Syria & the resistance are the knot of the schemes Sykes-Picot centenary -3-

Written by Nasser Kandil,

If the search for more effective alternatives than Sykes Picot in achieving the same goals has started from its failure in preventing the birth of strong, central and pivotal country in the Great Syrian territory or the natural historic Syria which its unity has been targeted by Sykes Picot which tried to distribute the balances on fragile entities with demographic balances that prevent the emergence of such a pivotal strong cross-tribalism, sects, and ethnics country, and if Syria the country which we know has constituted the knot of the failure of Sykes Picot in this test, and if the most important failure of Sykes Picot which accompanied Balfour Declaration and the birth of the usurper entity over Palestine was its failure in ensuring a suitable background to protect the Israeli excellence and ensuring the security of Israel, and if the resistance the force which the region’s nations adopted to respond to the emergence of the usurper entity and its continuous aggression, as it is the popular, patriotic, regional, and national outcome which broke the equations of the Israeli force and has dropped the schemes of the occupation through achieving the liberation, and thus the dream of the Greater Israel has fallen, and if the resistance has dropped later the schemes of deterrence to build a system that barters the relationship between Israel and the neighborhood with security in exchange of economy, then the search effectively for any alterative would start from here, from how can overthrow the Syrian country and how to stifle the resistance?

The separated century of the birth of Sykes Picot has characterized with two features that cannot be ignored in studying the proposed alternatives and the anticipating of what they will do to prevent the emergence of the strong pivotal country and the emergence of the resistance against Israel. The first feature is that the regional forces which are provoked by the conflict and the confrontation with the Western project in the region did not take time to become an organic part in the composition of the force balances which surround the conflict concerning the concepts and the formulas which will rule the forming of the pivotal country and the resistance’s project. This has happened with the emergence of the figure of Abdul Nasser, his revolution in Egypt and his unitary liberating project, which became a part of the equations of the Levant and the entities which were produced by Sykes Picot, but after overthrowing the project of Abdul Nasser and the joining of Egypt to Camp David, Iran did not delay in compensating this exit and forming a supportive attractive party for the equation of the pivotal Syria and the equation of the capable resistance, so it became imperative for any alternative project in order to be succeeded to neutralize the Iranian active influence and to weaken its impact on the vital term of the natural Syria, or to be able to change Iran itself and to turn it from one bank to another to ensure the region’s emptiness of any major attractive force that has a reverse influence on the Western project , while the second feature is the emergence of the close linkage between the status of the Middle East in the international equations especially the American Russian balance whatever the ruling regime in Moscow is, and the location of the Levant in the Middle East, because the equation of the security of Moscow starts from Damascus was put by Catherin II  not by Andropov , Therefore, for every alternative to be succeeded it must be in a harmony with the requirements of the strategic Russian security, or it must alienate the ability of Russia to perform, or to make Russia itself outside the international equation, because Russia has already shown a readiness for the intense presence when the security of the Middle East especially the Levant is presented to be discussed at its reigns as the capital of the Soviet Union or as a capital of the Federalist Russia after the dismantling of the Soviet Union.

The bet on more effective alternative than Sykes Picot in achieving the two goals of preventing the emergence of a pivotal country and to clean the region from the phenomena of the resistance is not consistent with the going to expand and to enlarge the geographical frameworks of the entities towards the integration and the unity, but towards more of division and fragmentation, there are no alternative that can be born but what was presented by Bernard Lewis of proposals at the Atlantic committee of the Wise Men that chaired by Madeleine Albright and what Bernard Lewis has made it a title for his political project for the Arab Spring, this was what Martin Indyk has previously foreshadowed it, it means different nominations for one project, for example the entities that are based on demography not on geography at Bernard Lewis are the same of the project of a civil religious continuous war hundred years ago between the Shiites and the Sunnis, as two prominent components in the Levant that are susceptible to repeat the scene of Europe in the Middle Ages and its religious war between the Catholics and Protestants, but at the end it is the same receipt which Martin Indyk called the confrontation till the death between the Shiite Jihadist and the Sunni jihadist.

Two main obstacles have contributed in killing this project while it is under birth in Syria which constituted the curse of Sykes Picot and the tomb of the new alternative. The first obstacle is taking the Muslims of the Levant especially those who were intended to play the role of the motivation for the fragmental project from the Sunni sect for the option of the sectarian eradicating fighting which is not consistent with their history as native residences who experienced living together with the components that share with them the building of their country before the emergence of Islam and before the advent of the divine religions, these countries are the outcome of the human experience of the human waves over thousands of years, they are not easy to be driven to wars that belong to permittivity and savagery , this alone explains the remaining of the Syrian cities and the great metropolis in Syria outside the new destructive project, but their involving in the war under the banner of defending for the project of the national country and its pivotal army, this means that going forward in  the option of the sectarian agitating of the strife requires mobilizing human body from outside these countries and throw their geography at the bosom of Al-Qaeda organization which is the only qualified according to the wehhabi thought and its Saudi auspices or with the partnership of the Muslim Brotherhood and their Turkish auspices, in addition to the illusion of the Sultanate  and the renewal of its Ottoman youth as an only way to spend more efforts in this war, so such an option which was actually tested means a fundamental violation of the strategic security for each of Russia and Iran in the light of the balances of international forces, that have proved the non-possession of the Western project of the sufficient capacity to stop them or to neutralize them of the vital term of the war on Syria the heart of the Levant.

The second obstacle was and still that the Shiite and Alawi composition which is indented to provoke it for a sectarian war does not respond as much as desired because of the engagement of its majority in the heart of the resistance’s option and its discovering and certainty of the depth of the relation between fighting Israel and overthrowing the project of the Wehhabi extremism on one hand, and the projects of division and fragmentation on the other hand. The most complex problem is that the attraction which is desired to be made from outside the equation of the resistance and the civil country means an escalation and condensing the referential of the Shiite and the Sunni of the region to Al-Qaeda Organization and Iran, towards going in the option of division to its ends through losses that end the unity of the two vital entities in the Western interests; Turkey and Saudi Arabia and what this will lead to giving the Mediterranean coast from the southern borders of Greece to the northern borders of Palestine for Shiite and Alawi entities that are loyal to Iran, in addition to Shiite entities on the borders of the Gulf waters, these areas include the oil especially in the Eastern of Saudi Arabia, thus this will make Iran a superpower that sticks to the security of the waters of the Gulf from the two banks, it decides who have the legitimacy and the illegitimacy to be in it, moreover it sticks to the fate of the oil flowing from it, along with the fate of the security of the Mediterranean  from the whole Western coast, in exchange of giving the region which stretches from the Turkish borders to the center of Yemen and the straits of Aqaba and Bab Al Mendab to Al-Qaeda organization, thus putting the whole security of the west at stake.

The conclusions which were equations about the dangers of tempering in demography and the regional and the international complexities which associate the chaos and tempering in the entities have become real facts that were translated by the facts of war on Syria, in addition to many additional obstacles that are related to the miraculous steadfastness of the idea of the national state in Syria, and the mysterious abilities which were expressed by the experience of the resistance through the possibility of combining between waging the war against the fragmentation and division and between keeping the deterrence balance against Israel. What the Russian position said that the temptation of obtaining Alawi or Kurdish state or both of them in Syria does not equal neither the losses of the Ottoman renaissance on the Russian borders, nor the dangers of the birth of entities that belong to Al-Qaeda organization and relate to the Islamic communities in the heart of Russia and the Republics of the Russian Federation, thus the tile of the Western equation became as summarized by Henry Kissinger in the discussions of the Atlantic Committee of Wise Men; No for changing the borders, Yes for igniting contradictions, stirring up strives and awakening the tribalism in order to change the entities into fragile countries that are easy to exert pressure on  and their negotiations became easier, thus their unity and the elements of their cohesion became fragile as the attempt to bomb them by re-form them according to ethnical, sectarian, and doctrinal compositions. This is the meaning of the speech of the UN Envoy in Syria Steffan de Mistura about the example of Taif Agreement which was dedicated to Lebanon as a source of aspiration for making the political solution in Syria in a way that its geographical unity is not affected. The inspiring example is the project of the sectarian country which the Syrians will fight to the last drop of blood.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,