No alternative to the unity of transformative democratic forces in Syria – Syrian academic
Washington – North-Press Agency
Hadeel Oueiss
Syrian academic and former head of the opposition Syrian National Council, Burhan Ghalioun, said that the Syrian solution is still in the unity of the forces of democratic change, which exceeds the limits of sects and nationalities, and that he is for a free, independent, pluralistic, and democratic Syria where all Syrians can achieve their goals.
In a dialogue with North-Press, Dr. Ghalioun said that both the political forces of the Syrian opposition and the Kurdish parties erred in dealing with the issue of Kurdish rights and the question of the majority and minorities, expecting signs of “more mature and militant” young opposition.
Regarding the “Syrian revolution” and what some describe as the dependence of the political parties on external influences, Dr. Ghalioun said that this dependence has no objective and firm basis, but it was the result of the “loss that the [Syrian] regime’s brutal policies led to, and the wallow of the international community in front of it, leaving things moving towards disaster and serving the strategic purposes of a significant number of regional and global countries.”
He believes that the illusions of depending on foreign countries to create new realities on the ground will fade quickly, after the appearance of the signs of the political transition, and after all in the pluralistic, civil and democratic Syria are assured for their equality and rights, and their awareness that there is no possible political solution in Syria away from the territorial integrity and state of Syria, and that, “all other solutions will only be an option to extend combat and war, by various means, whether regular or irregular.”
Burhan Ghalioun, the professor of sociology at the Université de Paris III Sorbonne University in Paris, said that the Kurds were partners with the Arabs and other people in building modern Syria, just as they were all victims of the dictatorial and fascist policies which prevailed, and that their responsibility to defend Syria and return it to the path of the constitutional and democratic life is not different from the responsibility of the Arabs, just as their interest is in communicating with their patriot partners and building bridges of understanding, cooperation and dialogue with them. These are no less than the responsibility of those in the duty of dialogue and communication with the Kurds, saying: “It is their country, and no one asks for a license to defend his country and protect his rights, or links his defense for his country with the position and sacrifices of the others. As far as we sacrifice for it, our balance, position and influence are in it. All Syrians will not forget the role of the Kurdish youth and their heroic fight in the battle to eliminate ISIS and to root out terrorism from eastern Syria in recent years.”
As for the duty of the Syrians in general towards the rights of the Kurds, Dr. Ghalioun stressed that, Syria is as much for the Kurds as it is for the Arabs, and the duty of the Kurds is to defend freedom and independence and to defend the rights of all Syrians living in Syria, just as it is the duty of all other Syrians to defend the rights of the Syrian Kurds and other nationalities and religions. Without this, there is no state, country, or patriotism.
But he criticized the Kurdish parties, saying that “after the revolution, appeared as if they wanted restitution for belonging to their homeland and participating in the battle to liberate it from tyranny and occupation. This greatly damaged their relations with other opposition parties, and damaged Kurdish-Arab relations in Syria. But this did not and should not change the duty of all Syrians to guarantee the individual and collective rights of the Kurds and of all other nationalities, regardless of the size and number of these nationalities, as an integral part of the conditions for building a new democratic Syria, and to end the nonsense of the minority and majority in our political discourse forever.”
As for the residents of al-Jazira region in Syria, it is clear that Kurds, Arabs, Assyrians, Syriacs and Armenians were all neglected and marginalized, because Syria does not have a national rule that placed the interests of the people and the improvement of their living conditions in the forefront of its interest for half a century in particular, but rather the interest of its governments and political systems, first and last, was to subjugate and suppress its people, minorities and majorities, to incite one another, and spread feelings of hatred among its nationalities and sects, in order to facilitate looting, robbery, and deprive them of their basic rights and freedoms, and turning Syria into a kingdom or rather a family farm.
“Kurds, Assyrians, Syriacs, and other nationalities and people who are inherent in our region have been partners in building the modern Syrian state since its inception in the 1920s, and they are active in determining its policies as well. Perhaps the number of political and military leaders of Kurdish origin, who have held high positions in the Syrian state since its inception, are no less than the number of leaders of other nationalities of the Arab or Sunni majority within the army and successive governments, so what about (the minorities) in general.”