Short history of Syria, Chapter 1: Until 1946.

The essential prerequisite to civilization is agriculture. This was invented in Syria around 10,000 BC. In Roman times Antioch (1938 annexed into Southern Turkey) was the capital of Syria, and was one of the largest cities in the ancient world. Later Saint Paul after his conversion on the road to Damascus, became an important figure in the early Christian Church based in Antioch. With the rise of Islam in the 7th Century Damascus became the capital of the mighty Umayyad Empire, that stretched from what is now Spain to Pakistan. This lasted until the 10th century when Syria was taken over by the Islamic Abbasid dynasty based in Baghdad. Then the Christian Byzantine Empire, then the Crusaders and by the 13th Century it was on the western edge of the Mongol Empire. Then from the 16th to the 20th centuries Syria became part of the huge Turkish Ottoman Empire.



A map is needed to understand what has happened to Ottoman Syria since the end of the First World War and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. Syria was an area bordered to the west by the Mediterranean and to the east the Syrian Desert (a continuation northwards of the Arabian Desert). It ended in the south with the Sinai desert and the Red Sea, and in the north with the slopes of the Tauras Mountains. The fertile areas of this region are shown in green above. This area forms the western arm of the "Fertile Crescent". The eastern arm "Mesopotamia" follows the Euphrates and Tigris rivers as they flow south east from the Tauras Mountains to the Persian Gulf.

Britain and France cheated the Arabs out of independence after the First World War, with the creation by the League of Nations of the British and French Mandates. King Faisal's brief reign in Syria (1918–1920) was ended by the French deposing him. He had wanted to unite Syria and Mesopotamia into one nation, and bridge the divisions between Sunni and Shia Muslims.

Control of Southern Syria (Palestine and Transjordon) was given to the British. After the Second World War this area became Israel and Jordon. The map above shows the Israeli Occupied Territories as part of Israel (going north to south .... Golan Heights, West Bank and Gaza) because unfortunately the chance of anyone forcing Israel to give any of them up is about nil. It should be noted that water supply is a key strategic asset in this semi arid region, and not sharing this resource fairly from the Golan Heights, Jordan River and the aquifers of the West Bank are seen by the Israeli establishment as essential.

In addition the British were given control of the Ottoman Mesopotamian provinces (now modern day Iraq). Kuwait (a semi independent emirate on Iraq's Persian Gulf coastline) had been under British protection since 1899. In the late nineteenth century the Ottomans were attempting to consolidate the outer reaches of their Empire, which threatened British interests and the autonomy of local rulers. The deposed King Faisal was installed by the British as King of Iraq in 1921, although they kept effective control. The King had enough authority among the diverse tribes of Iraq to help keep control, while still being vulnerable enough to be dependent [the classic definition of a good proxy colonial ruler or "satrap"]. The British also sowed the seeds of tragedy after independence by encouraging Sunnis to become the officer class of the new Iraqi army they formed. It should be noted that Faisal and his descendants failed to rule Iraq effectively, due to their feudal beliefs leading to a failure to distribute wealth to the majority of the poverty stricken population.

From 1920 France ruled the Northern part of Syria. They controlled their area by favoring minorities over the majority Sunni population. The country was divided into a number of statelets, such that in many cases minorities gained more local autonomy. After the Second world War this area became modern day "Syria" and "Lebanon".

The country of "Lebanon" (like the other fragments of Ottoman Syria) was created by foreign interests. In 1860 the French under Napolean III had already intervened in Ottoman Syria when fighting broke out between Shia Druzes and Catholic Maronites, resulting in a very large massacre of  Maronites. The Sultan was forced to change the administration of the area and provide an enclave "Mount Lebanon" for the Maronites. In 1920 France created the Statelet of "Greater Lebanon" by expanding on the enclave, which eventually became modern day "Lebanon". This new state incorporated many Muslims and Orthodox Christians, creating the tensions which together with external influences from the Israel-Palestine conflict lead to the disastrous 1975-1990 civil war.

In modern "Syria" the Aliwi are now a powerful minority, from which has come the current ruling Assad dynasty. Before the French Mandate they were seen as heretics and often discriminated against, by the Sunni majority and their religious leaders. The Aliwite promotion of the fourth caliph Ali into a deity, went beyond mainstream Shia Islam, into something that contradicted the orthodox Islamic idea that Mohammed was the “last” messenger from God. [Personally I do not hold with any Jewish, Christian or Islamic religious ideas that seek to limit God to how many messengers, prophets, saviors etc…. he can send to show us the way. We should only be interested in knowing and following the way.]

The Ismaili Shia sect and it’s esoteric offshoot the Druzes were also discriminated against, but the Alawis were singled out because of their perceived total lack of orthodoxy and their obsessive secrecy which encouraged the creation of myths about them. I find it difficult not to see the comments of previous writers on the Alawi and their religious believes, as being motivated mainly by prejudice and rumour rather than truth. It should also be noted that since the French Mandate and particularly since the1970s the religious position of the Aliwites has moved significantly towards mainstream Shia Islam.

The French created the “State of Latakia” for the Alawi in July 1922. This statelet was then granted low taxation and a generous French subsidy. In return Alawites formed about half of the French controlled colonial “Troupes Spéciales du Levant” army units , as well as serving in the colonial police. Nearly all Alawites lived in the countryside, and they were used by the French to control uprisings and strikes by Sunnis in the cities.

It is true in 1921 that the Alawis under the leadership of Salih al-‘Ali did revolt against the French. This stopped as soon as the French gave them autonomy in their own statelet, and from then on they supported the continuation of French colonialism. In truth it is difficult to blame them given their previous conditions.

The French continued the process of division of "Ottoman Syria" started with the creation of French and British Mandates. The French Mandate was further divided into a number of "statelets". This created new minorities within these statelets, which encouraged sectarian strife. Obviously colonial powers need to dominate colonies by encouraging divisions between indigenous groups, which in theory prevents them making common cause against the colonialists. This also creates a number of local elites with limited powers, who can be held responsible for disobedience of the people in their areas, and if necessary threatened with replacement.

Having created this corrupt colonial system the French, also sought to then improve Syrian society by weakening the power of feudalism. Clearly a noble aim in other circumstances. The humiliation of the Druze nobility backfired with a revolt in 1925 in the "Jabal Druze" statelet led by Sultan Pasha el Atrash. The Syrians overcame sectarian differences, and the revolt spread to many other statelets. After many victories against the French, they sent in thousands of colonial troops from Morocco and Senegal. Modern weapons eventually overcame the less well equipped rebels.

Even after the rebellion was crushed the French had the common sense to realize they had underestimated their Syrian subjects, and the harsh tactics of the early years were softened. On 27th September 1941 Syria was granted token independence. However the French were reluctant to leave. On 29th May 1945 they bombed Damascus from the air, and tried to arrest its new democratically elected leaders. Only pressure from Syrian Nationalists and the British lead to the last French troops leaving on April 17th 1946.

Anders Breivik, Oslo, Utoeya and Far Right Christian Fundamentalism.

Aljazeera was yesterday interviewing a security export from London, who said the terrorist atrocities in Norway were almost certainly the work of Islamists. He claimed they had targeted Norway partly because security there was comparatively lax. It has since emerged that the bombing in Oslo and the mass shooting on the island of Utoeya were the work of a 32 year old far right Christian fundamentalist Anders Behring Breivik. We do not know at the moment whose his accomplices were.

Today Professor Paul Rogers (Peace Studies, Bradford University) on the BBC was claiming that Breivik was a political freak with no popular support. Later it emerged that Breivik had posted many comments of forums praising Geert Wilders. I hope Professor Rogers intention was to calm public fear, as he is wrong.

Geert Wilders ironically named Dutch "Party For Freedom" won 15.5% in parliamentary elections in 2010. The equally right wing Islamophobic "Freedom Party of Austria" won 17.5% of the vote in 2008 parliamentary elections. In Sweden the far right wing and certainly Islamophobic "Swedish Democrats" have broken into national politics with 5.7% of the votes in 2010. Rather than Breivik being an isolated incident he is on the rising edge of a dark political tide, which is set to expand rapidly as economic stagnation grips Europe.

Breivik’s Christian fundamentalism is also far from unique. How can a grown man walk around an island shooting unarmed teenagers and not feel deep shame? How can he believe that Jesus Christ could possibly approve of car bombs on crowded city streets?

A sarcastic joke defines a Christian fundamentalist as an evangelical who is angry. There is some truth to this. Evangelicals believe in the absolute truth of every word of the Bible (inerrancy in the jargon). This standpoint allows the human inspired content of the Bible to dilute the content inspired by God. In order to claim to be taking every word literally an artificial balancing act of interpretation is required, which has the result of allowing the human content of the Bible to diminish the divine view of God it contains. Normally enough of the good content survives to temper the temptation to go too far with the bad. Except in anger, hence the barb in the joke. How many evangelicals are there? Therefore how many people have been converted to Breivik's extreme religious views?

If you think I am being unfair to evangelicals, then I should also say that liberal Christianity seems to lack positive strong beliefs. As if they are following the obsession with "good character" that evangelicals promote, but simply reacting to the right wing version with a left wing version. It should also be said that the same criticism could be made of Islamic and Jewish fundamentalism.

Go beyond character, we are out to change the world with prayer and action. We are certain to fail, but we are going to try, because God belongs to all and everything.

Let us pray for Anders Breivik to see the absolutely terrible mistake he has made, and put all his energy for the rest of his life into trying to refute what he did yesterday and the false ideas that lead him there.

Justice, Respect and Dignity .... Israel Plus Palestine = Hope.

I imagine Alice Walker, well known American Activist and Novelist never did get to Gaza this year on the freedom flotilla. Today the last surviving small boat "Dignite al-Karama" (dignity in French and Arabic) was forced to sail to the Israeli port of Ashdod. The rest of the flotilla have been prevented by sabotage, or diplomatic pressure on Greece (economy in crisis) and Turkey (struggling with regime change in neighboring Syria). This at least prevents the violence of last year when nine activists were killed ( I should probably say murdered ) by Israeli soldiers on the "Mavi Marmara".

In Alice Walker's article in the British "Guardian" Newspaper called "This is why I sail" she explains the reasons for her proposed voyage ( http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jun/25/alice-walker-gaza-freedom-flotilla ). One of these is Melvyn Roseman Leventhal, her ex-husband's, answer to why he had become involved with the civil rights struggle in sixties America :

"   I thought he might say it was the speeches, the marches, the example of Martin Luther King Jr, or of others in the movement who exhibited impactful courage and grace. But no. Thinking back, he recounted an episode from his childhood that led him, inevitably to our struggle.
   He was a little boy on his way home from yeshiva, the Jewish school he attended after school let out. His mother a bookkeeper, was still at work; he was alone. He was frequently harassed by older boys from regular school, and one day two of these boys snatched his yarmulke (skull cap), and, taunting him, ran off with it, eventually throwing it over a fence.
   Two black boys appeared, saw his tears, assessed the situation, and took off after the boys who had taken his yarmulke. Chasing the boys down and catching them, they made them climb the fence, retrieve and dust off the yarmulke, and place it respectfully back on his head."

She then goes on to say "It is justice and respect that I want the world to dust off and put - without delay, and with tenderness - back on the head of the Palestinian child."

The claim of the Zionist propagandists is that Palestinians have the rest of the Arab world to move to. They are fond of the map with the sea of the Arab world set against the small island of Israel. In reality this Arab world is impoverished, deliberately fragmented by foreign powers, (until recently) almost entirely ruled by dictators propped up by powerful foreign governments and even in it's geography largely inhospitable and arid. The propagandists retort falsely that it is the "evil" religion of Islam that is responsible, often claiming that fragmentation and dictatorship is the only way to constrain it. There has even been the absurd notion that Arab backwardness had made the land arid and infertile. Really this is racism. The experience of the Palestinian refugees is that often there has been nowhere else to go. The struggle for freedom for Palestine has been going on for nearly 90 years since the 1917 Balfour agreement.

We pray that one day a Jewish Israeli, a person with the rare gift of inspiring humanity, will look with fresh eyes on the experience of the Jewish people, and say "I am a Palestinian".