaining influence in Syria and Lebanon to counter Iran’s influence in Iraq. This can only be possible with an inclusive in administration, in which all religions and ethnic groups in the country are represented.” Also, Al Jazeera reports that “Saudi Arabia and Qatar have announced that they will settle serious debt to the world bank totaling roughly $15 million.” Therefore, al Sharaa may partially restrain the Sunni Arab nationalist forces, but he cannot go too far, or he will alienate his base in Syria and risk actually being overthrown by them. That is the best possible interpretation. Others argue that this is what he actually wants. We cannot know what is in his head, and it doesn’t matter very much. His actions speak for themselves.

Then there is the role of both Israel and its number one backer, the United States. Michael Karadjis in his blog site. Their anti-imperialism and Ours, reports that many forces in Israel are calling for the

What is the “Abraham Alliance” ? And look at the group that put up this billboard: Abrahamshield.org. This is not a good sign.

partitioning of Syria. “Israel has said it wants Syria split into.’cantons’, and requests the US keep its forces in east Syria, and that Russia keep its air and naval bases in Syria, as part of dividing up the land,” Karadjis reports. Playing to all these forces, al Sharaa also seems friendly to signing onto the Abraham accords, which means leaving the Palestinians to the “tender mercies” of Israel.

Economic Development
Then there is the question of the economic development of Syria. Syrian born socialist Joseph Daher calls the economic policies of the new government “Islamic neo liberalism”. He writes: “the minister of economy and foreign trade has repeatedly highlighted the neoliberal economic orientation of the new authority, stating. ‘ we will move from a socialist economy…. To a free market economy, respecting Islamic laws.’….” Daher continues, “many of Ahmad Al Sharaa’s meetings have centered around engaging Syrian and non-Syrian business persons, both domestically and abroad, to promote and explain the new economic vision. These discussions have largely been framed in alignment with the interest of economic elites, as the current authority aims to satisfy their demands….. Syria’s foreign minister, Asad al-Shaibani, told the Financial Times that the new authority plans to privatize state owned ports and factories, including those in oil, cotton, and furniture production, while also inviting foreign investment and boosting international trade…. In terms of austerity measures, several decisions have been taken. These include raising the price of bread from 400 Syrian pounds (for 1100 grams of bread) to 4000 Syrian pounds (for 1500 grams) and announcing plans to end bread subsidies entirely within one to two months as part of market liberalization efforts….. additionally, [there was] the announcement by the minister of economy and trade to layoff around 300,000 state employees.” It was exactly these sorts of neoliberal austerity measures that really lay at the roots of the Arab spring, which started in 2011. They will not be popular with the Syrian masses. So what choice does al Sharaa have other than to turn to Sunni Arab nationalism in order to maintain a base of support?

Some may argue that the new Syrian government has no choice but to attract foreign capital investment. We should consider the history of that approach. Take the example of South Africa: In 1994 the South African apartheid regime was overthrown and Nelson Mandela and his party, the

Marikana Massacre: The inevitable result of neoliberalism in ex colonial world.

African national Congress (ANC), took power. They hoped to develop the South African economy by attracting foreign capital. But the only way they could attract foreign capital was to hold down wages and guarantee “labor peace”. The full and inevitable result of that policy was the Marikana massacre of 2012 in which dozens of striking minors in Marikana were gunned down by the South African police controlled by the very same ANC. That massacre has been compared to the 1960 Sharpesville Massacre of the previous apartheid regime. Syria is not South Africa, but where have neo liberal policies ever succeeded in raising the masses of people up and out of poverty? When has it been more than a version of “trickle down” economics?

The Alternative
There is an economic alternative, but that alternative is impossible as long as Sunni Arab nationalism is accepted. So far, according to Rami Emad that acceptance is commonplace. He explains his own role: “I lost a lot in my life in order to try to help the people, because I thought of it as ‘this is my own people. This is my revolution. It’s for freedom, for peace, for democracy, for us to be free and say whatever we want, to live in peace. Nobody would threaten us with a gun at our heads.’ And I believed in it. Believed in it for the sake of the million martyrs I worked so hard for. It is the most painful thing. It is the most painful thing to me to see all of my fellow activist, yeah, if I might say now, attacking me…. Calling me a traitor, and inciting daily that I should be killed. My family should be killed. How can I feel that I’m connected with them?…. I put my life on hold for 14 years. I risk so much. My family lost so much…. My house was looted. Everything we had was looted, and was looted again and again. It’s very terrible to start your life over again, all for a revolution, and then you find this. The problem here has two sides. The first one is from the government which is killing me. The second thing, which is actually from the people, from the activists of the revolution who have been with me for 14 years, and now they’re accusing me of being a traitor…. And the Syrian people, instead of going to the streets to chant for me… they come to celebrate and encourage and call for more killing and more death and support the army in what they are doing. So now, how can I make a revolution with such people? It will not end up well. It would end up even worse, with someone who is more radical than al Sharaa, but leaving him [in power] also is not a solution…. I give up on this. I want to have my own local community, safe and separate…. I feel a little bit bad for the people, the Syrian people, because I know there are many of them who are not able to speak because if they speak, they are afraid to be arrested.”

It is difficult to imagine that there are not forces who abhor these pogroms and sectarian violence. Maybe some are held back by the sheer relief that the Assad nightmare is now over. Maybe this leads to a reluctance to criticize the government that has replaced Assad. That would not be surprising at all. But without openly speaking up, including going out into the streets to protest against this sectarianism, there is the extreme danger that the struggles and sacrifices of the past 15 years will be largely in vain.

Situation withn the Druz, Alawite and Kurdish communities
Now let us consider the situation within the Druze, Alawite, and Kurdish communities: Again, just as is true about our general lack of information about the alignment of forces within Syria as a whole, the same holds true for what is happening within those particular communities. However, we have to ask wouldn’t it make sense for the Druze, the Alawites and the Kurds to unite in a united front based on the principle of opposition to pogroms and sectarian slaughter no matter who is under attack? (Maybe this is already starting to happen, but we just don’t know about it.) Such a principled approach could also appeal to those Syrian Arabs, who fought so long and hard for democratic rights.

July 25 funeral for beloved Iranian environmental activist Hamid Moradi, who died fighting a wildfire in Iran. This funeral was proof that despite the repression the movement lives on in Iran.

But we can go further than that. How about the “women, life, freedom” movement in Iran? At present, the regime has been able to have somewhat driven the movement further underground due to the bombing campaign of Israel and the United States. That that will not last forever. The movement in Iran has shown the same heroism as has the Syrian revolution. Not only that, but it seems the powerful Iranian working class has played an important and somewhat independent role in the struggle. They would seem to be a natural ally in the struggle for democratic rights, the struggle against religious and nationalist communalism and violence, and the struggle of, by, and for the working class in both countries.

Within any movement there is always the class question. It may seem to be the easiest, or even the only possible road forward to unite all of the people in any particular group, be they Alawites, Druze, Kurds, regardless of class. We should remember, however, that we live under capitalism and under capitalism that inevitably must mean that such a movement will come under the leadership and control of the capitalist class of that particular group. And that class will always look out for its own class interest. If that sounds like a cliché, it is because it is true. The Druze capitalists will always unite with capitalist Israel, rather than the working class of Syria or the Kurdish workers or anybody else. And the same is true of the Kurdish and Alawite and Syrian Arab capitalists. And they will end up selling out “their own” people when their class interest demand it.

Some, both inside and outside Syria, condemn the Syrian Druze for aligning themselves with the genocidal state of Israel. But who really lies at fault for this when the Druze people in Syria find themselves under murderous attack and who in Syrian society comes to their aid? And anyway is the Druze acceptance of an alliance with Israel really all that different from anybody else? Al Sharaa after all is apparently moving to accept the Abraham Accord, under which the Arab states will abandon the Palestinians and recognize the state of Israel. And how about the Kurds in Rojava who are also moving towards an alliance with the state of Israel? So let us look first and foremost at those with some real power. Their orientation towards Israel is not really all that different.

Only the working class in Syria, be they Arabs or anybody else, can unite the great majority of the people of Syria, while at the same time rejecting all capitalist, imperialist forces, including Israel, Turkey, Russia, and the United States. Instead, a working class led struggle can reach out to the workers and freedom fighters in the surrounding states and around the world. Their support would be the defense against imperialist intervention.

As far as economic development, although the Syrian economy has been devastated by the many years of counterrevolution, it still has some great resources, including but not limited to the oil wealth in Rojava. It also has agricultural wealth and some important ports. A working class led and controlled movement and government which took over those resources and put them at the service of Syrian society as a whole, and which also united the overwhelming majority of the people of Syria, would receive a massive response from throughout the entire region. It would be a huge boost to the powerful Iranian working class and the left in general in that country. It would even receive a huge response from workers the world over, and would revive a global working class socialist movement. Many will say that is just a pipe dream. “You are dreaming. You must be realistic,” they will say. But what is realistic? Everything else has led to the disastrous slaughters that we were seeing all around the world today. In the end, socialist revolution is never practical until it is actually taken up.

We recognize that the Syrian economy, and the working class movement with it, have been devastated by nearly 15 years of counterrevolution in Syria. Also, according to several reports, the fact that Assad called himself socialist has has left a bad taste in the mouths of many Syrians for the word “socialism”. It would be naïve at best to think that the struggle along the lines of what we are advocating is just simply waiting to happen. It is impossible to predict from the outside how, through what channels, those ideas can surface inside Syria. But one thing is certain: it will never happen unless and until some forces take up that banner.

Conclusion
The overthrow of the fascistic Assad regime was a huge victory for the masses of Syrians. However painful it may be, we must admit that much of the fruits of that victory risk being squandered. Capitalism has proven to be a nightmare without end in the entire former colonial world. It has never been able to fully develop the economies, create stable, democratic rule, or unite the various different peoples. Syria is a living example of this. That is what Trosky‘s theory of permanent, or uninterrupted, revolution shows. Nowhere is it more relevant than in the history and present situation of Syria. For some historical context, see our article The Theory of Permanent, or Uninterrupted, Revolution, and Syria.

The real Syrian and Iranian revolution. For international working class solidarity