The International

Despite President Bashar Al-Assad’s claims in his speech on June 20 of the country’s immunity to social unrest, Syria has been unable to avoid the wave of protests that started in the Middle East last winter. Mild protests began in January, but full-fledged demonstrations that began on March 18, just one day before the NATO intervention in Libya, immediately resulted in 25 protesters dead in clashes with police, as reported by Al Arabia. The conflict has only escalated, with government tanks having been used to put down ever-growing demonstrations. The towns of Daraa, Homs and Jisr Al-Shughour remain constant hotbeds of violence between security forces and certain segments of the population. Casualties continue to rise on both sides: government sources cite 700 dead police and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights reports that over 3,000 protesters have been killed to date.

Syrian democracy activist Mr. Ammar Abdulhamid, in an interview with The Wall Street Journal, claimed that international reaction was too reserved. Initially, only a dozen or so Syrian officials were declared personae non-grata and had their bank accounts frozen by the EU and US. However, since then, the list has expanded to include 50 of Syria’s officials as well as an embargo on Syrian oil. Yet this still contrasts the West’s quick response in Libya, where NATO’s bombing campaign, coupled with activity by British SAS on the ground, began almost immediately after the start of social unrest in the country and continued well into September.

The Syrian people’s demands

The protesters have made approximately five broad demands for civil liberties, anti-corruption and Kurdish rights, all generally similar to protesters’ demands in other Arab Spring countries. President Al-Assad responded by removing the governor of Daraa from duty, which was one of the protesters’ more direct demands. A little over a week later, he reformed the Cabinet of Ministers, remarking in a public address that “Syria’s political system requires fresh blood.” Mr. Al-Assad followed up on these reforms, repealing the State of Emergency, which was in effect for over fifty years and prohibited even the most peaceful of demonstrations, and granting citizenship to approximately 300,000 members of Syria’s Kurdish population. This action marked a major shift in Syria’s immigration policy, which before was much stricter, especially toward Kurds. The Kurds, lacking Syrian passports, were not allowed to hold public office or travel abroad.

Despite these attempts by the Syrian government to satisfy some of the people’s demands, many protests continue across the country to this day, with many opposition groups calling for Mr. Al-Assad’s resignation. A National Council of 50 opposition members, which plans to act as a transitional governing body after Al-Assad resigns from office, was formed in late August. The Council’s demands for the Syrian president’s resignation were supported by France, Germany, Great Britain and the United States.

Mr. Al-Assad, however, has dismissed such protests as foreign conspiracy. Stores of weapons allegedly smuggled from neighboring Jordan and Iraq were seized by Syrian authorities in June, says PressTV. The Iranian news channel claims these were meant to arm the protesting masses for an upcoming civil war. According to some US diplomatic cables uncovered by WikiLeaks and published in The Washington Post, the State Department was funding Syrian opposition groups prior to the uprisings. As reported by the Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA), the Syrian government claims that some digital cameras and mobile phones confiscated from certain protesters by Syrian security revealed fabricated propaganda. For example, some photographs of demonstrations in support of Palestinian residents in the West Bank were allegedly edited to look like demonstrations against Mr. Al-Assad and the Syrian government.

However, many of the protesters’ demands still remain on the table, most notably those for more stringent measures against corruption and popular elections. Despite Mr. Al-Assad’s reform of the Cabinet, the changes still came about from within the ruling Ba’ath party, and protesters are strongly at odds with the party’s decade-long status of sole governing power.

A call for aid: Possible Western intervention?

As the heat on Syrian streets continued to rise, some, like US Senator Mark Kirk (R-IL), raised the possibility of another Western intervention in support of the protesters. Some groups such as the Syrian Revolution General Commission (SRGC), a coalition of 40 opposition groups, appealed to the UN in early September to send in human rights monitors, reports Reuters. While a relatively benign measure at first glance, the group may be attempting to bring about Western military involvement akin to the one in Libya. "If the [Syrian] regime refuses [to let the monitors in], it will open the door on itself for other actions such as no-tank or no-fly zones," said Commission spokesman Ahmad Al-Khatib. Some Western officials supported the idea of direct intervention from the beginning. Senator Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), as quoted by The Washington Times, said almost immediately after the start of unrest in Syria that he would support US involvement.

Most political analysts, however, have been fairly certain from the start that the Libyan scenario will not be repeated in Syria. Dr. Robert Jackson, an international security expert for Chatham House said in an interview with Deutsche Welle early last summer that it is unlikely “that the US will get involved with a direct intervention in Syria. There is too much opposition from Russia and the UN Security Council.” This is not surprising considering that Russia hosts a naval base in Syria’s port city of Tartus. Dr. Jackson’s colleague, Ms. Xenia Dormandy, claims lackluster support from Americans for an intervention, citing public opinion as “spending needs to be focused at home, rather than on more operations overseas.” In Syria itself, there is grassroots opposition to the ideas of SRGC. Protests against foreign intervention and sanctions staged by Syrian students in front of the UN Commission’s Headquarters in Damascus last summer illustrate more conservative sentiments. Further calls from the SRGC in mid-September for a no-fly zone in Syria drew "a tepid response from the Obama administration and European governments" who do not want to get involved with another Libya-type campaign, reports the Wall Street Journal.

Whether or not Mr. Al-Assad heeds the protesters and steps down, the country has been transformed from these incidents. Reforms have already started and Syrians will be expecting more from their government, Mr. Al-Assad, and his successor. The international implications of the Syrian changes may be more far-reaching, depending on how decisive the changes in the country’s political structure will be, and the international community will need to adapt in its dealings with the new Syria.