The pattern of conflict in the Syrian civil war is strongly influenced by the agro-city regional organization of the country. Fighting has generally started in rural regions that fall out of direct Syrian military control, and then spreads to large market towns where Syrian military control is more concentrated but made tenuous by the rural base of operations of armed opposition groups. Urban areas that serve as hubs of agro-city regions are then affected by the conflict as their restive suburbs, where much of Syria’s disenfranchised, rural population came to be concentrated in the last decade, or city quarters with social linkages to rebelling regions around the urban area, fall into opposition control. Thus, more than just a “rural insurgency,” Syria’s civil war is an “agro-city conflict” in which rural and urban social linkages cannot be easily disaggregated from one another.

In conducting fieldwork in Lebanon and Syria, I can attest that Syrians still view their strongest social and socio-econmic relationships to greater Syrian society through the framework of agro-city regions. Often, these relationships are indicated through strong identity with the family, clan, or tribe of the person being interviewed, and then with the village, market town, or urban quarter in the agro-city region’s major urban area where the person’s relatives were concentrated. While their Syrian nationality was generally never questioned as an authentic form of identity, the strongest identity affiliation of those interviewed was familial, local, and regional.

The current conflict in Syria is shaped by these affiliations. In general, Syrian armed opposition groups, including defected soldiers that do not have a strong identity with the particular unit that they defected from, are organized against the al-Assad government on the local level in their area of origin. Most armed opposition groups operate either in the area of their mobilization to defend their homes which are situated in a village, market town, or urban quarter, or attack Syrian military targets near their home areas. When engaging in larger operations, they most often choose to fight for the control of larger, strategic market towns or the agro-city regional urban hub closest to them.

This reality is demonstrated by the prevalence of opposition kata’ib (battalions), which are organized on the local level with, at best, agro-city regional area of operations. Many local kata’ib then choose to affiliate with larger armed opposition coalitions such as the Syrian Islamic Front, the Syrian Islamic Liberation Front, Alwiya Ahfaad ar-Rasool (The Descendants of the Prophet), Jabhat al-Nusra, and the Free Syrian Army. While affiliated to large opposition movements, local kata’ib can, and do, demonstrate their autonomy and can “defect” from these armed opposition coalitions at any time based upon the predilection of their leadership or the desires of their fighters. Syria’s civil war, like those of Libya, Iraq, and Lebanon before it, is becoming a conflict of militias with local, or agro-city regional, capabilities and objectives.

Aleppo Agro-City Region 

The ethnic and sectarian diverse agro-city region of Aleppo in northwestern Syria is a noteworthy example of this concept due to its size over several governorates (provinces), the number of satellite market towns it possess, and for demonstrating how agro-city conflict can escalate. The Aleppo agro-city region includes the northwestern Aleppo and Idlib governorates, and has a strong influence, through social and economic connections, upon armed opposition groups in northern Hama governorate to its south and in ar-Raqqa governorate to its east. Several large market towns, some of which could also be classified as major regional cities, particularly Idlib, Jisr ash-Shugur, and Ma’rat an-Numaan in Idlib governorate, and Afrin and al-Bab in Aleppo governorate, are centers of conflict that are linked to the urban hub of Aleppo.

Prior to the civil war, Aleppo was the largest city in Syria by population, serving as a major center of commerce in the Levant since ancient times and as the most market town and urban hub for northwestern Syria. Although a majority-Sunni Arab city that was named the 2006 “Islamic Cultural Capital of the World,” Aleppo also has significant population of Christians, ethnic Kurds, ethnic Turkmen, and Arab Shi’ites. Aleppo was an extremely influential city in contemporary Syria, boasting the country’s second largest economy after Damascus. The city, like Damascus, was experiencing significant growth in its tourist industry due to its historical sites and authentic Arab cultural heritage. This growing economic development, however, was not enough to prevent the spread of extensive, densely populated, and relatively impoverished suburbs inhabited by poor, mainly rural Sunni Syrians that came to the city’s environs not only from the greater Aleppo agro-city region, but also from the collapsing rural economies of northeastern Syria that had been severely impacted by a decade long-drought in the country.

Idlib, the second most important city in the Aleppo agro-city region, possessed an economy heavily dependent on agriculture and the agricultural industry. It relied upon Aleppo as the site of processing and distributing its agricultural products. Inflation, increasing unemployment, and a depressed wages for both agricultural and urban labor of the Aleppo agro-city region fueled discontent. In both the Idlib and Aleppo areas of the agro-city region, consistent anti-government demonstrations and eventual armed resistance formed most intensely in the hardest hit rural villages, spread to market towns such as Jisr ash-Shugur (which had also been a site of major militant Salafist resistance to the government of Hafez al-Assad during the period of 1976-1982), and into Aleppo’s suburbs that had social linkages to opposition-supporting areas. The Aleppo agro-city region was also one of the earliest sites of mobilization of armed Salafist opposition groups through agro-city regional social connections. Several of the most powerful Salafist fighting groups in the country, such as Harakat Ahrar ash-Sham(Movement of the Free Men of Syria), Liwa at-Tawhid (Oneness of God Brigade), Kata’ib al-Farouq al-Islamiyya (Islamic al-Farouq Battalions), and the al-Qaeda affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra (Victory Front) have their strongest centers of power in the rural areas of the northern Aleppo agro-city region.

Conclusion 

Utilizing the conceptual framework of agro-city regions allows for a more thorough analysis of Syria’s conflict in the context of the country’s most prevalent system of social and socio-economic organization. As the Syrian civil war has intensified, the Syrian military has ceded rural agro-city regional areas to the armed opposition in order to better control and coordinate its forces from major military bases and important market towns and urban hubs. This has had the effect of splintering opposition control of territory throughout the country, and concentrating it in certain pockets of agro-city regions where local armed opposition groups and opposition civil society are better coordinated and have the strongest asabiyya (social solidarity). The analysis of Syria at the agro-city regional level also has the benefit of providing a conceptual “map” to understand local and regional social dynamics in the country’s conflict-affected areas. Stability in Syria, whether imposed by the al-Assad government or by a transitional successor to it, will be most likely engaged with political movements, armed groups, and communal solidarity networks that experienced the conflict not as part of a great national struggle, but through the battles fought, and the resisting and dying done, at the local, agro-city regional level.

Nicholas A. Heras is a Co-Founder of and the Research Program Strategist of 361 Security

Originally published on 361 Security: http://www.361security.com/2/post/2013/06/syrias-agro-city-regions-a-method-for-framing-analysis-of-the-syrian-civil-war.html

The post Syria’s ‘Agro-City Regions’: A Method for Framing Analysis of the Syrian Civil War – By Nick Heras appeared first on Middle East Post.

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu was criticized by his own government for not cooperating and just today he changed his statement to say that he supports the efforts of secretary Kerry in the peace process. On the ground nothing changed but rumors talked about a silent freeze of settlements building in East Jerusalem. Close sources of the Middle East Post informed me that the Palestinian president was asked in one of his meetings about the other options that the Palestinian Authority have in case Kerry’s efforts fail in bringing anything new. The Palestinian president said clearly that taking the peaceful people resistance to a higher level in all the 1967 lands would be the next step. However, he made it clear that this kind of resistance would be peaceful and represented with demonstrations and the kind that was witnessed lately such as the building of Palestinians mall villages on the occupied lands.

The talks are not developing quickly especially that Israeli is not making any kind of a change on the ground; settlements are still built, checkpoints were not moved and there are even whispers of that Israel would never accept to change the borders that it built on it the separation wall. Even though the Palestinian leadership formed a new government with a new prime minister any failure of the current attempts to re-launch the peace process would result in more desperation that would lead to several events on the ground. Add to this the instable situation in the Middle East in which Syria is about to explode, Russia is racing with the U.S about who would control the situation in the Middle East and several actions were made through Jordan, Syria and Jordan that show how several military forces and strategic weapons are being brought into the region.

The Israeli Palestinian conflict is directly connected to the situation in the Middle East and any sudden developments would change any plans unless there is a real planning to control things and choose diplomacy as a solution rather than force.

The post Secretary Kerry plan: Only Economical or Political too? appeared first on Middle East Post.

Hamdallah who was described by the Israeli media as the second Fayyad is known for being independent and having a long experience in heading several economical and education committees. However, the question whether him replacing Fayyad would bring a solution for the internal crises is still questioned. Since the division between Fatah and Hamas no elections were held while two governments are still working in the West Bank and Gaza. Most of the Palestinians were criticizing the situation and the lack of a democratic process that gives the people the right to choose.

The internal law of the PLO considers the Palestinian Authority/Palestine non member state at the UN a body that works under the control of the PLO leadership and in a situation where there is a lack of possibility to hold elections, the PLO leadership is the body in charge of making decisions AS LONG AS THE PALESTINIAN NATIONAL COUNCIL is functioning and elected as requested by law. Currently none of these authorities are functioning while being elected by the Palestinian people. All of the Palestinian political movements hold responsibility for the current situation in which the lack of an agreement between the different political parties is resulting in destroying the Palestinian democracy that the Palestinians were always proud of.

The Fayyad model government is nothing but an administrative authority that applies on the ground what the funding foreign governments decide; an obvious interference with the Palestinian independence in which no economy nor policy can be developed without the interference of other sides. Former Prime Minister Fayyad’s promise of building an institutional government and state failed and nothing changed when talking about the relation between the Palestinian citizen and the Palestinian government. All of these matters are connected directly to the political situation that decides the faith of any government before it is formed. The lack of a solution for the Palestinian case will continue to cause much more damage to any attempt to build a Palestinian economy or professional authorities within the state.

The only government which would succeed in leading the Palestinian people into a better situation is a united government that raises the call for people and non violent resistance that embarrasses the Israeli occupation and leads the people toward facing the real reason for their tragic life; Israeli occupation. Neither projects that would be administrated by the Jordanians-Israelis-Palestinians nor suggestions for temporary agreements would solve the matter. The best example is the Oslo agreement that was signed more than twenty years ago and followed with hundreds of projects that were supposed to develop the life of the Palestinians but caused nothing but more desperation and lack of hope for a better future.

Leaving a society to live without democracy affects everything in it; social, economical and cultural situations and therefore only Palestinian national elections with any price that needs to be paid is the best solution.

The post Is replacing Fayyad the solution for Palestinians? appeared first on Middle East Post.

Netanyahu former plans for peace included seducing the Palestinians to accept an economical peace in exchange for forgetting the Palestinian rights according to the UN resolutions and International Law. Netanyahu’s peace plan includes keeping East Jerusalem under occupation, refusing a Palestinian state on the 1967 lands, continuing the building of hundreds of settlements through the occupied Palestinian territories, imprisoning Palestinians and ignoring the fact that millions of Palestinian refugees are left to die in very bad conditions since tens of years.

The Israeli prime minister is known for being a leader who wants to direct the conflict and therefore any attempt for reviving the peace process would mean for him only a gain of time to use in other matters. One of these matters is the Iranian Syrian alliance that Netanyahu wanted desperately to break whether by targeting the Syrian president Alassad or by convincing the U.S to direct an attack against Iranian targets. While being in a process of reviving the peace process, Netanyahu can use this to prepare an attack that he desires to hold against his enemies in Lebanon or Syria.

Preparations on the ground in Israel show that the latter is getting prepared for war and the movement on the northern borders with Syria and Lebanon show how the Israeli military is preparing to enter a war status at any moment. All of this is being made under the radar while U.S secretary of state is trying to push the peace process through offers such as the Jordanian Israeli Palestinian economy project that would bring millions of dollars for those who take part in it.

The Palestinian cae isn’t a case of economy because the only healthy economy can be made when Palestinians are allowed to live independently in a country of their own. Since Oslo many projects were held to try to burry the conflict whether through economy cooperation or creating partnership between Palestinians and Israelis. None of these projects brought any benefit except for keeping the occupation presence and losing hope to reach any kind of a solution. Israel’s call for an opportunity for peace is actually a call for the Palestinians to surrender and forget about their national demands and instead to accept an autonomy model that would give them better living conditions; something that no Palestinian leader can accept. A call for an opportunity for peace would start by stopping the building of settlements and withdrawing completely from the west bank that has been under strict occupation and control for many years. This would be a step towards saving a real peace that brings back land to its owners and security for everyone in the region.

The post The Peace that Netanyahu offers appeared first on Middle East Post.

The free Syrian Army annihilated the entire population of a Christian village while President Obama’s administration weighs overt military aid to Syrian rebels. These were the words that drew my attention while I was reading the article. I still do not understand what kind of logic is being considered when talking about decision-making and strategies in dealing with the Syrian regime. Thousands of Jihadists are filling Syria with an agenda known very well by its nature: Chaos and violence for the sake of creating a new system that can be controlled. These Al-Qaida affiliated groups claim to be Sunnis but have nothing to do with the moderate Sunni polar in the region. Most of the weapons brought into Syria (As if the west did not allow it till now) reached their hands and if Syrian President falls, we will see many more massacres within the Christian, the Sunni and the Shia population.

Supporting the conflict in Syria whether by being on the rebels side or the government side is not the issue. Even when talking about the Syrian regime, one must understand that international strategic benefits are being considered whether when talking about the Russians or the Americans or the Arabs while being divided. I can give you a perfect example about how most of the world and region peoples are taking positions regarding the Syrian conflict; If you are a Sunni then you should be against the regime, if you are a Shia you should be with the regime, if you are a nationalist or a Baathist you should sympathize with the regime and the list goes. No one thinks about the national interest of Syria when taking positions these days. Even the great powers are considering their interests when deciding whether to be with or against the regime/rebels.

Even the Western powers are making a mistake because even when talking about the strategic benefit of ending the presence of the Syrian regime that is supporting Iran to weaken the Iranian alliance in the region, it is not worth the risk taken by grouping thousands of Al-Qaida and Islamist Jihadists in Syria to lead the country following the fall of the regime. Actually Assad would bring much more stability and silence when talking about his father and his “strategic balance” policy in the region.

We are playing with fire in Syria and this fire would soon cause a reaction that no one imagined in the region and none of the current trainings and military preparations would be able to control it.

The post Playing with fire in Syria – today’s Islamic rebels would be tomorrow’s Al-Qaeda men appeared first on Middle East Post.

Syria’s Turkmen community is becoming increasingly involved in the country’s opposition movement. The mostly Sunni Turkmen of Syria represent a significant ethnic minority community that is located throughout the country, particularly in diverse and highly strategic areas that are currently the sites of significant conflict. The Turkmen community in Syria is charged by the Assad government of being militantly pro-Turkey, pro-opposition, and in support of the re-imposition of Turkish dominance over Syria (al-Akhbar [Beirut], August 28, 2012).

Syria’s Turkmen communities are descendants of Oghuz Turkish tribal migrants who began moving from Central Asia into the area of modern-day Syria during the 10^th century, when the Turkic Seljuk dynasty ruled much of the region. Under the Ottomans, Turkmen were encouraged to establish villages throughout the rural hinterlands of several Syrian cities in order to counter the demographic weight and influence of the settled and nomadic and semi-nomadic Arab tribesmen that populated the region. Syrian Turkmen were also settled to serve as local gendarmes to help assert Ottoman authority over roads and mountain passes in diverse regions such as the Alawite-majority, northwestern coastal governorate of Latakia (al-Akhbar (Beirut), August 28, 2012). After the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire in 1918, communities of Turkmen continued to reside in the country.

Syrian Turkmen opposition leaders, many of who are in exile in Turkey, assert that while Turkey is a cultural “Father” country to their communities, Turkmen are committed to a pluralistic, territorially intact Syria, with a polity that is representative of all of its ethnic and sectarian groups and is no longer ruled by the largely Arab Ba’ath Party (Anadolu News Agency [Ankara], July 4, 2012; Hurriyet Daily News [Istanbul], March 22, 2012; Today’s Zaman [Istanbul], December 8, 2011). Citing strong historical and cultural ties and his country’s deep affinity for their ethnic compatriots, Turkey’s President Abdullah Gul stated that: “The Syrian Turkmen people are integrated parts of our nation, and they are the strongest bridge of humanity between Turkey and our Syrian brothers and sisters.” [1]Syrian Turkmen leaders report that their efforts to win the support of anti-Assad Arab states were rebuffed because their community was seen by those states as already having a sponsor in the Turkish government. [2]

Turkmen leaders assert that their community suffered discrimination and repression under Ba’athist rule. Turkmen were unable to teach the Turkish language and Turkmen cultural and historical subjects in schools, Turkmen villages were given Arab names and Turkmen land was appropriated for the use of Arab peasants (AFP, January 31). These factors, as well as tribal divisions within the community and the lack of a large contiguous area within the country where Turkmen are a plurality of the population are blamed by Syrian Turkmen leaders for their community’s lack of participation in the country’s political opposition prior to the uprising. [3]

Turkmen leaders also assert that under the Hafez al-Assad government, their community was viewed as a potential “fifth column” for Turkey, which had a hostile relationship with the Syrian government for much of Hafez al-Assad’s rule. They also state that Hafez al-Assad’s position on the Turkmen was adopted by his son Bashar al-Assad after the onset of the Syrian uprising and the Turkish government’s consequent support for the Syrian opposition. As a result of this history of dispossession, Syrian Turkmen opposition leaders are seeking the recognition of their community as an integral part of the country and their cultural and linguistic rights guaranteed in a post-Assad Syrian constitution (Today’s Zaman (Istanbul) December 17, 2012).

The demands of the Syrian Turkmen community are not dissimilar from those of Syria’s Kurdish community, which also suffered from repression of its cultural and political rights. Kurdish and Turkmen communities are reported to have a tense relationship in contemporary Syria because of Syrian Turkmen ties to Turkey and the desire of some Syrian Kurds for a Kurdish-ruled autonomous region. Syrian Turkmen leaders assert that any Kurdish attempt to create an autonomous “Western Kurdistan” within Syrian territory would threaten to displace tens of thousands of Turkmen (Today’s Zaman [Istanbul] July 23, 2012; August 12, 2012).

Turkmen communities coexist within Kurdish majority areas in a geographic region near the Syrian-Turkish border that runs from the northwestern governorates of Idlib and Aleppo to the northeastern governorate of Raqqa. Fearing the displacement of a claimed 290 Turkmen villages in this area if an autonomous Syrian Kurdish region were to emerge, Syrian Turkmen leaders state they experience “anxiety” at this prospect and reiterate their desire to work with Syrian Kurds as siblings (Today’s Zaman [Istanbul] August 12, 2012; Today’s Zaman [Istanbul], July 23, 2012). Of particular concern to Turkmen leaders is the widespread conflict between Turkmen opposition fighters and Kurdish fighters of the aggressively pro-autonomy Partiya Yekîtiya Demokrat (PYD – Democratic Union Party), reported to be an ally and ideological offshoot of the Partiya Karkerên Kurdistan (PKK – Kurdistan Workers’ Party) (Today’s Zaman [Istanbul] July 23, 2012; August 12, 2012).

Syria’s Turkmen communities are located in several strategic areas, including the Jabal al-Turkman region near the city of Latakia, the city of Aleppo and its northern suburbs stretching towards the Turkish border and in villages north and north-west of the city of Homs near an important highway linking Damascus to the generally pro-Assad coastal governorates of Tartus and Latakia. There are also important populations of Turkmen in the southwestern governorates of Dera’a (bordering Jordan) and Quneitra (in the Golan region bordering Israel), the northwestern governorate of Idlib near the Turkish border and in the northeastern governorates of Raqqa and Deir ez Zor (Today’s Zaman (Istanbul), December 8, 2011). The total population of Turkmen communities in Syria is believed to be approximately 200,000, or 1 percent of the country’s population, although this figure is a matter of controversy and is disputed by Syrian Turkmen leaders who claim there are more than 3.5 million Turkmen in Syria, though some two million speak only Arabic as a result of state “Arabization” policies (AFP, January 31; Today’s Zaman [Istanbul], August 12, 2012). This figure is not only much greater than what is commonly believed to be the Syrian Turkmen community’s population, it would make the Turkmen one of Syria’s largest minority groups on par with Syria’s Christian, Alawite and Kurdish communities.

Syrian Turkmen communities are active in the opposition, although some Turkmen opposition leaders assert that the Syrian opposition movements, particularly the Syrian National Council (SNC), were slow to recognize Turkmen as “Syrians” and only included Syrian Turkmen in their membership after the intervention of Turkish diplomats (Hurriyet Daily News (Istanbul), December 17, 2012). Several Turkmen opposition parties have been formed over the course of the uprising, both within Syria and in exile, primarily in Turkey, including the Syrian Democratic Turkmen Movement, the Syrian Turkmen National Bloc and the Syrian Turkmen Platform. Currently, Turkmen are reported to hold 16 seats (of 310) within the SNC and three seats (of 60) within the larger opposition conglomerate of the National Coalition for Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces. [4]

In late March, the Turkish government hosted several Syrian Turkmen opposition parties and assisted the formation of a new Syrian Turkmen opposition coalition called the “Syrian Turkmen Assembly.” The Turkish Foreign Ministry and Syrian Turkmen leaders state this coalition was organized in order to provide a unified “Turkmen” front to engage in a transitional process in a potential post-Assad Syria (Anatolia News Agency [Ankara], April 1). [5] Syrian Turkmen Assembly members, representing both Syrian Turkmen opposition parties and armed groups, are seeking at least one Cabinet seat to be devoted to Syrian Turkmen in a post-Assad government (Today’s Zaman [Istanbul], April 1). This political maneuvering is occurring as several Syrian Turkmen armed opposition groups, either as part of or in cooperation with the Free Syrian Army (FSA) continue to engage in combat against the Syrian military and its allied paramilitary forces throughout the country (Reuters, February 15).

Syrian Turkmen armed opposition groups are especially active in the Jabal al-Turkman region in Latakia and in Aleppo and its suburbs, such as the district of Hanano. It is reported that more than 10,000 Turkmen fighters are mobilized in armed opposition groups throughout Syria, with the greatest number of groups concentrated in Aleppo and its immediate suburbs. Some of the Syrian Turkmen armed opposition groups in Aleppo carry names that evoke the memory of the Ottoman Empire, including the “Sultan Murat” and “Abdul Hamid I” brigades (Today’s Zaman [Istanbul], April 1).

In Latakia governorate, the Syrian military is accused of shelling and striking Turkmen villages from the air in the Jabal al-Turkman region, which is now considered to be firmly under the control of the opposition (al-Jazeera (Doha), August 31, 2012). Current fighting in and around the southern regions of the Jabal al-Turkman is reported to be fiercely contested, with overtones of communal animosity between Alawites and Turkmen (AFP, April 4; Hurriyet Daily News [Istanbul], July 31, 2012). Turkmen opposition leaders allege that the Syrian government has a policy of forcing Turkmen communities out of the area in order to create an autonomous Alawite region in the event of the collapse of the al-Assad government (Today’s Zaman [Istanbul], August 12, 2012).

Syria’s Turkmen communities are active participants in the Syrian opposition and stand to benefit from this participation in any post-Assad Syrian state. The political and diplomatic support of the Turkish government, in the context of weakened al-Assad government control over many regions of the country, provides Syrian Turkmen opposition groups with a benefactor as they position themselves to participate in a potential post-Assad transition period. Syrian Turkmen leaders appear to be pursuing citizenship-based representation in a future Syrian government and thus far appear to be carefully seeking to legitimize their community’s status as “Syrians” in a diverse Syrian polity.

This narrative of inclusion, politically important for the community as a minority without a distinct political or geographical base, may be tested in the event of a bitter communal conflict between Turkmen and other Syrian communities particularly Alawites and Kurds. In the context of potential widespread conflict in a post-Assad Syria, Turkmen armed opposition groups, relatively small in number and geographically dispersed, may be limited in their ability to protect the property and lives of their community and can not necessarily depend on the intervention of the Turkish military to support it in its interests. A pluralistic, post-Assad Syrian state that can guarantee the physical security of all its communities, and that considers Turkmen to be “Syrian,” is thus an important objective of the current Syrian Turkmen opposition.

Notes

1. “H. E. President Abdullah Gül’s Message on the Syrian Turkmen Platform,” Presidency of the Republic of Turkey, December 15, 2012, Available at: http://www.tccb.gov.tr/speeches-statements/344/84743/h-e-president-abdullah-guls-mebage-on-the-syrian-turkmen-platform.html.

2. “An Interview with Tarik Sulo Cevizci, Deputy Chairman of the Syria Democratic Turkmen Movement,” ORSAM, Center for Middle Eastern Strategic Studies, Ankara, January 25, Available at:http://www.orsam.org.tr/en/showOrsamGuest.aspx?ID=405.

3. Ibid.

4. Ibid.

5. “Foreign Minister Davuto?lu received the Syrian Turkmen Assembly delegation,” Republic of Turkey Ministry of Foreign Affairs, April 2, Available at: http://www.mfa.gov.tr/foreign-minister-davutoglu-received-the-syrian-turkmen-assembly-delegation.en.mfa.

Nicholas A. Heras is an independent analyst and consultant on Middle East issues and a former David L. Boren Fellow.

First published on The Jamestown Foundation: http://www.jamestown.org/single/?no_cache=1&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=40961&tx_ttnews[backPid]=7&cHash=7913ab2f01cb16ba44052b4e30054793

The post Syrian Turkmen Join Opposition Forces in Pursuit of a New Syrian Identity – By Nicholas A.Heras appeared first on Middle East Post.

It is hard to explain the kind of relation that is created between a Palestinian who is born into Jerusalem and prevented from holding its nationality and the mission that he or she has to take without a choice while living in the occupied lands or even when expelled. One of my friends just told me that he was banned from issuing a travel document that allows him to return to Jerusalem even though he was born at it. This friend is currently a student in another country and has been studying abroad for a few years. According to the Israeli apartheid law, he would lose his residency right even though he was born in the city simply because of his Palestinian Arab nationality. He holds no passport to protect him and waits now to see how some employees working at the Israeli Interior ministry would decide his future and faith.

The Israeli former and current governments thought that such a law would help in emptying the city from its Palestinian youth generations that travel to study or work abroad and then desire to return to their homeland. In the last few days I was thinking about the nature of our life as Palestinians under occupation and comparing it to the opportunities we can get if we decide to immigrate to other countries and whether if this is even accepted by the majority of our youth generations.

I personally had and still have a chance to leave the city and move to live a life empty of checkpoints, daily harassment, apartheid policy and daily reminder made by the Israelis to remind me that I am a third or fourth level resident of my own land simply because I am a Palestinian. If I move I would get rid of all of this and feel secured without being afraid to express my opinion and I would be able to demonstrate for the sake of my homeland cause without being treated as a terrorist. I would live a normal live like the other peoples of the world and spend my time in conferences and events held only to talk about the Palestinian cause without working for it. Everything would be different but nothing would feel the same as in Jerusalem.

The relation between Jerusalem and its native Palestinian inhabitants is a relation that cannot be described or understood; it is a relation built on an increasing love as suffering and oppression increases on those who live within it. Its air is not similar to any other in the world and the streets of its Old City are magical that you can never get enough from even if you are born within the walls of this city. We Palestinians teach the meaning of life while spending every day in this city with a hope that it will be free so others would be able to enjoy it as we do. We fight for its freedom not because we are not free but because of our desire to give others the opportunity to come and live what we live in this city. In this city you may meet freedom fighters, lovers of life and the history of this city, believers in justice and right cause, followers of the good who refuse bad and very inspiring courage young people that have a chance t enjoy freedom by raising their flag in the streets of the holy city while being chased by aggressive policemen on horses trying to desperately to hunt down their innocent happiness and smile.

I wont exchange Jerusalem for all the capitals of the world because in Jerusalem I see the capital of the world – all of the world standing still to teach other capitals history and lessons in fighting for justice and freedom.

The post Jerusalem – The mother of all capitals; the Capital of the world appeared first on Middle East Post.

One of the main problems, which the Syrian opposition is facing now and the Iranian opposition faced when it went to the streets a few years ago, is the involvement of foreign powers into the internal matters of the country. Many western countries used the internal conflicts of both countries to justify the interference of foreign powers in the way things happen inside them. This did not bring any help but on the contrary put the opposition into a very bad situation where it is described as the server of the foreign power that is trying to mess up with the sovereignty of the country. Add to this the entrance of thousands of Jihadists that have a different agenda that includes raising an Islamic extreme regime in Syria while the Western countries were covering their eyes and allowing the moving of weapons into their hands.

It is true that there is a dictatorship within Syria and that Iran is not enjoying a real democratic society where freedom of expression is protected but these are internal issues that the peoples of these countries must solve without rising on foreign tanks to remove a national regime. Add to this the race created between foreign powers in controlling the country on conflict such as in Syria between the U.S, Russia and both of their allies. A question that is worth asking is why for example these democratic countries are not thirsty for their involvement in ending the Israeli occupation of the Arab lands exactly as they were determined to get involved in Libya and today in Syria. Palestinians have been under occupation for many years and no one talked about a UN or Nato involvement in the occupied territories but on the contrary of these countries objected to UN General Assembly resolution that gave the right for Palestinians to live freely in a state of their own on the 1967 borders.

It isn’t about democratic norms or the liberal and moral belief in the importance of preventing war crimes that pushes great powers into getting involved in local conflicts; it is the national interest of these great powers and their strategic benefits that lead them to get involved in conflict areas whenever there are benefits. This is a piece of information that everyone who desires a change in his/her country must take into consideration when thinking about cooperation with former powers. It is true that mutual interests join powers and sides together but it should be equal in the outcomes it brings and causes no damage to the cause raised.

The post Syria between a national case and a trophy for Great Powers appeared first on Middle East Post.