Syrians are calling for freedom.
BEIRUT – Syrians are organizing campaigns on Facebook and Twitter that call for a “day of rage” in Damascus this week, taking inspiration from Egypt and Tunisia in using social networking sites to rally their followers for sweeping political reforms.
Like Egypt and Tunisia, Syria suffers from corruption, poverty and unemployment. All three nations have seen subsidy cuts on staples like bread and oil. Syria’s authoritarian president has resisted calls for political freedoms and jailed critics of his regime.
The main Syrian protest page on Facebook is urging people to protest in Damascus on Feb. 4 and 5 for “a day of rage.” It says the goal is to “end the state of emergency in Syria and end corruption.”
Baby Assad is going to have his hands full for a while. Let’s see, losing Egypt but gaining Syria… nah, it’s still a lose, but it sure will eff up Hezbollah and Iran for a bit.
Here’s hoping the protesters succeed in reforming the Syrian government. But I wouldn’t count on it. He’s got his daddy’s example of the Hama massacre.
The Hama massacre (Arabic: مجزرة Øماة‎) occurred in February 1982, when the Syrian army bombarded the town of Hama in order to quell a revolt by the Muslim Brotherhood. An estimated 17,000 to 40,000 people were killed, including about 1,000 soldiers,[1] and large parts of the old city were destroyed. The attack has been described as possibly being “the single deadliest act by any Arab government against its own people in the modern Middle East”.[2]
By the way, who initiated the violence there? That’s right, the Muslim Brotherhood—those peaceful, peaceful guys who modeled their organization after the YMCA, and who mean Egypt no harm. (Sorry, couldn’t say that with a straight face.)
hmm, Syria’s a tricky bit of business. Because the Assads are Alawi (a minority within a minority), there’s relative religious freedom (for Christians and Muslims, hmm? [hmph!]). Ba’ath Party, right? Yeah, there are some similarities to Hussein’s regime: general religious/ethnic freedom .. until somebody became a perceived threat. The only group in Syria who are outright outlawed are followers of (vaguely defined) Salifism .. in short, Saudi-sponsored fundamentalists. So, um, from Israel’s point of view, you presently have a state that is *politically* (i.e., secularly) aligned against it versus .. the potential emergence of a state led by the sort of people who are presently crossing into Iraq from Saudi Arabia to blow themselves up in crowded (Shia) places. on the other hand, it would take a *lot* to make that happen in Syria, a (generally) secular society. but who knows where the next (sorta) “revolution” is going to happen? i’ve heard some things from out of Albania, but that poor country falls so far below the U.S. radar that it’s difficult to hear much !