In a January 2011 interview to The Wall Street Journal , Bashar al Assad declared that the “jasmine revolution” was the result of stagnation in the region — “if you have stagnant water, you will have pollution and microbes.” Countries in the region had failed to bring changes in keeping with the world, he argued. But the Syrian President put his own country outside of that stagnation, asserting that while political reforms and economic growth were both necessary to keep people contended, one reason for the stability in his country was that it stood firmly against the United States — “it is about the ideology, the beliefs and the cause that you have.” Clearly, he was out of touch. Since March, the country has been in the grip of a people's uprising in which, unsurprisingly in this prolonged “Arab spring,” the main demands are democracy and freedom from four decades of rule by the Assad family. Syrians are questioning why they cannot have reform and be part of the “resistance” in the region against the U.S. and Israel. The regime in Syria responded initially by offering carrots. Twice, Mr. Assad, who inherited his position after the death of his father Hafez Al Assad in 2000, promised political reforms; the country's Emergency laws were lifted. But the promises were belied with the Syrian regime unleashing a series of repressive measures. Over 1,000 people are believed to have been killed in these counter-measures; thousands more are said to be in jail. Though it seemed at times that the Ba'athist regime had managed to suppress the movement, the 150 deaths reported between June 3 and 6 might prove to be the turning point in this uprising. Especially so if reports are true that the Army massacred 120 soldiers in Jisr al Shoghour to prevent them from defecting; this suggests serious disaffection in the armed forces, contrary to claims by the regime that the soldiers were killed by “armed gangs.”
Mr. Assad has lost important friends in the last few days. Within the region, only Iran stands by him, while others have been critical, albeit for their own reasons, for his high-handedness in handling the protests. France, which, earlier this year, helped end Syria's international isolation, has declared that the Assad regime has lost its legitimacy. It is now the main force, along with the United Kingdom, behind a proposed United Nations Security Council resolution criticising Syria for using force against civilians. But the idea of a resolution itself is questionable, although, unlike the resolution on Libya, this does not call for a military intervention. Any attempt to meddle in the happenings in Syria can only undermine the legitimacy of the protesters' demands.
