Some might think that terrorism is only one type, without examining its nature, its origins, and the circumstances that led to it. In reality, terrorism is not a single type, but rather several. The first is state terrorism, which is terrorism practiced by the state against its citizens through its security apparatus and repressive forces. Simply speaking about politics becomes a crime, a proven offense with a predetermined outcome: imprisonment or death.
The second type of terrorism is the reaction of the oppressed citizen towards the state. This is a natural reaction, but the security state perceives it as rebellion and terrorism, and combats it with all means of repression and torture, both innovative and traditional.
The third type of terrorism is international terrorism, which is practiced by one state against another, such as that practiced by the Zionist entity against the Palestinian people.
In Syria, with Hafez al-Assad’s rise to power in 1970, he found that the security apparatus of his state was already in place, particularly in the period preceding his seizure of power. Political parties had dissolved themselves in the name of unity between Syria and Egypt, and the security and repressive apparatuses had solidified. The climate was ripe for establishing a state of repression, with the people even going so far as to deify the ruler and instill in the minds of citizens, through the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party, the idea that Hafez al-Assad was the captain of the Syrian ship, who would steer it to safety.
Assad realized early on that controlling the levers of power required a new administrative structure that ensured the loyalty of those who controlled these levers. Sectarian loyalty was the primary factor in assuming sensitive positions within the state, and these positions were restricted to members of the Alawite sect for two main reasons: to gain their loyalty and approval, and to build a strong popular base. Meanwhile, second-tier positions, which did not pose a direct threat to the regime’s security, were given to members of the Sunni sect and other sects.
To reinforce this security policy, Hafez al-Assad sought to win over the Sunni street to prevent the emergence of any opposing Islamic influence, thus ensuring the stability of the regime and maintaining security. Going back to the period before the Assad regime, we find that the Syrian people were united and coexisted peacefully without any sectarianism. Sunnis, Alawites, Ismailis, Jews, and Christians worked hand in hand to build the Syrian nation. After Hafez al-Assad seized power, he worked tirelessly to sow the seeds of sectarian strife among the people in order to tighten his security grip and prevent any political or armed opposition against the regime. Ironically, it wasn’t only other sects that suffered greatly under this regime; even his own sect was not spared from restrictions, prisons, repressive branches, and the regime’s pre-packaged formulas.
Politically, the ruling Ba’ath Arab Socialist Party assumed leadership of the state and implemented a policy of silencing dissent, cutting off livelihoods, and even beheading anyone who dared to oppose Hafez al-Assad and his son, Bashar al-Assad. Because the Ba’ath Party monopolized political activity, the Syrian regime worked to eliminate and ban all other political parties, establishing a model of one-party and one-man rule. This blatant disregard for the principles of political pluralism and democracy allowed the party’s ideology and beliefs, embodied by its members, to spread throughout state institutions like a tumor in a patient’s body.
Thus, Saydnaya Prison (the first military prison), officially opened in 1987, became a prison for anyone who dared to oppose the regime. Despite being a military prison, it housed all segments of Syrian society: opponents of the Assad regime, supporters of opposition and banned parties, and politicians calling for reform and change. The Assad regime could not tolerate the idea of opposition, even verbal opposition. While opposition is considered a healthy aspect of political life in any country, Hafez al-Assad had a different view. He transformed Saydnaya Prison into a holocaust in the truest sense of the word.
After Hafez al-Assad’s death in 2000, his son, Bashar al-Assad, inherited a legacy of oppression and bloodshed from his dictatorial father. This legacy included a repressive security apparatus and notorious prisons, as if the Convention against Torture, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the prison system itself were forms of armed opposition to the dictator Hafez al-Assad’s regime.
Therefore, over time and after more than half a century of the rule of the terrorist state, we in the legal office of the Syrian Future Movement see that the first type of terrorism is state terrorism, which was practiced on the Syrian people throughout these dark years by the Assad regime. We call on the sons of our Syrian people to unite and cooperate and return to the culture, awareness and solidarity of the pre-Assad regime era and to read history well in order to reject sectarian division so that we can raise the Syria of the future to a better tomorrow.
