Syria: is the Cold War thawing?



AP Photo.

WITH the Syrian death toll reportedly rising to 60,000 according to the UN, the 23 month-old uprising – which started off as a peaceful protest against President Bashar al-Assad’s regime – has developed into a conflict with Cold War overtones.

President Bashar al-Assad’s January address to the troubled Middle East nation – his first in six months – was a flowery monologue that evoked Al-Qaedah whilst giving little to his opposition and even less to the international community. UN envoy Lakhdar Ibrahimi described Assad’s speech as a “lost opportunity”.

Or as Syrian media activist, Ahmad Rahban, commented: the only new thing in Assad’s address (in which he mooted political transition on the one hand, and a refusal to deal with “terrorists” on the other) was his reference to the resistance as a coalition of “soap bubbles”.

The problem, as many Syrian commentators have pointed out, is that the key dramatis personae in the conflict – Iran, Russia, China, Turkey, Israel, Qatar and Saudi Arabia – all have their own geo-political agendas.

And while the bull elephants trample the grass, says Sami Ibrahim of the Syrian Network for Human Rights, the welfare of the beleaguered Syrian population appears to be the least consideration. A massive humanitarian disaster is unfolding.

Apart from 4 million Syrians being internal refugees, the UNCHR estimates that there are some 750,000 refugees in neighbouring states such as Turkey and Jordan. This means that a quarter of the Syrian population has already been displaced by the conflict. To make matters worse, Syrian government forces have been widely accused of war crimes.

In the meantime, the Friends of Syria – an assembly of nations convened by the US outside the UN Security Council in the light of Chinese and Russian vetoes on sanctioning Assad – has made little progress.

But then, the UN-approved Action Group for Syria (which included Russia and China) and which outlined a six-point peace plan in June last year, failed to make an impact too. It saw special envoy Kofi Annan resigning in frustration.

The US, traditionally a powerful broker in the Middle East and NATO, has been cautious on direct engagement. The Security Council vetoes by Russia and China have also assured that Syria will not go the way of Libya. NATO forces will not be taking out Assad’s airforce.

However, the interests of China and Russia in Syria are not the same. China has invested in Syria’s oil industry and is a major trade partner, but not to the extent where economic losses in Syria would trouble Beijing too much.

Nicholas Wong, writing for Open Democracy, suggests that whilst China wants to protect its strategic interests in the Middle East, it is also trying to ensure that a pro-west, pro-US (thus anti-Chinese) government does not replace Assad’s regime.

This, he hints, is one of China’s concerns about the effects of the Arab Spring. By backing Syria, China prevents the political dominoes from falling into Iran, a strategic “anti-western” cohort.

In the case of Russia, it’s a re-visiting of the Cold War era to counter US influence. Russia’s relationship with Syria goes back to the 1950’s. The Syrian port of Tartus is Russia’s last naval base in the Middle East.

Iran’s alliance with Assad and Hizballah is often portrayed as a Shi’ah alliance, but it is not the honest answer. The ruling Alawite clan, a 10% minority which controls Syria via its own network and a Sunni elite, embraces an eclectic mixture of beliefs foreign to Shi’ah Islam.

The truth is that Iran’s long-standing alliance with Syria is more political than religious. It is centred on Iran’s regional interests and the balance of power, especially in Lebanon.

Saudi Arabia and Qatar have supported the Syrian resistance– but for their own reasons; the blunting of what they perceive as a “Shi’ah crescent” from Iran to the Arabian Peninsula. The Shi’ah constitutes nearly 20% of the Saudi population, and a significant percentage in the Gulf. They are the unwelcome elephants in the Arabian room.

Turkey, a Euro-Asian power, had mended its fences with Syria after decades of post-colonial tension. But skirmishes close to its southern territory saw another chilling of detente with Damascus.

The Turks have taken in over 300,000 refugees and have worked quietly, and mostly behind the scenes, with the IHH – a Turkish humanitarian organisation –successfully negotiating the release of 48 opposition-held Iranian Republican Guards for 2,000 Syrians held in Assad’s jails.

For the Israeli house, jittery about the Golan Heights and Hizballah in Lebanon, Assad has been a case of the devil you know. Israel’s recent air-raid on Syrian territory against an alleged arms convoy travelling to Lebanon was not only a pre-emptive strike at Hizballah, but Iran.

Given the impasse – the intransigence of Assad and the inability of the opposition to coalesce – the rise to prominence of Mouaz al-Khatib, a geophysicist and Islamic cleric, as an identifiable leader of the Syrian Opposition Coalition has been hugely significant. It could finally offer some hope.

A proponent of political plurality who sees dialogue not as surrender, but the lesser of two evils, he has recently met with the Foreign Ministers of Iran, Russia and the US vice-president, Joe Biden.

Syrian opposition sources told me this week that Al-Khatib’s offer to enter into a dialogue with Syrian vice-president Farouk al-Sharaa – on the condition that 160,000 political detainees be released – is not only a calling of Assad’s bluff, but could be an important step towards negotiating a transitional government.

Even Moscow is showing a subtle shift. Russian Prime Minister Dmitri Medvedev suggested, in a rare criticism of Assad, that his refusal to engage in dialogue was not good for Syria. Media activist, Ahmad Raban, said the leaders had begun to realise that the bloodshed could not continue.

“Things are really bad. Five thousand people are dying every month. We Syrians have been forgotten. The world must act as one to stop the violence,”he said.

 

District Six Moods

 

Aspeling Street minaret. Victorian  masterpiece.

South-east clouds roll over mountain like a wave.

Muir Street.

Aspeling Street against backdrop.

In Muir Street mosque.

Cat on a hot green roof, Azzawia, Walmer Estate.

New Year in full glory.

 

 

 Photos copyright Shafiq Morton.

The Bidáh of the Mawlud - a Dialogue with Bin ul-Faragh

“Don’t you people know that the mawlud is a bid’ah? Don’t you people know it’s haraam to celebrate birthdays!” blurted-out the man (whom I will call Bin ul-Faragh). We were at one of those social gatherings so typical of our community where we sit at hired trestle tables.

We’d been discussing the mawlud, and Bin ul-Faragh had been unable to contain himself. Every family has its Bin ul-Faraghs. But we were in a cramped space, and there was no such thing as an easy, diplomatic getaway.

I could see those around me shifting uneasily with embarrassment. They knew, like I did, that “you people” was a rhetorical challenge – and the harbinger of unavoidable confrontation. I had to think quickly on my feet to avoid it.

“I agree. The commemoration of the Prophet’s (SAW) birthday is a bid’ah. The mawlud is an innovation, you are dead right, brother,” I answered, “if you don’t like it, stay away from it.”

“Whaddaya mean?” Bin ul-Faragh’s head snapped back in surprise. “So you, Shafiq Morton, say mawlud is shirk then? You admit that the mawlud isn’t mentioned in Qur’an and Sunnah? You admit that the Prophet (SAW) didn’t celebrate birthdays in his lifetime?”

He was now speaking with a raised voice. Others began to fall silent in the crowded room, turning from their chatter to see what the source of the commotion was. Instead of damping the flames, I’d only stoked the fire in Bin ul-Faragh.

“No, I don’t agree that the mawlud is polytheistic,” I said quietly. And facing those at my table asked whether anybody present worshipped the Prophet (SAW) as Bin ul-Faragh accused us of.

There was an uneasy silence, soon followed by utterances of “astaghfirullah” (May Allah forgive me) and very heated denial.

“Surely you’ll concede,” I added, “that the origination of the mawlud celebration is historically derived from the necessity to love – and not worship – the Prophet (SAW)?”

“Ja, man, but you people are all misguided. You people make mawlud into a Christmas carol,” retorted Bin ul-Faragh.

 “You talk about Christmas,” I said, “what about the verse in the Qur’an (19:33) where it says that peace rest upon Jesus on the day he was born? Or (19:15) when Allah Almighty declares the same about prophet Yahya (as)?

 “Then what about the admission of the Prophet (SAW) that he fasted on Mondays because it was the day he was born? He celebrated his own birthday – a blessing for mankind – every week during his lifetime.”

Bin ul-Faragh’s response was to enter into a long monologue in which I was accused of using “pre-Islamic” texts and “Zionist-influenced mischief” to argue about the permissibility of the impermissible mawlud. He suggested that I was drunk with the propaganda of my Shaikhs.

He then quoted Hadith in Arabic: “Beware of matters newly begun, for every innovation is misguidance …and every misguidance is in hell.” He had mangled the syntax by inserting a negative “ma” before the first “misguidance”.

“Brother,” I said, “you’ve totally misunderstood the context of this Prophetic axiom. Scholars agree that what’s being referred to here is something new in Islam that’s contrary to the spirit of Shari’ah, or Sacred Law. What do you say if something is not contrary to Sacred Law?”

Bin ul-Faragh glowered as those at my table tut-tutted. I went on to say that tarawih (the prayers in Ramadan), the Islamic calendar, the compilation of the Qur’an – as well as some of the utterances in the prayer – were all innovations introduced by the Prophet’s (SAW) noble Companions.  

“Are people such as Sayyidina ‘Umar (ra) in hell?” I asked.

I borrowed Shaikh Nuh Keller’s commentary on the Shafi’i scholar, Naqib al-Masri’s The Reliance of the Traveller, to explain.  The principle was that whatever was introduced to Islam in contravention of Sacred Law would be discarded, but whatever was regarded as good (and not contrary to Sacred Law) would be beneficial.

"That’s the distinction you can’t make. There’s bad bida’h and there’s good bid’ah. Good innovation is lexically an innovation, but legally speaking is actually an inferable Sunnah,” I said to Bin ul-Faragh.

“And no, I’m not going to argue that the mawlud is an issue of Fiqh (the application of Sacred Law) when it clearly isn’t, and that it might be obligatory, which it isn’t too. It’s a question of choice, a question of respect for the Prophet (SAW) and a noble way of remembering him.

“The mawlud – which is usually a recitation of the Prophet’s (SAW) life combined with the remembrance of Allah – is a social gathering that carries with it the power and grace of good intention. By its very nature it does not contravene Sacred Law.

“This is what ‘ulama over the centuries, together with the various Caliphs of the Islamic realm, have acknowledged,” I said.

I pointed out that until the 19^th century the scholars of Makkah had visited the house of the Prophet (SAW) and walked to the Haram in a procession on the night of the Prophet’s (SAW) birth.

“But you people make haraam at these gatherings…you commit extravagances instead of giving to the poor,” argued Bin al-Faragh.

“Is extravagance for the sake of the Prophet (SAW) a blameworthy trait?” I asked. “Has any poor person ever been denied access to a mawlud? And what about those who give sadaqah, or charity, at that time?”

Bin ul-Faragh reddened with indignation, but the tide was turning. I could sense that the room was now against him. Cape Town, with its strong Sunni ethos and 300-year legacy of tasawwuf (or Sufism), was not the best place for petro-dollar Islam.

“I think everybody here will agree to disagree,” I said. “Nobody is forcing you to attend a mawlud, so you should not condemn those who do celebrate it as misguided.”

“But you are misguided! There are no birthdays in Islam, period. You people are going to roast in hell,” shouted Bin ul-Faragh, rising to his feet and stumbling over those sitting next to him as he rushed for the door.

 

Spanglish Concert, Athlone, Cape Town

Spanglish performed at the Joseph Stone Auditorium on Friday 14 December. The group, which specialises in Spanish-influenced guitar and vocals infused with local flavour, also sing traditional "liedjies". Spanglish has been together for two years, and is a group of nine yougsters - some still at school - whose musicality and talent belies the fact that none can formally read music.

The auditorium was packed to the rafters and the crowd was enthusiastic.

 

Pics copyright Shafiq Morton and Spanglish Guitarists.

 

Voice of the Cape Festival Snapshots