The Syrian people are united.

After more than a decade of the Syrian popular revolution and the internal and external fragmentation it has caused, is it still possible to say: “The Syrian people are one”?

Following various Syrian social media channels reveals a kind of abstract imagination and excessive idealism. This behavior manifests as open hostility towards all or some of the four de facto authorities: “The Coalition, SDF, the Salvation Government, the Regime.” This hostility reflects a denial of the popular support these authorities have, as well as a denial of the current internal political reality in Syria. The true consequences for the Syrian people have become increasingly evident, especially considering the movements in Daraa and Sweida, which, whether through violent or peaceful opposition, fall under the Syrian regime’s authority as internal opposition.

We now observe a normalization of the unilateral thinking that was a defining characteristic of the Baath regime and Assad’s rule. The Baath regime, having lost more than half of Syrian territory, continues to reject any opposing voice that does not fall under the National Front parties’ umbrella or its intelligence agencies’ surveillance. The regime’s discourse remains focused on treason, hostility, and the refusal to even acknowledge opposing parties.

This unilateral thinking persists among almost all four Syrian factions. We see the Coalition refusing to normalize relations with the regime, SDF, and the Salvation Government; SDF labeling the opposition as Turkish-backed terrorists and occupiers; and the Salvation Government claiming to be the true revolution, defending the Sunni identity against Alawite and Shia encroachment. Each faction has its conscious, interactive, and even participatory base, whether organizationally or ideologically, defending its project as the revolution, the homeland, or the truth, while considering others as evil and conspiratorial.

But wait… Is this unilateral perspective necessarily bad? In truth, it represents a political, intellectual, and ideological stance that must be considered a human right. Even if we oppose unilateral thinking, it remains a way of thinking that cannot be suppressed or justified, especially when we advocate for human freedom and the application of human rights conventions.

So, where is the problem? The problem lies in the absence of a unifying framework for all these calls—the absence of a nucleus that must be created to protect the Syrian entity, to protect the country from fragmentation and division, and to prevent the ongoing bloodshed and conflict, which does not seem to have an end that Syrians can decide on their own.

The reality has shown that Syrians are not united, and there is no shame in that. In fact, the shame lies in the very notion that they should be united as if they were robots manufactured in the same factory, sharing the same thought process, the same political and ideological choices, the same methodology of peace or violence, and the same internal and external paths and commitments.

A sign of the development of a nation’s consciousness is its diversity and its ability to take varying positions. Another point: since humans are still on their journey of biological evolution, and their brains have not yet reached the pinnacle of awareness, it is entirely natural to see this unilateral view that rejects dissent and considers it outside the bounds of truth and correctness.

So, what is the nucleus or unifying framework? Since human nature is diverse, and since no one has absolute truth or righteousness, and since truth is singular in essence but diverse in manifestations, political, intellectual, or even religious differences cannot and should not be rejected under any circumstances.

The experience of COVID-19 is the biggest proof that even the experimental method could not provide definitive truth. More than a quarter of the population refused preventive measures, seeing the pandemic as an evil conspiracy to rule the world! This, despite the fact that we witnessed the loss of loved ones due to this virus. My father, may God have mercy on his soul, was among them. Despite being a cancer survivor with weakened immunity, he refused to take preventive measures, and the virus ravaged his lungs, taking his life. May God have mercy on him and all your deceased loved ones.

If the inductive and experimental method failed to convince people, how much more so with the less conclusive deductive methods that govern our individual political, intellectual, and ideological choices?

Thus, the first step toward creating a nucleus is to acknowledge that truth has various manifestations depending on the individual and their abilities, as well as the complex reality that touches on those individual capabilities. This does not mean we should oppose those with a unilateral mindset but rather recognize that other Syrians have the right to their choices, even if they are wrong.

Let the regime continue to accuse its opposition of treason; let the Coalition consider SDF as outside the national vision; let SDF see others as extremist terrorists; and let the Salvation Government view others as encroaching on Sunni political rights. But let them all agree on a unifying nucleus: the “national state.”

Here, the state means institutions that include all Syrians, treat them equally, allow them to engage in political and social activities freely, and prevent any Syrian choice from being marginalized, even if it calls for what it calls for.

The state should be the unifying framework for all Syrians, not dominated by any one faction or group, representing all Syrians through its executive, legislative, and judicial institutions.

The term “national” here means the sovereignty of this state over the internationally recognized territory known as “Syria.”

The absence of this nucleus, the “national state,” will continue to cause the loss of Syrian identity, leaving individuals unsure of their goals, caught between indifference, as seen in some segments of the Syrian population, and engagement with the varied Syrian ideological and political systems, searching in a dark room for a black cat on a pitch-black night.

At the same time, this unifying nucleus will not provide a magical solution! It will not end the ongoing conflict, as the conflict is tied to various wagers. However, it will serve as the compass that unites all Syrians, at the very least unifying their path as it trims obstacles toward a common goal.

This nucleus, at its core, is what makes the Syrian people one, and it is what legitimizes internal or external+ gathering. It is also what makes the solution real for all Syrians, except for those conspirators and traitors who benefit from the continued state of Syrian hostility without an end in sight.

Jomaa Mohammad Laheeb
Political Office
Research and Studies Department
Articles
Syrian Future Movement (SFM)