Who's Who in Syria's Rebellion

[khad]

http://media.economist.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/full-width/images/2013/05/blogs/graphic-detail/20130518_gdc631.png

Here's a handy-dandy reference sheet for those interested.

[SmirkerOfTheWorld]

Certainly does seem to give credence to the New York Times assertion that there are no secular forces in Syria...

[dez]

Islamist, Islamist, Islamist. :crying:

[Comrade Nasser]

The number of Islamist groups is fucking alarming to say the least, and the proportion of Islamists in the rebellion seems to be blown out of the water.

On a side note: Wheres the FSA on the list? Just curious.

[khad]

On a side note: Wheres the FSA on the list? Just curious.
The FSA is the supreme military command (SMC), which theoretically has control over most of the opposition's forces. In reality, they have limited influence over dozens of bickering militias, most of which are islamist to one degree or another.

Here's the FSA/SMC media relations guy on TV promising genocides of Alawite and Shia villages if the rebel garrison in al-Qusayr falls. He looks quite irate.


UlwgcZIBq-s

[Comrade Nasser]

Man Qusairs really bad now. Heard Hezbollah lost 50 guys and 20 militiamen loyal to Assad. And the rebels lost about 100 guys. Freakin crazy.

[Pessoptimist]

Where has the proletariat gone in Syria? Is it just a choice between a dictatorial and a religious/Western-backed side now? I haven't heard anything about the working class in Syria during this entire uprising/civil war. Why is that the case?

[Paul Pott]

Where has the proletariat gone in Syria? Is it just a choice between a dictatorial and a religious/Western-backed side now? I haven't heard anything about the working class in Syria during this entire uprising/civil war. Why is that the case?

It has taken one side or the other.

[KurtFF8]

Where has the proletariat gone in Syria? Is it just a choice between a dictatorial and a religious/Western-backed side now? I haven't heard anything about the working class in Syria during this entire uprising/civil war. Why is that the case?

How have you not heard about the working class in this conflict? Who do you think the fighters on both sides are for the most part? The mass demonstrations (both for and against Assad) were of course largely working class, etc. etc.

I don't know why some Leftists assume that a third communist organization will just rise up and fight all sides in this conflict. From what I understand, many Left groups in Syria have taken sides. The proletariat doesn't only exist if it's part of a Communist or anarchist organization.

The Guardian has an interesting video (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/may/19/eu-syria-oil-jihadist-al-qaida) about oil field workers who were former university students working for the rebels and the conditions they work to provide oil to the rebels.

[khad]

Where has the proletariat gone in Syria? Is it just a choice between a dictatorial and a religious/Western-backed side now? I haven't heard anything about the working class in Syria during this entire uprising/civil war. Why is that the case?
To have a working class, you kind of actually have to be able to work.

eMt3ash5uMw

"We stand in line at the bakery from 6:00-11:30am. We never reach our turn to buy bread. Then the Free Syrian Army comes and takes bread without having to stand in line. If we object, they answer: 'We are part of the Nusra Front'. Our children should be in the Front too to eat?"

"I have no job. What kind of life are we living?"

[Pessoptimist]

How have you not heard about the working class in this conflict? Who do you think the fighters on both sides are for the most part? The mass demonstrations (both for and against Assad) were of course largely working class, etc. etc.

Sorry I misspoke, the working class of course exists in Syria and has played a huge part in the conflict. My larger question would be about the Left in Syria. Assad's Ba'ath party claims to be an Arab socialist party, communist and socialist parties hold seats in government, but where would a socialist anti-imperialist stand in this conflict?

I could see why an anti-imperialist would have trouble supporting the Western-backed FSA, both sides have committed human rights violations in the conflict, and Assad's corruption and mistreatment of the Syrian people prior to and during the conflict indicate to me that the government was really pseudo-left.

What would a Syrian socialist choose to do in this situation? It seems that maybe there is no easy option.

[KurtFF8]

Sorry I misspoke, the working class of course exists in Syria and has played a huge part in the conflict. My larger question would be about the Left in Syria. Assad's Ba'ath party claims to be an Arab socialist party, communist and socialist parties hold seats in government, but where would a socialist anti-imperialist stand in this conflict?

I could see why an anti-imperialist would have trouble supporting the Western-backed FSA, both sides have committed human rights violations in the conflict, and Assad's corruption and mistreatment of the Syrian people prior to and during the conflict indicate to me that the government was really pseudo-left.

What would a Syrian socialist choose to do in this situation? It seems that maybe there is no easy option.

Again you ask this as if there is not an answer and as if it's hypothetical instead of something that has already been answered.

http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2011/syria270411.html

http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2011/ahmad301111.html

http://www.solidnet.org/syria-syrian-communist-party-kb/3910-syrian-cp-the-israeli-aggression-wont-shock-the-national-steadfastness-will-en

http://www.pslweb.org/liberationnews/commentary/communist-parties-win-11.html

http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2011/syria180411.html

etc etc

[Sir Comradical]

Hilarious to think that people here at one point were actually arguing that the rebels were significantly secular/leftist.

[Paul Pott]

Hilarious to think that people here at one point were actually arguing that the rebels were significantly secular/leftist.

You still see it from time to time.

[Sir Comradical]

You still see it from time to time.

It's funny because they accuse those of us who want the Syrian Army to win of giving the Syrian government a socialist colouring (which we don't) while running around claiming the rebels are secular and leftist. I ask, who are they kidding? What people don't get is that Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar aren't in the business of supplying and funding movements that champion the cause of the poor.

[Agathor]

running around claiming the rebels are secular and leftist.

Find me a post on this website claiming that the rebels are leftists, 'running around' or not.

[Agathor]

The FSA is the supreme military command (SMC), which theoretically has control over most of the opposition's forces. In reality, they have limited influence over dozens of bickering militias, most of which are islamist to one degree or another.

Wrong. The FSA is an army mostly composed of defected soldiers. It's estimated to consist of around 100,000 soldiers and has a very bad relationship with the Islamist militias.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

Wrong. The FSA is an army mostly composed of defected soldiers. It's estimated to consist of around 100,000 soldiers and has a very bad relationship with the Islamist militias.

Sources?

[Tim Cornelis]

Wrong. The FSA is an army mostly composed of defected soldiers. It's estimated to consist of around 100,000 soldiers and has a very bad relationship with the Islamist militias.

That seems more to be the image they want to create than being true. The FSA consists of defected soldiers and volunteers, true, however it is a ragtag alliance of various armed groups, a loose network more than an actual army. Its relationship with Islamist militias is generally good, though some conflicts have occurred (which is inevitable with a diverse and loose network of armed groups).

[Paul Pott]

It's funny because they accuse those of us who want the Syrian Army to win of giving the Syrian government a socialist colouring (which we don't) while running around claiming the rebels are secular and leftist. I ask, who are they kidding? What people don't get is that Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar aren't in the business of supplying and funding movements that champion the cause of the poor.

I don't want the Syrian army to win, I want a popular movement for peace and a peace process to take hold with progressive and centrist rebels, and the Syrian government to continue to give democratic concessions, after which Al-Qaeda and friends can be driven from Syria.


Find me a post on this website claiming that the rebels are leftists, 'running around' or not.

People make all kinds of stupid and naïve claims about Syria. 99% of it is from those who see the current crop of rebels as the Syrian Tahrir in arms.


Wrong. The FSA is an army mostly composed of defected soldiers. It's estimated to consist of around 100,000 soldiers and has a very bad relationship with the Islamist militias.

The FSA is not an army, the FSA is an umbrella term for a bunch of defected army units, militias, jihadist warlords, and armed gangs ranging from al-Qaeda's fellow travelers to semi-socialists who sometimes cooperate against the army.

It has 100,000 on paper, not on the battlefield, and despite several western backed officers claiming to be a "high command" there is no central organization.

When the US first labeled Jabhat al-Nusra a terrorist group there was a huge cry of protest from the major FSA factions.

[Nakidana]

Wrong. The FSA is an army mostly composed of defected soldiers. It's estimated to consist of around 100,000 soldiers and has a very bad relationship with the Islamist militias.

Well, according to this (http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/security/report/2013/05/14/63221/the-structure-and-organization-of-the-syrian-opposition/)report...


The SMC comprises a council of leaders from various armed opposition groups and coalitions across Syria. The level of coordination between these armed groups and the SMC varies group-to-group. The council of leaders includes representatives from the Free Syrian Army, the Syrian Liberation Front, the Syrian Islamic Front, independent brigades, regional military councils, and defectors from the Syrian army. The council is made up of 30 elected members split evenly to represent the country’s five geographic fronts: eastern, western/middle, northern, southern, and the district of Homs. The council has no structural hierarchy, and command across the five fronts is not uniform. Instead, the SMC’s legitimacy is bottom-up, voluntarily given by the commanders that comprise it but with little coercive power by the SMC to control local commanders.
...
The FSA’s leadership is fully incorporated into the SMC and is closely linked to the Syrian Opposition Coalition.There's a pretty good diagram too:

http://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/SyriaOpposition.png


Sources?

@FSA troop numbers; Wikipedia states 60000-140000. The 60000 number comes from this (http://icsr.info/2013/04/icsr-insight-european-foreign-fighters-in-syria-2/) report published by the ICSR. The 140000 number comes from this (http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/2/8/69138/World/Region/Nusra-pledge-to-Qaeda-boosts-Syria-regime-Analysts.aspx) AFP article which simply sources "experts".

The problem with FSA is that they've carried out sectarian attacks on Christian and Shias and have also said that they're willing to accept the continued occupation of the Golan heights by Israel. As for the Assad regime, let's not forget that he declared the NCB illegal and also supported the 2011 military intervention against protestors in Bahrain by Saudi.

[Paul Pott]

Totally irrelevant to the facts on the ground.



Free Syrian Armies
But is there no FSA organization at all? Oh, of course: there are many. Syria and Turkey currently host a whole bunch of defected officers who claim to be leaders of the FSA, or who are described as such by the media. Here’s a non-exhaustive list:
- First, there’s Col. Riad el-Asaad and his associates (such as Malik el-Kurdi, Ahmed el-Hejazi, and others) from the original FSA faction. This was the original FSA leadership, with a clearly defined command structure at the top. It just never got around to having any fighters. Nowadays, Col. Asaad has left the army camp in Turkey, moving back and forth across the border, but he seems to have been confined to the margins of rebel politics. He wasn’t even invited to the most recent rebel unity conferences. Never a quitter, though, he continues to give interviews as top FSA leader.
- Second, there’s his old rival, Brig. Gen. Mostafa el-Sheikh, who heads the FSA Military Council. After US, Qatari, Turkish and other pressure, Sheikh went into a joint FSA structure with Riad el-Asaad in March 2012, but that didn’t work out. After celebrating their newfound unity, both men continued to do their own thing. Sheikh remains active as a minor player in rebel politics, and an associate of his, Louai Meqdad, is frequently quoted in the media as “the FSA spokesperson”.
- Third, there’s Col. Qasem Saadeddine, who is the leader of a military council in the Homs Governorate (there are at least two such councils, and neither of them seems to function). In early 2012, he declared the creation of a unified internal command for the FSA, supposedly backed by five regional military councils, which would snatch command from the hands of Riad al-Asaad and the exiles. The whole thing almost instantly collapsed back into just representing Saadeddine and his sidekicks, but he’s still using the title.
- Fourth, there’s a Turkey-based guy called Bassam al-Dada, who is nowadays often quoted in the media as “the political advisor of the FSA”. No one seems to be quite sure which commander or group it is that Dada is advising, but he’s getting a lot of media attention anyway.
- Fifth, do you remember that thing about a “new name for the FSA”? In September 2012, the Syrian National Army was declared by Gen. Mohammed Hussein el-Hajj Ali, on the premise that it would absorb the FSA and all other armed groups into a single command structure. This was a huge project which actually got a lot of commanders to sign on, but it imploded just days after its creation, partly because Col. Riad el-Asaad and various Islamists sabotaged it by withholding support. It hasn’t been heard from since.
- Sixth, there’s also Gen. Adnan Selou, who defected in June 2012. A month later, he declared himself “Supreme Commander of the Joint Military Leadership”.
- Seventh, there’s a slightly mysterious American NGO called the Syrian Support Group (SSG). Many Syrians seem to believe that this is a CIA front, which is certainly possible, but I’ve seen no evidence either way. Since 2012, the SSG has been marketing a select set of pro-Western commanders in the so-called Military Council structure, by presenting them as the “real FSA” to the Western media. Most well-known among these commanders is Abdeljabbar el-Ogeidi, a mid-size leader in the Aleppo region.
- Eighth, in September 2012, a group of Military Council commanders and assorted rebel leaders gathered to create a Joint Command of the Revolutionary Military Councils. This was set up by the salafi sheikh Adnan el-Arour and a couple of his sidekicks, including people associated with Mostafa el-Sheikh (see above). Sponsorship also probably came from Qatar, and there were at the very least some quiet nods of support from the USA. This group didn’t use the FSA name, but the media still decided it was the FSA. It quickly ran into internal problems, and has now been succeeded by:
- Ninth, in December 2012, a Saudi-backed conference in Antalya, Turkey, set up a General Staff of the Supreme Joint Military Command Council, led by Brig. Gen. Salim Idriss. This group doesn’t formally use the FSA name, but the media has invariably described Idriss as “the newly appointed leader of the FSA”, thereby giving the term another lease on life. The General Staff got the support of most of the factions that had already been receiving Western and Gulf State support in some way.
So, what do all of these groups have in common? Two things: all of them keep appearing in the media as representatives and leaders of the FSA, and none of them have any boots on the ground.
Well, to be fair: some of these commanders may enjoy the formal allegiance of a few tiny factions inside Syria, either paid for by foreign sponsors, or adopted through political alliances. For example, Riad el-Asaad has belatedly attached himself to the Muslim Brotherhood, and is now showing up at their conferences to grant an FSA stamp of approval to Ikhwani armed units. But that doesn’t really make him a significant rebel commander.

[Sir Comradical]

Find me a post on this website claiming that the rebels are leftists, 'running around' or not.

http://img856.imageshack.us/img856/7286/56099010152135299570697.jpg

[billydan]

As communists who do we want to win the civil war in Syria?

[B5C]

Senator John McCain calls these groups freedom fighters and we should arm them to get rid Assad to bring Democracy!

That sounded so familiar?
Reagan on the Mujahideeen.

“These gentlemen are the moral equivalents of America’s founding fathers.” ~ Ronald Reagan

http://factsanddetails.com/media/2/20120711-MujahideenReagan_meets_Afghan_Mujahideen.jpg

[Zaza]

As communists who do we want to win the civil war in Syria?

Don't see it as a "communist".
What would you prefer? An islamstate which will try to found the new chafiat,
kill all Atheists and people with other religions
or
A socialistic govnerment which actually fights the foreign Terrorists and is loved by the country.

More than 70% of the country are pro-Assad.

[Paul Pott]

More than 70% of the country are pro-Assad.

I keep seeing this thrown around this forum and around the internet by pro-Assad people, where are they getting it from?

[Rusakov]

Khad's reference sheet is something I'm thankful for.

At the moment, I'd say the Assad side of this civil war is the less repellent.

[Turinbaar]

It's funny because they accuse those of us who want the Syrian Army to win of giving the Syrian government a socialist colouring (which we don't)

well it seems not all of you refrain from doing that


A socialistic govnerment which actually fights the foreign Terrorists and is loved by the country.

perhaps Sir Comradical could explain to Zaza where he is in error.

[Sir Comradical]

Don't see it as a "communist".
What would you prefer? An islamstate which will try to found the new chafiat,
kill all Atheists and people with other religions
or
A socialistic govnerment which actually fights the foreign Terrorists and is loved by the country.

More than 70% of the country are pro-Assad.

This is from the reformist CP-Bakdash.

"When we evaluate the 10-year period before the aggression toward Syria, we see that the Syrian government made grave mistakes in the economic area. By choosing neoliberal economic policies, it opened the Syrian market to foreign imports, especially Turkish and Qatari products. As a result, hundreds of factories and workshops shut down and millions of workers lost their jobs."

Syria is not as neoliberal as the US would want it to be, but it's not socialist. Also while we should condemn the imperialist proxy war against Syria, let's not kidd ourselves into thinking the country is "socialist", at least not in the Marxist or anti-capitalist sense.

[Zaza]

I keep seeing this thrown around this forum and around the internet by pro-Assad people, where are they getting it from?

Even though I have no source for this exact number, it's a question of which people are living in Syria.

About 70% are members of the Sunni Islam
The rest of the 30% are Alawis, Christians, Druzes if they are counted together.

As you can tell, under Hafez and Bashar Al-Assad the 30% of the people got alot of rights in Syria, maybe even more than in other arab countries.
So you could tell, 30% are already for him.

Now to the rest of the sunni islam;
Even thought alot of sunnis in other arab countries prefer the sharia and a khalifat over a democratic govnerment ( Doesn't have to be Syria. Just any western country ) you would have to split the sunnis into 35% Pro and 35% contra Assad.
By the way, there are even alot Sunnis who work in the govnerment, if you exclude the "Syrian Elite" in which alot alawi officers are.

Combined together you have about plus/minus 65% people which are Pro Assad.

I believe there was even a page with a similar opinion about this, I will search for that one.

Other than that, I got some Youtube links with big pro-Assad demonstrations if you want to have them I could link them here?

[Dropdead]

I keep seeing this thrown around this forum and around the internet by pro-Assad people, where are they getting it from?

Pro-Assad demonstrations in Syria are huge.. For example http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7zFUaDOPCE

[Tim Cornelis]

Pro-Assad demonstrations in Syria are huge.. For example http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7zFUaDOPCE

I could show you a similar mass gathering of the Communist Party of Greece, that doesn't mean 70% of Greece supports the KKE.

[Zaza]

I could show you a similar mass gathering of the Communist Party of Greece, that doesn't mean 70% of Greece supports the KKE.

And which sources confirm that the majority of the "Syrians" are anti Assad?
Al-Jazeera? CNN? BBC? I highly doubt that their news are true.


By the way, to my earlier post:
Accoding to a german page it's only 60% sunnis. So you could speak of more supporters.

[MaoandMummar]

Alright looks good, perhaps we may see an Islamic Socialist state in Syria.:cool:

[Tim Cornelis]

And which sources confirm that the majority of the "Syrians" are anti Assad?
Al-Jazeera? CNN? BBC? I highly doubt that their news are true.

I don't have any sources, but I didn't make any positive statement regarding the support for Assad either way.

As a rule of thumb, authoritarian dictators rely on a support of 20 to 30% of the population. Less would jeopardise the existence of the regime, and more would be difficult to maintain due to the oppressive character of the regime and they rarely oversee economic miracles. Looking at Syria, its economic situation (not affluent) and the political (oppression and according privileges to a religious minority) I very much doubt the Syrian regime can count on more than 30% of the population. Though I can't make a hard claim.

[Zaza]

If the number of supporters was only 30% Al-Assad's end would've been here a long time ago.
Even those, who usualy disagree with Assads politics and which are Syrians living in Syria support him suddenly.
If you ask "Why?", the answer is easy.
Hate him or love him, but if you want to change something on the politics, you surely don't want a wasteland as country after the foreign terrorists finished their job.

And all the reports of the Syrian soldiers changing to the FSA side are just lame jokes.
There is a propaganda video which shows a group of masked people which claim to join the FSA. A joke if you look at the cross chains they are wearing. They look like those guys from the american rap videos.

[Zaza]

Ah. Found here some "official" informations if you want to call it that.


NATO Study: Assad Winning War, 70% of Syrians Support Him
Local Editor
A NATO data published by World Tribune on Sunday shows that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is winning the war against the foreign –backed opposition, as it stresses that 70 percent of the Syrians support their leader.

The study, complied Western-sponsored activists and organizations, showed that a majority of Syrians were alarmed by the Al-Qaeda takeover of the opposition and preferred to return to Assad.
Source : Almanlar News

Even if I don't agree with its content, you should read it.

[Tim Cornelis]

If the number of supporters was only 30% Al-Assad's end would've been here a long time ago.

Based on? And do you mean in general or within the context of the civil war. If it's the former, then it's false as most dictatorships rely on 20-30% of popular support, and if it's the second then: sheer numbers of popular support aren't a good indicator of military strength. If you have 90% of military backing, but 30% of popular support, your "end" would not have been "here a long time ago" by any means.


Even those, who usualy disagree with Assads politics and which are Syrians living in Syria support him suddenly.
If you ask "Why?", the answer is easy.
Hate him or love him, but if you want to change something on the politics, you surely don't want a wasteland as country after the foreign terrorists finished their job.

Then that would explain why 20-30% would turn into 50-60%, say.


Ah. Found here some "official" informations if you want to call it that.


Source : Almanlar News

Even if I don't agree with its content, you should read it.

I don't know if that's good news or bad. On the one hand it suggests disgust with fundamentalism, on the other hand it suggests support for a racist bourgeois oppressor. Problem is though, I can't find any NATO study. The original source, World Tribune, has no source for its information at all. Then the question is, what stake does World Tribune have in distributing this information? If it has none, then where is the NATO study? The NATO website certainly doesn't have it, rather odd if it's a NATO study.

[Zaza]

Based on? And do you mean in general or within the context of the civil war. If it's the former, then it's false as most dictatorships rely on 20-30% of popular support, and if it's the second then: sheer numbers of popular support aren't a good indicator of military strength. If you have 90% of military backing, but 30% of popular support, your "end" would not have been "here a long time ago" by any means.


I don't know if that's good news or bad. On the one hand it suggests disgust with fundamentalism, on the other hand it suggests support for a racist bourgeois oppressor. Problem is though, I can't find any NATO study. The original source, World Tribune, has no source for its information at all. Then the question is, what stake does World Tribune have in distributing this information? If it has none, then where is the NATO study? The NATO website certainly doesn't have it, rather odd if it's a NATO study.


First of all, not even the millitary would be standing with him if only 30% of the people supported him. Look at Riad al-Asaad, a high ranked man in the syrian air force. If he wasn't a paid guy, and he stopped to make a real revolution, way more people would've joined him.

Secondly, I am not well informed about this NATO study I just quoted. But what from I've read from it, I don't exactly agree with it anyway.
I can't link stuff here, otherwise I would give it to you.
Want me to personal message it to you?

I also have a german article but doubt you'll understand it.

[Paul Cockshott]

I keep seeing this thrown around this forum and around the internet by pro-Assad people, where are they getting it from?

The Sunday Herald in Glasgow yesterday reported on opinion poll data available to Nato that gave support for Assad as 70% and for the rebels as 10% with 20% neutral. It said support for the rebels had almost collapsed since the rebel movement had come to be increasingly dominated by Islamists.

[Luís Henrique]

The support or opposition to any given government depends on what such government does. If things are going well, unemployment is low, wages are high and/or raising, prices are stable, infrastructure is developing... you can be sure that the government is going to be popular, with 60-70% of the populace supporting it. Conversely, if unemployment is high, wages are on the fall, prices are rising, civil construction is at a slump, then the government is going to be unpopular. (And those things are relative, of course; a government can be very popular with an inflation rate of 20% a year, if it has managed to curb a 500% inflation to such figures; but the 20% results from mismanagement of an economy that used to have a 5% inflation rate, government is likely to be very unpopular.)

Whether people will support opposition to a government that is faring badly, depends on what such opposition is, what it proposes, whether what they say is trustworthy, what they have done when it was their turn in charge, etc.

Of course factors like religion, regionalism, personal charisma, freedom of opinion or lack thereof may influence the popularity of a given government. But if I am unemployed or the price of food and shelter is too high, or raising, compared to my wage, it is unlikely that I will support any government just because their members share my religion, stem from my neck of the woods, have wonderful smiles and voices, or are deemed the end all be all of statesmanship by the press.

So if things are going well with the Syrian economy, it is likely that their supposed core base of Alawites and Christians and whatever else is going to support them enthusiastically, while the Sunni majority is going to have more important things to do than opposing Assad. Conversely, if things are going badly, the supposed core base will tend to go fragmented, while the not so much privileged majority is likely to unite in opposition. What opposition? It depends on what political forces exist, what tradition they have, what they have made in the past, what chances they have to effectively attain power, etc.

I doubt very much Assad's popularity can be calculated from simplifications like "30% of the population is Alawite, 70% is Sunni". If for no other reason, because he governed for decades without an opposition raging into civil war, and the demographic composition of Syrian hasn't changed that much.

Luís Henrique

[Zaza]

[QUOTE=Luís Henrique;2625631
I doubt very much Assad's popularity can be calculated from simplifications like "30% of the population is Alawite, 70% is Sunni". If for no other reason, because he governed for decades without an opposition raging into civil war, and the demographic composition of Syrian hasn't changed that much.

Luís Henrique[/QUOTE]

But it's an important factor. Regardless of the situation, people support that what they supported before as well. As for some Turks. They would not care if the turkish economy was good or bad, or if it's a strong country. They would still want a religion ruled country.
It's not that much like in America where the supporters vary from what the canditates say.

[Luís Henrique]

But it's an important factor. Regardless of the situation, people support that what they supported before as well. As for some Turks. They would not care if the turkish economy was good or bad, or if it's a strong country. They would still want a religion ruled country.
It's not that much like in America where the supporters vary from what the canditates say.

I don't think it is that much of an important fact, no. And I think there is some "orientalism" here, as if "Western", rational, people cared about the economy or politics, while "Eastern", irrational, people care about religion or superstition.

Evidently if a given government is based upon a particular demographics (like the Israeli government upon Jews or the Syrian government upon Alawis), such demographic is going to be privileged to some extent; but it is much more the real or perceived social situation that is responsible for support or opposition, rather than mere belonging or not belonging to such groups.

Of course there are individuals who care primordially about religion or race, or whatever else; but I don't think they are numerically significant.

Luís Henrique

[Flying Purple People Eater]

Alright looks good, perhaps we may see an Islamic Socialist state in Syria. :cool:

What in the piss?