Considering a Sunni Regime in Syria

STRATFOR.com ^ | July 10, 2012 | Reva Bhalla and Kamran Bokhari

[Wuli]

Last week's publicized defection of the Tlass family marked a potential turning point for Syria's al Assad regime.

The Tlass family formed the main pillar of Sunni support for the minority Alawite regime. The patriarch of the family, former Defense Minister Mustafa Tlass, had a strategic, brotherly bond with late Syrian President Hafez al Assad.

cut

But blood still runs thick in clan politics, and as Sunni blood was spilling into Syria's streets in the current uprising, the Tlass family likely felt growing pressure to side with its fellow Sunnis. Perhaps more critical, the Tlass family assessed it was time to make a move before it paid a price for its allegiance to the regime.

[Wuli]

Read the full article for Stratfor's analysis of this how Tiass' defection evolved, and why, and their analysis of the role of it, and other matters, may play out in Syria, over time.

Although Stratfor does place the events clearly within the framework of the Sunni versus Shia struggle within Islam, for power and supremacy, within the Middle East and globally - which it is, Stratfor does not place that fact where it belongs - in my view - in our own clearly western context.

Stratfor, like most everyone else, is caught up in current labels and current context of who are the primary forces and leaders of Sunni based Islam and Shia based Islam - Saudi Arabia, religiously & politically currently dominated by the Wahabi clerics and their brand of Ilslamic theoloogy, and Iran, religiously & politically currently dominated by the theocratic followers of the radical cleric Khomeini.

The grave mistake for the west is the belief that that Sunni versus Shia division will dissolve peacefully if only the regime in Iran can be either contained, brought down or helped to implode.

Nothing can be further from the truth.

Shia Muslims across Islam, whether theocrats like the dictators in Iran or moderates or complete secularists are likely to feel more embattled, against Sunni interests, not less.

And just what is the Sunni interests that the west seems so handily to support. Frankly speaking, neither the Wahabi-based clerics nor the Muslim Brotherhood politics are anymore compatible with our true interests than are the theology and politics of Iran's clerics.

One should not expect the Shia of Mesopotamia to become any less suspicious of Saudi led Sunni interests even if totally secular moderates could finally come to power in Iran. Nor should we expect the Saudi-based Wahabi clerics, the Sunni led Al Queda types and the Muslim Brotherhood to be less regionally antagonistic toward such a secular moderate Iran than they are today.

The Wahabi and the Muslim Brotherhood and al Queda are no different than the Iranian theocrats in having established their calling on a return to extreme fundamentalist Islam.

I repeat what I keep repeating - when it comes to the power struggle within Islam, between the Saudi-based Wahabi clerics, allied with the Muslim Brotherhood - on one side, and the current theocrats in Iran, the United States does not have a dog in that race in the long run.

It is a struggle where we have no winners.

Why then should we be choosing sides?

We shouldn't.

We are looking at a very short-term context and believing it explains what's going on, and it doesn't. The current faces and our recent history with each explains neither the depth of what's going on, nor the depth to which neither side is or ever will be our true friends and allies.

I always appreciated the depth of understanding of key players that Startfor always develops.

I don't always agree with where - in U.S. policy - that understanding should take us.

Either the U.S. needs to have a policy of "containment" in terms of the spread of the influence of the radical Wahabi-based interests, or the fundamentalist politics of the Muslim Brotherhood, matching it's attempts to "contain" the theocrats in Iran, or it should quit "meddling" in the Middle East altogether, outside of our support for an independent Israel.

[katana]

Agree entirely with what you've written. Preferred method of "containment" of both the Wahhabi Sunnis (and the Muslim Brotherhood) and Shiite elements (and Alawai's in the Syrian context) should be in a deep open pit with smooth sides, both armed equally with rocks and sticks.

Letting each side bleed the other dry with just enough support to whomever looked like they might lose outright at any point in the struggle (to keep things going) was a very wise policy during the Iraq - Iran war. But that was in the 80's when we had adults running things.

[Shadow44]

Amen! The old order of the Middle East is crumbling, and instead of getting caught in the earthquake we should just ride it out and see how things turn out.

Trying to prop up the old order will just make things worse like when the Brits tried to save the old monarchies they installed in Egypt and Iraq.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks Wuli.

Last week's publicized defection of the Tlass family... The Tlass family formed the main pillar of Sunni support for the minority Alawite regime. The patriarch of the family, former Defense Minister Mustafa Tlass, had a strategic, brotherly bond with late Syrian President Hafez al Assad... as Sunni blood was spilling into Syria's streets in the current uprising, the Tlass family likely felt growing pressure to side with its fellow Sunnis. Perhaps more critical, the Tlass family assessed it was time to make a move before it paid a price for its allegiance to the regime.

[rmlew]

Wahhabis and the Muslim Brotherhood are all Salafi tracing legitimacy from the Hanbali school of Islamic Jurisprudence, normally through the interpretation of Ibn Taymiyyah. Ibn Abd al Wahhab (founder of Wahhabism) specifically expounded upon Ibn Taymiyyah's concept of returning to Tawhid. However, the Muslim Brotherhood do not look to Ibn Abd al Wahhab. In fact Egyptian scholars generally consider al Wahhab not just to be ignorant of Islamic Law, but dangerously so. What made Sheikh Abdullah Azzam (founder of Makhtab al-Khidamat, the predecessor to Al Qaeda) so dangerous was his acceptance of the Qutbist school of the Muslim Brotherhood and fusion of Wahhabism to this. Al Qaeda is the union of these two Salafist schools. However, Al Qaeda does not get its religious authority from the Wahhabists, but from Muslim Brotherhood clerics like Azzam and Omar Abdel-Rahman.

As to the main point, left the Muslim Brotherhood and Shia Islamists kill each other in Syria. Better they kill each other than us. Also, it drives a wedge between the Sunni Islamists Turks and Muslim Brotherhood and the Iranians.

[Cronos]

exactly my point. This is not our fight. In this case, the best outcome is for Assad to ‘lightly’ “win” —> I mean he stays in power, but in on tenterhooks. So he’ll always be watching out for the Sunni jihadis and their focus will be on him — this keeps both of them occupied rather than focussing on US

[Kenny Bunk]

I am siding with the Russkis on this one, or at least the Russian Orthodox Church. Assad, or equivalent, is absolutely required in a sectarian cockpit like Syria.

If he leaves, what's left of Syrian Christianity will be obliterated. The battle continues from Tours, Spain, Mohacs, Vienna, Lepanto ... it's just that now the worthy oriental gentlemen outnumber us and have .... thanks to our oil money ... far better weapons ... and easy, post-Christian, politically correct enemies.

"Democratic Rebels?" Please. Don't make me laugh.

[SunkenCiv]

Assad is not on the side of the Russian Orthodox Church — the ROC supports the atheist commie Putin. Protector of the Faith? Don’t make me laugh.

[Kenny Bunk]

I am supporting the Russian approach to Syria not out of some deep-seated admiration for Putin or the hopefully by now quasi-state church.

I simply do not think the United States has any business making the world safer for radical ... or any other ...Islam. In Syria, the Russians are the enemies of my enemies. However, I am not exchanging friendship rings with them.

Who or what comes after Assad will be something worse.

[SunkenCiv]

Putin’s Ruasia is supporting the Alawite regime, which makes the world safer for an Islamic regime. For now. I’m glad the Russians are there, because they are going to either wind up being ineffective and leaving as everything falls apart for their clients, or wind up getting their asses handed to them in a very public way, as happened in Afghanistan, and wind up being ineffective and leaving as everything falls apart for their clients.