Thursday, November 14, 2013

Hezbollah and Bashar Al-Assad

Ahmadinejad, Assad, and Nasrallah (leader of Hezbollah)

Hezbollah is recognized by the US and other governments as a terrorist organization. Hezbollah has been a strong ally of Syrian president Bashar Al-Assad, who claims that the revolutionaries he is fighting are terrorists. It seems that the two fighting factions in Syria have terrorist elements. ISIS (Islamic State of Syria and Iraq) on the rebel's side, and Hezbollah and some elements of Iran's shadier groups on the Syrian government's side. There is one glaring difference between both groups. The difference is sectarian, with Hezbollah, Assad and Iran being Shi'a and ISIS and the rebels being Sunni.

It appears that the conflict in Syria is devolving into a sectarian conflict with serious ramifications for the region. Aside from this issue, another issue of concern is the international communities lack of action concerning the disturbing relationship between Assad and Hezbollah. What if the Saudi monarchy allied with Al-Qaeda to quell an uprising? It is unlikely that the United Nations and the international community would idly sit by and watch it unfold, even with the backing of some of the permanent members UN's Security Council.

It makes one wonder who Assad is talking about when he says he is fighting terrorists?

Here are some additional links about the relationship between Assad and an interesting video about the Hezbollah fighters in Syria.

Saturday, November 9, 2013

Anonymous Syrian Activist Confesses He Wants Assad to Win

Recently, I read an enlightening article on Buzzfeed about a Syrian activist was was involved in the revolution from the beginning and who has witnessed the uprising shift from a democratic revolution to a radical Islamist revolution, reminiscent of the Iranian Revolution of the 70s.

Syrian Rebel Commander Interview on Political Objectives for Syria (Link to video below)

VIDEO: MEMRI: Syrian Rebel Commander Ahmad 'Issa: Iran Will Always Be Our No. 1 Enemy, Syrian People Will Decide about Israel

I remember the early days of the Syrian revolution, when the revolutionaries were unarmed civilians desperate for a say in the matters that affect them most. Following the killing of countless unarmed civilians, the Syrian "rebels" were in dire need of weapons to protect themselves. President Obama was in the midst of an election, the United Nations was virtually held hostage by Russia's unwillingness to allow any meaningful resolution regarding Syria to pass and Syria was in a state of chaos.

A chaotic environment is one that radicals love to infiltrate and it's the perfect environment for radicalism to flourish. So, when the radical Islamist group ISIS (Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, a Al-Qaeda linked group) began to descend upon Syria, providing weapons for the defenseless revolutionaries, it was not a surprise that the revolutionaries accepted the "help." It is not hard to see why they would do that. If you had to find a way to save your own and your children's lives by arming yourself, would you question who the weapons came from in the heat of battle? I dare to say most people probably would not.

The anonymous Syrian activist who claims he now wants Assad to win, feels this way because Assad is the lesser of two evils. The activist reasons, whereas the radicals will use religion to justify taking away the freedoms of the people, Assad will have to make some concessions or changes if he is to be accepted by the people.

However, there is a possibility that Assad would crack down even harder, (using the excuse that he is fighting against terrorists) and all the innocent people who died in the pursuit of freedom would have died in vain. Then again, if the radicals take over and restrict people's freedoms as well, then those same victims would have also died in vain. This leads me to a few questions ... Has the Syrian revolution failed? Is there hope that the moderates can gain influence in Syria? Or will Syria become another Egypt, where the only options are secular oppression or radical repression?