The Assad regime: The occupier's need and pretext

Far from the ongoing aggression on Gaza, and the repeated raids on the Syrian regime’s sites by the Israeli occupation air force, some EU countries are busy with the task of restoring relations with the Syrian regime, in coincidence with the Russian effort in this field that opens the path for Turkish normalisation with the Assad regime. This is in light of a common desire among a number of EU countries to reconsider their policies regarding Syria in order to find a solution to the Syrian refugee problem in these countries, by relieving pressure on the Syrian dictator who is the primary cause of the plight and catastrophe that the Syrians are suffering in their country and the places of their displacement.

This comes 13 years after the outbreak of the Syrian revolution and the Assad regime committing of all kinds of war crimes and crimes against humanity, as confirmed by international and local organisations.  The countries themselves that embrace the Syrians are aware of the essence of the Syrian regime’s policy over the past years towards its people, and the enormity of the crimes of using sarin, mustard and chemical gas, and resorting to the Russian and Iranian occupations to install the regime’s muscles and inflate them on the bodies of the Syrians, which caused widespread destruction to Syrian society and the displacement of half of its population.

READ: Syrians must produce regime issued passports to travel through border with Turkiye

Therefore, a decade ago, the capital of the EU – Brussels – and other European countries believed that severing its relationship with the regime would be the main means to pressure the Syrian regime, under the pretext of its adherence to the values ​​of protecting democracy and preserving human and citizenship rights and rejecting the crimes of genocide committed by Al-Assad and his allies.

The Syrians felt the lack of Western and American seriousness in dealing with the regime and preventing its crimes and the crimes of its allies, so the toll of victims was large, and the destruction was greater. These countries played a big role in the survival of the regime, the restoration of its security control over Syrian society, and strengthening its control over 70 per cent of Syrian geography. They were just like the Palestinians, the victims of Zionist barbarism, who experienced great disappointment in the failure of the international community to prevent the genocide committed against them in Gaza, and in its favouring of the Zionist coloniser.

Therefore, many Syrians see some European policies, led by Italy under the leadership of Giorgia Meloni, as favouring the Al-Assad regime by appointing an ambassador to the Syrian regime, a step that increases the relief of pressure on the regime, and puts more pressure on Syrians in their countries of asylum and in the countries of the region. This is because normalisation with the Syrian regime is a disregard for the political solution decided on the basis of international resolution 2254, to reach a peaceful solution and secure a political transition. Instead, it skims over the crimes that Al-Assad and his regime are accused of. This is a position that France and Germany still adhere to, saying that it is irrational to normalise with the regime in Damascus in the absence of a political transition and with Bashar Al-Assad regime’s rejection of any arrangements that benefit the Syrian people.

The passage of time does not mean the end of the crime and forgetting it, and not referring to the Syrian leader as a dictator and tyrant does not mean he is innocent of the crimes. Al-Assad remaining in power does not mean his regime is victorious over the Syrian people, but rather highlights the lies and the same slogans, as well as the hypocrisy accompanying the Israeli aggression on Gaza and the silence in the face of the crimes of genocide.

With the same question that answers the questions of the Palestinian and Syrian people, why does the criminal escape punishment? How does Western hypocrisy continue regarding issues of freedom, democracy and human rights? How can the common interest between the tools of occupation and the Arab tyrant lead to a mutual partnership created by interests between the occupier and the tyrant, and between these and the Western colonial project in the Arab region? There were sufficient motives before 2011 for the Syrians to revolt against the regime, its policies and its exposed function. The existence of the Al-Assad regime and allowing its control is a purely colonial need, and normalisation with it, both Arab and Western, for the purpose of preventing change in any aspect of political, economic and security life in the Arab region, are all purposes that existed for decades, before Assad inherited his father’s rule.

READ: Saudi Arabia reopens embassy in Syria, completing reconciliation with Assad regime

The desired benefit from the relationship with the Al-Assad regime for the Arabs, after its involvement in all cases of supporting terrorism and committing war crimes and crimes against humanity, raises the same question for the northern shore of the Mediterranean about the interest that lies within the relationship with the Al-Assad regime and what the justifications of the countries themselves carry for dropping the massive crimes that exist in the drawers of these countries’ courts and on the shelves of international organisations.

The Assad regime has nothing to offer on the Arab political table other than the success it was rewarded for by preventing the collapse of other Arab regimes that see its “steadfastness” as protection for them, after its model of destruction in Syria became a factor of comparison among tyrants and despots in the Arab region, and by an occupation that presents the brutality of its crimes in Gaza as a model of punishment for the Palestinian people.

The regime also has nothing to offer in terms of being effective on the international political stage other than the tasks it carries out and implements on the security level that it has been repeating for 13 years, that is, “My presence prevents terrorism from reaching you”, and “I am here to fight terrorism, which is my enemy and your enemy”, a slogan that is also raised to justify the atrocities and crimes in Gaza and all of Palestine.

In coincidence with all of this, there appears to be direct Arab coordination between the security of the regime and its counterparts in Arab regimes that are preparing to get rid of the problem of Syrian refugees. While Al-Assad’s strategy with the Europeans has not yet borne fruit, some was borne from Arab regimes that were the first to normalise with him and with the Israeli occupation, and did not take any steps to back down from normalisation with the occupier at the height of the crimes of aggression on Gaza. These regimes encourage and support Assad’s remaining  in power for the common benefit of all parties that believe Al-Assad’s role is preventing the desired change in Syrian society and whose attempt at revolution terrified the occupation and tyranny. Instead, his crimes were a means of reassurance for them and a scarecrow for their people.

Normalisation with the Assad regime was practically achieved by overlooking his crimes, and his repeated acceptance of the aggression of the Israeli occupation and remaining silent about it and its crimes in Palestine. The commonalities of mutual benefit between him and the regimes of occupation and tyranny were dismantled by Gaza, and the resistance of the Palestinian people exposed the entire dictionary of normalisation and the vocabulary of shame, betrayal, hypocrisy and conspiracy. It revealed the Western colonial and Zionist need for the survival of Arab regimes as terror becomes a weapon that prevents confrontation with the occupier and protects its needs in the Arab presidential palaces.

READ: Israel air strikes on Syria’s Hama leave 14 dead, 43 wounded

This article appeared in Arabic in Arabi21 on 10 September, 2024.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.