High above the teeming streets of Damascus, from giant hoardings, posters and balloons, Bashar al-Assad gazed benignly down on his people — determined, proud, statesmanlike and reassuring — the carefully crafted image of a man fit to carry on leading Syria for another seven years.
Banners praised “our Bashar”, defender of sovereignty and stabilityÂ. “We love you,” declared another sloganÂ, printed over a thumbprint in the national colours. Nightly street parties, concerts, dabke dancing and rallies created a festive, jubilee-like atmosphere in the run-up to the presidential referendum held on May 27.
No one was surprised that cele- brations were taking place before a single ballot was cast; Assad was, after all, the only candidate nominated by the ruling Ba’ath party. There was no legal opposition. Tellingly, the event was described in Arabic as “renewing the pledge of allegiance” as if this young, British-educated ophthalmologist and computer buff were a mediaeval Caliph.
“We have our own style of democracy and we are proud of it,” the Information Minister, Mohsen Bilal, told this reporter. “Our hearts are beating for Syria and for Syria’s leader,” read a text message sent to customers by a leading cellphone company.
In 2000, when Assad created a republican dynasty by succeeding his formidable father, Hafez, the referendum produced a comfortable 97,3% vote in favour. The official result this time did not stray far from that, with Assad winning 97,62% of the vote, though accurate turnout figures would provide a better guide to the real mood of this country.
Voting is a “national duty. You can have problems if you don’t,” said a driver from Latakia. Public-sector employees and members of the armed forces were out in strength at the celebrations and marches. “Of course I’m voting,” grinned a middle-aged man on his way to referendum centre 542 in the old Ottoman Hejaz railway station. “Dr Bashar is our president!”
Assad does seem genuinely popular, especially with younger people, though there is no opinion polling. Fear of the Mukhabarat secret police is pervasive. Jokes abound about the man who once dared to tick the no box and was dragged back by his terrified mother to beg to be allowed to vote again. “Don’t worry,” the officials reply. “We’ve changed it for you — but just this once.”
Assad’s triumph is intended to demonstrate to the world that he is a strong and legitimate ruler and things are going his way. Two years ago he was humiliated when Syria was forced out of Lebanon after nearly 30 years, in the wake of the murder of the former prime minister Rafiq al-Hariri, an assassination blamed by the United Nations on Lebanese and Syrian security officials. The creation of an international tribunal to try Hariri’s killers is seen as a grave threat.
To the east, Saddam Hussein’s execution to the sound of Shia sectarian taunts made grim viewing, and 1,2-million Iraqi refugees have put an enormous strain on the Syrian economy. Washington has kept up pressure to stop the flow of foreign jihadis heading to Iraq via Damascus airport.
But the chaos next door has helped: with stability the new watchword for a United States desperate to extricate itself from Iraq, the danger of regime change in Syria has receded. Now foreign VIPs from the European Union’s Javier Solana to the US Democratic House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, are trooping to Damascus.
Early in May Condoleezza Rice, the US Secretary of State, had a “businesslike” meeting with her Syrian counterpart — the first such encounter since the Hariri murder. Western diplomats suggest the alliance with Iran may be under strain. Even peace with Israel is back on the agenda.
Still, Syria’s rhetoric remains defiant. Damascus backs Hizbullah in Lebanon and Hamas in Palestine. Keeping Assad in power, goes the official line, is the best response to Israel and the West. Claims that Syria is behind Fatah al-Islam, the al-Qaeda-linked group fighting the Lebanese army, are rejected as hostile propaganda. “Syrians will give their answer to all the American pressure and all the injustices we have been subjected to, and to all the suffering of the Palestinians by saying yes to the president: he has confronted everything that is evil.”
None of this is good news for those who hope for change. The brief “Damascus spring” that followed Assad’s succession is a distant memory. Domestic opponents are imprisoned and intimidated: Kamal Labwani, a dissident, was jailed for 12 years last month for meeting US officials.
“We were acting peacefully, moving gradually and we were against violence,” said Riyad Seif, a former MP who was imprisoned for four years in September 2001. Seif rejects the argument that it was 9/11 and the war in Iraq that nipped Syrian reform in the bud. “Bashar was too weak,” said a Western observer. “The regime lost its nerve.”
Economic liberalisation has advanced — though benefiting business rather than the poor. Foreign diplomats admit that their understanding of the opaque relations between the Assad family, the Ba’ath party and the security services is anecdotal and limited.
Talk of change is met with warnings about Islamist extremism. And it strikes a genuine and highly sensitive chord; thousands died in 1982 after an armed uprising by the Muslim Brotherhood was brutally crushed in Hama. Syrian jihadis have returned from Iraq. It is they, not the small but vocal democratic opposition, who threaten this most secular of Arab regimes. “The jihadis are our enemies,” Bilal insisted. “They hate us and we fight them.”
“We have Bashar al-Assad, the Muslim Brotherhood and the example of Iraq next door,” said another loyalist. “Who would you choose?” But there is a third way, retorts Samir al-Taqi, who runs a government-backed think-tank. “Gradual reform that would change the way this country works.” Whether Assad is willing or able to do that is quite another question — the big one.
“There are a lot of people in Syria who think Bashar is a good man,” admits a moderate Islamist who yearns for freedom, loathes the system but eschews violence. “And if there was a free election now he would probably win. But after a while, when they opened the files on everything this regime has done? I don’t think so.” — Â