The Opinion... and the Sword the Mechanisms of Possessing the State and Reinforcing the Authority

       Jad Al Kareem Al Jeba'i

 

 

Many expressions are used to describe the type of authority's system in countries like Syria, Iraq and others. All these expressions are derived from one idiom, "Despotism", which Abed Al Rahman Al Kawakebi was the first to uncover its origin, derivatives and features. Actually, many terms belong to despotism and are classified under the nomenclature "People's Democracy", for example, the rule of the political elite or the One Party or the One Leader or the Oligarchic rule or the Tribal rule or the Sectarian or the Group. Also, we have terms, like the rule of the individual or Autocratic or Dictatorship or suzerain or comprehensive and totalitarian. Being intersecting terms and having mutual elements, some politicians, writers and researchers are tempted to use any of the former terms and replace it by the other one.

Researching about a certain specific case, such as the Syrian case, requires checking the above mentioned terms and other terms according to the actual events and phenomena. Still, using any of these terms clarifies the writers' attitude toward the meant regime, also, implies an ideological element, which is imposed by the sense of the term and its functional criterion. Obviously, the complete "objectivity" is so difficult or rather impossible to be obtained, as well as, the complete 'neutrality', because in all the human sciences and criterions there is a personal subjective element, which could not be ignored.

Due to state's incorporation in its controlling regime, we are inclined to use the concept of "dominating state" or "suzerain state". This means that the state transforms from a political form of social existence, which represents the social completeness, into an absolute subjugating regime, which makes the governmental organizations and the society structures just an expansion of it. Thus, the limits of the state and the limits of the authority become identical, also, both lose their political characteristics. A suzerain state is declined to a lower grade than a political state, it is a tool of compel and theft; accordingly, its people become sort of a subject and a material for theft and compel, but with all false grandness and magnificence. On the other hand, the use of the term 'suzerain rule' is tempting because, in Arabic language, it is linguistically, similar to the Sultanic rule of old Arabic historyژ(1)گ.

Khaldoon Hasan Al Nakeeb believed that the historical origin of the dominating state was the bureaucratic state, which was born at the beginning of last century, during the Romantic period that succeeded the Renaissance period. It had two trends, the political trend in France and the ideological trend in Germany. Furthermore, the birth of this state was concurrent with the emergence of the capital production pattern after the first industrial revolution, besides, the prominence of the national and social matters. Due to the organizational creations of the French revolution, the centralized bureaucratic state appeared with all its institutions, army, police forces and clerks. This system turned over the foundations of the absolute rule's organizations. Thus, the new organizations enabled the state to interfere with the people's life. Therefore, the state depended on "Radicalism" to visualize the social and public affairs, in other words, the mobilization of inhabitants to assist the political operation by the influence of people's ideology. In fact, the nationalistic spirit and mind, or the nationalist discrimination dominated the public ideologyژ(2)گ.

The three elements: radicalism, publicist and nationalistic spirit grew in the modern bureaucratic state and produced the Liberal state and the suzerain state, which depended on the grade of the dominating elements' growth, according to its pyramidal arrangement and bureaucratic system. Probably, the separation of the authorities, people's observance of the rule, sovereignty of law, equality of citizens and the emergence of the authority from people were the main factors which delimited the development of subjugating elements in liberal countries.

We can say that the historical origin of the dominating state was the state of the organizations' age, which meant the Hybrid State of the Ottoman Sultanic State and modern bureaucratic state. It grew through the capitalistic expansion, the appearance of Oriental matter and the rise of the Arabic national feeling in the age of nationalism or at the imperialistic age and the nationalistic matter. Still, imperialism, which internationally, generalized thoughts, ideologies and created organizations, prevented the establishment of modern independent nationalistic countries at the margins of the global system, which it founded and gave it its characterizations. In fact, the dominating state is a modern phenomenon, which started after the First World War, and a special stage of the Hybrid State's growth. This confirmed the belief that the social and cultural base, which Sultanic State grew through, did not witness fundamental changes as in the west.

The modern bureaucratic state of the west is the newborn government of the civil modern society and modern thoughts. Still, there are mutual elements among all types of dominating states, mainly:

1) The monopolization of all power, authority and wealth, besides, the penetration into civil society in order to organize its structure and absorb its power.

2) Bureaucratizing the economy, through extending the public sector, and making it as a private proprietorship for those who direct it, or executing a new sort of feudalism.

3) The establishment of ruling system legitimacy upon power, overcoming and duress, by means of organized terrorism and generalized repression.

This suzerain state depends on three basics:

- One) The dominating elite, civil or military, or one ruling Party.

- Two) Bureaucratic pyramid that relies on the principle of personal devotion.

- Three) Paralleled structures, such as, tribal, sectarian, ethnic and professional solidarity.

The suzerain state in the third world has, in general, a distinguished middle class culture, or a consumption culture. Actually, these classes live in the margin of the social production operation, they have a distinguished environment of society masses' environments and a distinguished culture of masses' culturesژ(3)گ, which are supplied intensively by all means of directed media that praises the ideology of the ruling group. Also, this state has a distinguished economy, which is the capitalism of the depending stateژ(4)گ.

In Syria, theoretical researches about the characteristics of such a country are still at its beginnings. Khaldoon Al Nakeeb prepared the most important study in this field, which we referred to before. Also, Hisham Sharabi, Haleem Barakat, Yaseen Al Hafez and Abdullah Al Arawi wrote of this approach.

The Environment of the Suzerain Authority:

Nakeeb defined the suzerain rule as a despotic rule, which is built on the mastery of the bureaucratic state upon the society by extending its capacities to organize the underneath structures. So, it penetrates the civil society, completely, and makes it an expansion of its authority. Thus, the regime would be able to execute the effective monopolization of power and authority resources in the society. Usually, the resources of power and authority are restricted in the economical power, crowds' multitude power and the organizational power.

This definition, in spite of its importance, ignored the historical span of the social, economical, political and cultural factors which produced such a type of ruling in the Arab world, in general, and Syria, in particular. It means that Nakeeb skipped the influences of these factors to produce a local version of modern state, which was founded in the Colonial period. In other words, he neglected the effects of the 'historical retardation' that caused the rise of such a local modern state and the factors of its transformation into a dominating state. In which it gathers into the classical despotism new created forms of organizing power to become a higher shape of the usual despotism in the environment of the contemporary bureaucratic state. The definition of Despotism is 'the complete despoliation of the nation'.

First, let us say that, in general, bureaucracy is an important element in the state, especially, in the modern state. The dominating despotic element, which is implicit in each organizing order, progresses forward with the growth of bureaucracy's capacity to organize the social structure and absorb its power. Generally, this accords with the modern centralized bureaucratic state. The "historical retardation" provides for the despotic element a suitable environment to grow. This environment is the climate of the social political patriarchal system, the knowledgeable type or system and the relating virtual system. This, of course, facilitates the reproduction of the classical ruling type of Sultans characteristics, which rely on dependency, loyalty, gifts and privileges in a new modern and contemporary way.

One more important external element is added to both previous elements, which is related to the capitalistic expansion after the 1st World War. The expansion was clarified in our countries by the imperialistic phenomenon, which unified the world paradoxically, deepened the polarization between the center and the sides, and generalized it on the world level. The operation of unification was and continues to be paradoxical and depends on margined integration, or containing and eliminating at the same time. Therefore, the authorities of dependent countries became a part of the global capitalistic system. They have the function of "brokers" between their countries and the capitalistic market. Besides, having the function of the weaker partners in stealing the wealth and the power of their nations' labor.

Although imperialism generalized thoughts, ideologies and created organizations for the bureaucratic state in the entire world, it prevented the establishment of democratic independent constitutional nationalistic states in depending countries. It also, did not permit the accomplishment of an independent national progress in these countries; moreover, it weakened the democratic nationalistic states of developed countries for the benefit of the great powerful countries and the monopolizing multinational firms. Accordingly, the dominating state is a retarded capitalistic state, or a retarded capitalized and dependent country. In other words, as Yaseen Hafez said, the dominating state is a retarded incorporated government with the global system, which would reform it and restrict its structure and function. Thus, the secession of the dominating state from the society, which is supposed to have produced it, is the result of incorporation and neglect, or containment and elimination. On one hand, being a dependent capitalist and having the brokerage, "comprador", function, the dominating authority is incorporated within the global capitalistic system, on the other hand, due to its nationalism or nationalist, it is eliminated from the system. Actually, it also applies this paradoxical mechanism through its relation with its society. In its country, the dominating state incorporates the social powers including their economical, multiplicity and organizational characteristics, and deports the powers of social and political characteristics.

The dominating regime unties the social groups and re-organizes them in a way that enables it to penetrate through society, paralyzes its effectiveness and controls its capacities. Therefore, the authority becomes a transcendental structure outside the society. The increase of the governmental interference in the society and economy for achieving social care, increases its authoritative power and its possibilities of accomplishing the effective monopolization of power and authority resources in the societyژ(5)گ. This general rule does not define, only, distinctions of grades between the dominating state and the modern bureaucratic state, which pay attention to social services and citizens' welfare, in fact, the interference policy of the dominating state does not look for citizens' welfare, nor protect their rights or security. Accurately, the dominating government is the disease of modern bureaucracy and nationalistic tendency at the same time.

In spite of the mutual characteristics and features, the modern bureaucratic sample of state, even with its Fascist or Nazi forms, could not be projected on the sample of the totalitarian government, like the Soviet Union and Eastern European countries, "Bureaucracy" or the dominating governments in the Arab world. While, the dominating government of the Arab world shares "Bureaucracy" with the Western sample, it shares "Totalitarianism" with the Soviet sample. So, we face a compounded and complicated phenomenon, which its "retarded historical" reality and imperialistic penetration increases its complications. The stagnancy of the Arabic society, the coagulation of its internal history and the backward of its ideology and, especially, the political structures clarify the historical backwardness. Al Nakeeb diagnosed the imperialistic penetration, which is cleared in the following symptoms:

1) Power, or imperialistic powers do not attach the penetrated system to its political system, completely, but it never allows it to escape from its suffocative control.

2) The penetrated system, therefore, remains continuously, facing the imperialistic powers. This unbalanced confrontation exhausts its resources and increases its rotten interior conditions.

3) In this penetrated system, the local political, provincial, national and international matters become all mixed together. Thus, the political system could not be understood without returning to the suzerain imperialistic powers.

4) This penetrated system is often, a political game played by local social, provincial and international powers in exchangeable and changeable alliances. So, political and social powers might often be local extensions of provincial and international powers. This position is, mainly, related to the range of imperialistic deep penetration.

Accordingly, in this position many matters emerge like religious, sectarian, nationalistic, ethnic, cultural and linguistic. These matters arise in political forms, which imply pressuring powers that demand to share in political representations. Some of these powers look for independent rule or independent direction, or secession. This is called politicizing the minorities' matter.

These symptoms that attack the penetrated political systems are the special forms of dependency, which its chief elements are lack of freedom, independence and sovereignty. It is a dependency, which results from the power relationships that the global system and the type of international relations are build upon. The penetrated political system can not be self-initiative to solve its interior problems. Besides, the ruling groups have restricted freedom to take strategic decisions, independently, from the suzerain external powers. Still, the decisive factor is always related to the interior positions, the ability of the social powers for penetration and the grade of the historical retardation effects.

The writer believes that the suzerain authority in Syria started its formation after the "Secession", the separation between Syria and Egypt on the 28th of September 1961, which was an assassination of the national state's embryo. This was clarified by the increasing separation between the rule and people, the growing of the totalitarian type that preserves the Arabic systems and the astonishing expansion of governmental corruption. The corruption did not become marginal, nor exceptional or disguised, on the contrary, it took a possessed political type. However, it became not just a matter of moral corruption, but an expression of the separation of the authority from the nationژ(6)گ. The rest of the elements became available after the debacle of June 1967.

Actually, the dominating state emerged in the climate of the retreating project of the national rising. In the climate of a shameful debacle against Israel and its ally, the United States. As well as, the growth of "Shakhboot" phenomenon, which symbolizes, according to Yseen Al Hafez, a bundle of political, ideological and sociological pretensions that expanded after the Nasseri period. There had been a sociological and ideological backwardness, once Bedouin and other times rural of Bedouins inclination. This was associated with fortunes, which did not relate to the Arab society's productivity (oil wealth). The most prominent pretensions, which Yassen Al Hafez observed, were:

1) The elimination of the nationalistic project, the embryo of the state, besides, the retrogression before the state period, such as, tribal rule, troop rule and sectarian rule.

2) Also, the elimination or splitting of the retarded socialism to the benefit of the miraculous retarded capitalism, which combined the consumption expenditure and the subservient begging at petroleum tents. Thus, a new class emerged from the Bureaucracy State, which might be called the "Upper bureaucracy" or the Bourgeois of the retarded state. This new class allied and supported the brokerage bourgeois, which put the state and the nation at its service. Almost, it publicly transformed the government into a tool of spoliation and the nation as the subject of pillaging.

3) Since the debacle of June 1967, the ancestral domain of the traditional ideology started to expand, notably. Also, the sectarian political conflicts, whether concealed or exploding, which a number of Arab countries suffer from, became sectarian ideologies that supported the ancestral traditional ideologies. It loosened and cut the national ties among people, besides, presented the matter of minorities as an urgent and bursting matterژ(7)گ.

The Arabic government in all its forms, such as, parliamentary, revolutionary, autocratic and military, which were enveloped during the imperialistic invasion with a semi-modern cover, remained of a traditional structure in its essence. The distinguished feature of such a country of these structures not, only, make it above the society, but also, provides an incorporation between the authority and those who practice it. This government, which has Arabic political traditions of theocratic type, still thrusts into the ideology of the motionless mass of the nation. Consequently, the pasteurizing feeling toward the government is the prevailing one among the most backward parts of the nation. On the other hand, the parts of the nation, which are less backward did not reach the extent to be stubborn fighters, thus, their rejection became expressed through withdrawal and introversion, in case of acceptance, they supported but did not participate. So, such a state opens the chances for any minority to practice a permanent domination. In retarded societies, the conflicts over authority are considered "politics", in which the most powerful minority of people overcomes the rest. Thus, by canceling the people's political life, the operations of modernizing politics becomes deactivated and impedes democratizing. This means that the individual's transformation into a member in the state becomes obstructedژ(8)گ.

The Debacle of June 1967 was neither just a military defeat in front of Israel, nor a passing moment in Arabs life. In fact, the debacle left the Arabs on a slope, which Tashreen's war could not lift them out of. Due to the policy of Anwar Al Sadat, former President of Egypt, and his 'Country of Faith and Science', this war transformed into another political debacle and its sequences affected all fields. For example, some of the Arabic societies, which established a bit of modernization, relapsed to the worst stages of its history. Meaning that it retreated into a political life type which resembled the Mamaleek/ Ottoman age. The main features of that age were:

- The separation of the rule from the people.

- The separation of the state from society.

- The stagnancy of society.

- The coagulation of society's internal history.

- The domination of the traditional ideology, which supported dependency.

- The compliance, the deficiency, withdrawal and fear.

- The fears from nature, government, truth, freedom.

- The fear from self-confrontation and reality encountering, and fear from the future.

One prominent feature of Mamaleek/ Ottoman age was that 'Freedom' did not exist and could not grow except outside the state and in opposition to it. Therefore, we Arabs did not share the rest of the nations' festivity of freedom, except in burying it. The dominating rule started and grew in the climate of the debacle, which was transformed by the advanced speech into a magnificent victory. The "advanced" systems lied to its nations, then believed its lie and obliged the nation to believe the lie. Except Jamal Abed Al Nasser, who confessed his defeat, announced his responsibility and resigned from the presidency. Later, due to the pressure of the crowds' movement, he withdrew his resignation.

The historical retardation, especially the nationalistic splitting, combined with the political and ideological retardation, plus, the imperialistic penetration with the incoming bureaucracy from the modern liberal government. Also, the arriving totalitarianism from socialism, which was supported by the revolutionary coup d`etat ideology and deepened capitalistic expansion. Besides, the international polarizing between north and south on one side, and capitalism, free world and socialism, led by the Soviets, on the other. All these factors combined to produce a suitable environment for the growth of the dominating authority.

Possessing the State and Assorting the Structures of the Society - The 8th of March Revolution in 1963:

On the 8th of March 1963, the Syrian citizens woke up in the morning to hear the news of a military coup d`etat. The coup d`etat was led by six soldiers of the army: Ziad Al Hariri (independent), Rashed Khattini and Mohammed Al Sufi (Nasseris), Mohammed Omran, Salah Jedeed and Hafez Assad (Ba'athi and members of the military committee which was established in Egypt 1960).

The Military order No. 2 was the announcement of the State of Emergency in the country until further notice. Until today, Syria is still in a State of Emergency. At 8.40 a.m. of that morning, the broadcast announced the 9th statement by which the five members of the military committee returned to the army. Assad was promoted from a Captain to a Lieutenant Colonel and appointed a commander of Dhumair Air Baseژ(9)گ. The leaders of the coup d`etat formed a Council of Revolution Leadership, which was composed of twenty soldiers, twelve of them were Ba'athi, eight were Nasseri and Independent.

After a couple of days, the Council was expanded and joined a number of civilians, like Michel Aflak, Salah Aldeen Al Bittar and Mansure Al Attrash, beside three leaders of the Nasseri groups. The new civil members had no effective role in the Council. According to Patrick Seal, who interpreted what M. Attrash said, "the soldiers let us talk, but we discovered later that they, formerly agreed, within themselves, about the procedures of their decisions"ژ(10)گ. Patrick Seal added, "the first days of the revolution were spent for bargaining about the ranks and how to be divided between the different military groups. These matters were discussed in long meetings, which often needed whole nights"ژ(11)گ.

Unlike the former military coups d`etat that occurred in Syria in which the military interfered to terminate the political conflicts between the competing powers, the 8th of March revolution delivered the country to the military. Accordingly, the army turned from an essential power for the rule, into the essential power of the rule. Therefore, as much as the military started to be politicized and became a dogmatic army, politics started to militarize as well. According to some former Ba'athi cadres, the civil Party wing was weak with a small number, which at the time of the revolution did not exceed 400 members or much less. Antoin Makdesi referred that the number of civil members was much less than the mentioned one. He wrote in his second letter to the President of Syria on the 3rd of April 2001 the following: "At the beginning of 1963, Al Ba'ath was preparing to take over the authority in Syria and Iraq. The clinic of Dr. Jamal Atasi was one of the most active centers. Party members were whispering and exchanging information about the latest news. Ali Saleh Al Sa'di and his companions were ready to return to Baghdad for their decisive battle on the 8th of February 1963 against Abed Al Kareem Khasem. I was contemplating these preparations and asking myself, what was the number of the Syrian Ba'athi members at that time? 50 members! I almost knew them all! By the night of the 8th of March, they became at most 180 members"ژ(12)گ. The civil wing of the Party was formed under the authority of the military wing, or what was called 'the Party's authority'. Therefore, the military had the main domain in directing the Party and ending its interior conflicts, which were, always, bloody conflicts.

In addition to announcing the State of Emergency under the commandment of the revolution council, the military started their political life by breaking the essential army system and loosing its discipline. Also, they restructured its relationships according to Party's bigotry and personal loyalties, which had no objective guarantees rather than the privileges of rank and prestige. Patrick Seal said, "at the office of the Officers Affairs, Salah Jedeed started to eliminate the enemies and promote friends. Thus, he brought to the actual service a big number of Ba'athi reserve officers, in a quite and an elegant way".

After clearing up the Army of the "Damascusi Officers", who did the coup d`etat on the 28th of September in 1962, the Nasseri Officers had to be cleared up, too, then the non-adherent Ba'athi Officers. That was because some Nasseri officers, led by Jasem Alwan, tried to make another coup d`etat on the 18th of July 1963. The position was settled for the benefit of the Party in the authority after settling it in the army and the security institution. After the army's position was settled, the operations of elimination started within governmental institutions to get rid of non-Ba'athi and non-adherent Ba'athi, too. The conflicts within the Party started on the 8th of March and did not terminate until the Correction Movement, which was led by Hafez Assad on the 16th of November 1970. After each confrontation, there had been a wide elimination attack on the army and the governmental organizations.

Patrick Seal pointed that "within four violent months loaded with bloody events, starting from March 1963, Assad and his friends in the military committee destroyed all the organized resistance against their rule, which they practiced behind the screen. Almost, from the first moment, they had to govern by the "force of power" and not with "agreement", probably, because they were a military group that split from a semi-dead Party and without a public base. The experience of these early days affected their attitudes during all the succeeding years. Even after the Party grew and became big and strong, they could not get rid of cautiousness and repression habits"ژ(13)گ.

The widest elimination attack, which included adherent Ba'athi to the Nationalist Leadership, was after the 23rd of February movement in 1966. About 400 officers and employees were expelled, beside the imprisonment of Ameen Al Hafez, Mohammed Omran and their adherent leaders at the Central prison of Mazzeh. As well as, the detention of thirty old Ba'athi members, like Salah Al Bitar, Mansure Al Attrash and Shebli Al Aisami, plus, Lebanese, Saudi and Jordanian members of the Nationalist Leadership, who were kept in the Guest House at Baghdad St., a well known street in Damascus. Michel Aflak left Damascus and went to Brazil, then to Iraq, where he never could return back to Syria. Other elimination attacks were applied before and after Saleem Hatoom's coup d`etat attempt on the 8th of September in 1966.

The first effective monopolization of power was, first, the monopolization of the military and security powers, then the power of the governmental organizations. During the operation of constructing the dogmatic army, then, the operation of Ba'athisizing the state were increasingly deepening, the masses were noticeably careless. Due to the Party's growth and the increase of its members, it was easy to understand the people's carelessness and rejection. Also, the public organizations, which included big masses, were negatively supporting instead of positively participating, or stayed with complete carelessness toward what was going on in the country including what related to their own living conditions, civil rights and fundamental freedoms. The first Regional Conference, which was held after the revolution of September in 1963, was an important turning point at the procession of Al Ba'ath Arab Socialist Party. In fact, Akram Al Horani and his supporters left the Party, beside the Nasseri' split. The Regional Conference was a preparation for the 6th Nationalist Conference in October 1963. The Regional Conference had a Leftist mark; it confirmed the principle of "The Party is the leader of the State and society". It legalized the army's interference with politics and considered that the political dogmatism of the army was as important as the military training. At that conference, it was decided to mobilize the masses by public organizations of workers, farmers and free professions, such as doctors, engineers, lawyers and others, beside the youth, students and women's organizations. The Party controlled all these organizations and they became the devices of building the national democracy, which opened the way for the socialist diversion.

The leftist trend became a general tendency after the 23rd of February movement, led by Salah Jedeed, who became the first man in the State. Still, he did not have any official rank other than regional assistant secretary of the Party, then, Assad appointed him as Minister of Defense. Both leaders paid all their attention, first, toward the Party and the government, which became the State of Ba'ath, secondly, toward military and armed forces, which were the solid nucleus of ruling and its protecting armor.

Patrick Seal said that the system came out after three years of conflict over the authority, which succeeded the 8th of March movement. Then, the expulsion of Nasseris, the suppression of the Right and religious opposition in Hama 1964 and the removal of Ba'athi old generation, made the atmosphere clear for the military committee to govern. Until that time, the military committee was the central institution through which the officers imposed their will. In 1966, after Omran left, the committee weakened and lost its effectiveness because officers monopolized the government institution, besides, there was no more need for secret conferencesژ(14)گ.

The conflict over authority occurred on two fronts, one front was inside the Party, the other one was facing the competitors and the opposition from outside the Party. In both fronts, the military was the fundamental decisive power. After each confrontation there remained some less dangerous or unimportant groups, during the passage of time they all converted to the negative opposition at the civil and military sectors.

What made the officers, cadres of the Party and high-rank employees have an honest loyalty to that leader or the other? Was it partial dogmatic bigotry, or class bigotry, or sectarian bigotry, or directional bigotry? Or, were there other reasons more objective, especially that the competitive leaders were, often, from the same Party and the same class or sector and trend?

The reason of loyalty might be due to the privileges that the leader would give to his followers or the benefits that the leader would allow them to get, in addition to the temptation of authority and prestige. Patrick Seal said that "after the debacle of June 1967, Assad understood, thus, solidity replaced his delights, since that time he decided to develop his personal base within the armed forces. As the tribal chiefs do, Assad polarized his loyalty through rendering services, offering gifts and improving the conditions of his friends". Thus gradually, the authority diverted into a source of wealth, power and prestige, according to the need of the followers and supporters.

Morally, the privileged cadres might have deserved what they gained because of their services to the country, which its frontiers shrank to be equal to the restrictions of the Party and authority. In the absence of law, the absence of the interrogation principle, the deformed organizations and the immobilized powers, the privileges, gifts and theft became the base of the authority. We can add that all bigotry met at one point, the private benefit, which gradually, replaced the general benefit. Therefore, the political denotations depended on personal benefits, so that the principles and foundations of the Sultanic government were repeated. According to Mohammed Abed Al Jaberi, these principles were, already, settled in the political unconsciousness as, "Tribe, Faith and Gaining". Flee from authority, or Sultanic government, or the dominating authority was repeated. Fleeing might be an escape form the authority or running to it. Those who escaped to it wanted either to avoid its harm or to gain its benefits; they became the masses of the ruler, his aura and his devotees. Still, they were not safe of tyranny, repression and terrorism, they were always, obliged to prove their loyalty through "bootlicking" and hypocrisy, or by denunciating friends, relatives, work companions and neighbors.

On the other hand, fleeing from the authority was clarified by joining the Party or the paralleled organizations, such as, Ba'ath Vanguards, Union of Youth's Revolution, Union of Women. Also, Sportive Union, Farmers Union, Workers General Union, Writers Union, the Union of Journalists and other professional unions, which were, completely, dominated by the Party and the security agencies. The society was subjugated to a revolutionary diversion from the pastoral position into the mass position. The main feature of the mass's position was the negative support and the conditional response, like Pavlov's dog response, which responded to the clear and symbolic orders of the authority.

The suzerain state depends on three bases that enable it to produce its society of masses, which are terrorism, ideology and the directed propaganda. These bases are consolidated by three principles:

- The first is the effective monopolization, which means monopolizing authority, wealth and power, besides, monopolizing the truth and nationality.

- The second is the principle of overcoming and duress.

- The third principle is the personification of authority and worshiping power, which means that the person and his rank become incorporated. Also, the moral and material power of the rank is transferred to the person who becomes the ideal grandeur of power and influence. In this case, orders replace laws, privileges replace rights, and loyalties and devotions replace qualifications and merits.

In order to clarify the vision of the suzerain state and its comprehensive span, each one of these bases and principles needs a special study. In fact, they all combine to produce what is so called settlement and continuity, which have no other meaning than preserving the actual conditions and obliging the people to believe all the falsifications.

Due to former monopolization, the society and the nation become useless and exceed the needs. Actually, it is not possible to have a ruler without ruled people, or an authority without a nation, or a State without a society. This tragic paradox or the Black Tragedy (The authority's dispense and need for the nation) explains the authority's neglect and contempt of the people. The authority considers the nation incapable and believes to maintain it as a subject for its will and complete capacity. The authority, which is able to interpret the progress of illusion, can cancel plurality, variety and opposition, also, oblige the reality to yield to whatever ideology disciplined by the "General".

A Society without Classes:

The Agrarian Reform dropped the big proprietors and divided the confiscated lands among farmers. This led to the increase of small and middle proprietors. The decisions of the "Socialist" Nationalization dropped the rising national Bourgeois. Thus, the government, gradually, converted into a big proprietor, a unique industrialist, a wholesaler and retailer and a manager of the rising working class, which widened due to developing the capitalism of the dependent state. The Middle-class became distributed vertically according to its loyalty or opposition to the authority. Therefore, it was divided between a ruling group and masses, in which the ruling group split into masters and dependents. Masters were the Bourgeois of the upper authority, civil and military, the dependents and the followers of the dependents and who depended on the dependents, until the bottom of the pyramid, were the masses.

Nationalization was an elimination of the working class and cancellation of its political and social role rather than a socialist act.

This destroyed any class' solidarity among workers and farmers, or among poor rural people and the poor city people to face the joint liability of proprietors and managers. The government presented itself as a representative of these classes and decided their dissolution before they were culturally and politically identified. The procession of neglecting them quickened according to the growth of the dominating authority and the transfer of social power from the society organizations into the governmental organizations, which converted by time into security institutions.

At the same time, there was a growing Aristocratic class of workers, farmers and medium Bourgeois, all protected and supervised by security agencies. The main features of such Aristocracy were corruption and virtual loose, but the national socialist ideology was its cover and justification. Day after day, the gap between the new Aristocracy and its supporting masses widened much more than the gap between the worker and his Bourgeois manager. Therefore, the working class and the drudged masses turned into a troop of slaves. The cancellations of Party, rural and workers aristocracy, which was a new class with mutual benefits, encountered the cancellation of classes or social groups. The serial elimination of these classes made their members slaves for the authority, because the slavery system would never create a free class. Thus, workers, rural and poor city people became slaves of the slaves. This is the main phenomenon of political, cultural and social negligence. The dominating authority does not accept the existence of united and unified privileged groups or classes, it only, accepts privileged individuals. Consequently, the opponents could not depend on organized and unified classes or groups of mutual benefits. Actually, by shattering and dividing, the dominating authority creates a crowed of isolated and competitive individuals, which their benefits relay on denouncing each other and withdrawing from the general affairs. Force or reality accuses each one, so, a person has to face the accusation by dropping it on others, also by adulating the ruler to convince him of his innocence and prove his loyalty. Thus, the individual becomes besieged from inside and outside and driven into a series of useless practices, which increase his self-despise and isolation. These futility practices, in fact, are blind instinctive responses toward an existing possible danger and violence. The violence of the dominating authority is not only directed to the opposition but could be, irrationally, practiced with everyone. In such a system, each individual is possibly considered an opposition and an objective enemy. Terrorism always presumes more illusions, more secret agencies and more detectives.

This explains the cancer progress of security institutions. These institutions have the complete freedom to interfere directly with citizens' detailed life, on all levels of administration and activities. If these institutions did not enrich enough through stealing from the government, they enrich by stealing and blackmailing their victims, beside sharing the activities, which they were supposed to control, like gambling, prostitution, smuggling and drug trade. This made the security institution a sort of state within a State, which was established by terrorism, blackmailing, corruption and corrupting.

These institutions transformed the society into the society of exchanged fear and doubts, plus, subjugating the society's concepts into their measures and virtual scales. Their essential functions might be and still are to control the plurality of the society and the infinite varieties and differences among human creatures in order to make them similar copies which resemble a mono totalitarian creature. This is impossible unless all citizens are diminished into one fixed and empty identity, which is constituted of instinctive reactions, plus, declining their freedom for the sake of preserving their kind.

The political terrorism and the political detention with all the accompanying body torture and psychological oppression, severely, affected the ruining of the human relationships. Besides, penetrating the society and destroying all its forms of resistance transformed it into a kind of big Holocaust. Hanna Arndt said: "the first fundamental step for complete control is to kill in the person his legal self, then, to kill his virtual self, after that, ruining the individual is accomplished"ژ(15)گ.

Converting classes or social groups into masses and canceling any solidarity or unification between groups are two obligatory provisions for full despotismژ(16)گ. The transfer from pastorals into masses is a transfer from uncovered pauperization and misery into disguised pauperization and poverty, also, from a frank slavery into a flowering one. According to Aristotle, a slave is the one whose spirit weakened; wits declined and annexed his self to others. Besides, a slave is the body, the ox and the tool of his Master. According to the writer of this report, he believes that the "dependent" is a body without spirit or mind nor conscience. In fact, everything in the state or society exists in the individual, by force or reality, so, what does this mean if the individual is a body without spirit or mind nor conscience?

Actually, the society of masses and a dominating authority, or totalitarian, is a society and authority without spirit, or mind, nor conscience! The extinguished spirit, resigned mind, dead conscience and the deprivation of meaning are the most prominent productions of the dominating authority, at the same time, the most important provisions for its settlement and continuity. The dominating state is a meaningless authority because all its speeches and acts are meaningless. The 'meaning' is constituted of speech and action. Thus, a dominating authority can not produce the provisions of its settlement and continuity unless it slays the human spirit, blocks the voice of mind and executes the conscience and assassinates the meaning.

The prevailing corruption, which some people might consider it an incidental extraordinary phenomenon, and a disease, which could be treated without changing the structure and function of the government, is the direct tangible result of the authority' settlement and continuity. The changes of the state' structure and function do not mean overthrowing the actual regime but retaining the state, as well as, canceling its partition feature, being the state of the leading Party, and gradually, transforming it into a political state, which expresses the social wholeness. This means transforming it into a State of rights and law without discriminations or exceptions among citizens, and reviewing the production of its functional social types. The writer of this report believes that the existing authority and Al Ba'ath Party could assist effectively in the grand historic conversion by transforming the authority into a political authority, and the leading Party into a political Party in a modern contemporary meaning of politicsژ(17)گ.

The democratic freedoms are based on the equality of law between all the citizens; besides, the social justice becomes the actual practice of equality. Thus, these freedoms would not have a meaning and function unless the citizens, according to their social environment, belong to groups who represent them and form within themselves a social and political pyramid. Therefore, citizens would belong, voluntarily and rationally, to free organizations and groups, which are produced by society that express its effectiveness and activities. These political organizations, associations and groups, beside other civil organizations could not be really free unless all their members are free. Freedom, here, is under the provision of law and responsibility. Thus, the collapse of the social classes' system, which means the evacuation of the only political and social base of the modern state' structure, was one of the most tragic events in the history of nations. This event occurred in a primitive, barbarian and tyrannical way. The conflicts of the social classes do not always terminate by the victory of one class and the deterioration of the other; actually, they may terminate by the collapse of all the conflicting groups. The conflicts in our country as in many other countries terminated with the collapsing of all the conflicting groupsژ(18)گ. This collapse corresponded to the rise of Fascism in Europe and Totalitarianism in the former Soviet Union and other Eastern European countries, besides, the domination in dependent and retarded countries. Ruining the social groups, necessarily, causes the ruin of public life field and removes politics from society, because it is the essential quality of the human society and the distinguished formula of these groups. The dominating authority does not only ruin public life field, but it looks for ruining private and personal life's fields. Also, to pauperize the individuals and impoverish their lives. Pauperizing and impoverishing are the mutual foundation of terrorism. They both prepare the executioners and the victims; also, they spread among the individuals deep tragic feelings of extraction and uselessness, which is the most alienated feeling of persons from themselves, their production and the world.

The Indications of Reformation:

After all what we said, is it possible to reform? Yes, it is possible and it is a duty. The radical corruption needs a radical reformation. As the writer believes, Syria, today, is standing on crossways, either the radical reformation, or the reproduction of the same dominating system, which are anarchism, self-destruction and collective suicide. There is no other possibility unless what other external powers would impose, but, reformation is the best possibility.

Naturally, reformation is gradual, slow and sometimes painful. Reformations differ, the authority reformation with its own known devices and machinery would lead into the reproduction of the system with some improvement here and there. This will reproduce the same crisis, which will have no exit other than a radical reformation. The radical reformation occurs when the efforts of the authority and the nation combine, as well as, the positive participation of all the groups and powers of the society. This reformation would lead the country to exceed the present toward renaissance and progress. There is no third choice because all this corruption and ruin could not be canceled without a historical action on the same level of its danger and challenges.

The writer claims that the feelings of necessity for reformation were growing slowly within some spheres of the authority, which deafened during a long time and did not hear the voice of the nation, especially, the voice of the intellectuals and the employees of the public field. These spheres felt the stiffness of the governmental articulations and the prevailing corruption in all the levels of the public administration, which became its distinguished characteristics. Also, they felt the rusty ideological project of the authority, "the nationalist socialist ideology", the aggravation of the economical crisis, the bankruptcy of the public economical sector, except the oil sector, which is considered a prohibited secrecy. Before the death of the former president, Hafez Assad, there were rumors about opening the files of corruption. Many names of prominent corrupted personalities were mentioned, which included high-rank employees in all the commanding sectors. Therefore, the former Prime Minister, Mahmod Al Zu'bi was accused of corruption and was abstained from work. There were conversations about a project of reformation held by Dr. Bashar Assad, which one of its headlines was to control corruption.

In this climate, cultural gathering nucleuses of political spans started to be formed. They spread in all the cities and Syrian regions, especially, in Damascus, the capital. Members of these groups were intellectuals and strugglers from all different opponent political groups, who had cultural interests and found in that a base for politics. Some of these forums were called: the Cultural Forum, Literal Salon, Literal Gathering or Civilized Forum. There were other groups of dialogues, which were formerly, held periodically or semi-periodically in many regions. All these assemblies practiced their activities half secretly and half openly, except some known Literal Salons in Damascus, such as, the Salon of lawyer Hanan Najmeh, and the Salon of Dr. Jorjet Atiah and others.

The Seminar of the Economical Tuesday, organized by the Syrian Economical Association had an important role. It uncovered the factors and features of the economical crisis, its morals, political and social effects in the society, plus, the aggravated resulting effects of the administrative corruption. However, a number of intellectuals and interested cadres gathered in Damascus and established the association of the Friends of Civil Society, which became later committees for the Revival of Civil Society. The league of graduated students in Homs made a cultural political activity, which assisted the activation of the cultural life and provided the chances of dialogues among the different political and intellectual trends. The Syrian Communist Party, the wing of Yusef Faisal, presented various seminars that assisted the activation of dialogue, too. Unfortunately, the authority stopped this kind of activities in all leagues and cultural centers; thus, homes became the only place to practice activities.

After the death of Assad, his son Bashar became the president. He announced in his speech of oath the "Presidential Program" of developing and modernizing. This refreshed some prospects of improving the political position, especially, after releasing 600 hundred detained politicians, which formerly, the authority denied their existence. Therefore, the circles of Forums widened and became overt, new forums were established in Damascus, such as, the Forum of National Dialogue by Riad Saif, who used his own house at one of the southern districts in Damascus. Also, Jamal Atasi's Forum of Dialogue and Democracy, which was established at the house of the intellectual and political leader Jamal Atasi. The writer of this report had the honor to be the Spokesman of this later forum and inaugurated it by a lecture titled "Present Matters for Discussions". He also had the honor to assist the foundation of the Cultural Forum of Human Rights and become a member of its administrative institution. Besides, he inaugurated the cultural activity of the later forum at the residence of the Lawyer Khaleel Ma'took in one of the southern districts in Damascus by a lecture about the fundamental principles of Human Rights. Unluckily, this forum was closed at its beginnings. Other forums were established, like the Cultural Forum in Hasakeh, the Cultural Forum of Gladet Badrahan in Kameshli, north of Syria, the Forum of Abed Al Rahman Kawakebi in Aleppo, the Cultural Compass Forum in Homs, as well as the Cultural Forum, announced by Mrs. Najah Al Sa'ati in Homs. Also, others forums were opened like the Cultural Forum of the writer and novelist Nabeel Sulaiman, who established it in his home in latakia, plus, Latakia Cultural Forum, which was announced by MP Mrs. Suhair Al Raies. Banias Cultural Forum and other two forums were opened in the littoral Tartous City. In addition, there was Homs Forum for Dialogue at the residence of Mr. Najati Tayarah, the Left Forum in one district of Damascus and the Cultural Forum of Jaramana. Moreover, there was new forum of women's rights in one of Damascus districts and an enlightened Islamic forum at the residence of Mr. Mathehar Jarks in one of eastern districts of Damascus. Besides, there was the Forum of Democratic Dialogue in Swaida City and many others in Damascus and its districts, plus the other cities and regions of Syria.

Plenty of Syrian intellectuals and educated people lectured at these forums, which included a wide range of political, cultural and social cadres. At these forums, the language and culture of the dialogues flourished, besides, forming many collective demands, which were expressed by statements, documents and writings. Therefore, one important statement was signed by 99 Syrian intellectuals and had the following demands:

- Terminating the State of Emergency, which was imposed for continuous forty years.

- Canceling the Martial Laws and exceptional tribunals.

- Releasing the political dإtentes and permitting the deported persons to return home.

- Liberating fundamental freedoms.

- Issuing the law of Parties and associations.

- Issuing the press law, which organizes Journalism.

- Viewing other matters, which related to fundamental freedoms, human rights and the sovereignty of law.

Within these activities, the predicament of civil society emerged to oppose the totalitarian authority, the mass society, plus, the cancellation of political life, pauperizing the nation and neglecting it. This predicament with all its intellectual, social and political inclusions was clarified in the "Fundamental Document" that was issued by the foundational institution of the committees for the revival of civil society. 1.200 intellectuals and activists in the public field signed the document. They were writers, journalists, artists, lawyers, engineers, doctors, graduates and teachers of both genders. This document was called "Statement of the Thousand". It was succeeded by a second document, titled "Toward a National Social Age in Syria, General National Concordances". Like the first one, different powers and effective political and social trends welcomed this document. Another statement was issued by the lawyers, which confirmed the demands of both former statements. Moreover, the attention toward the human rights increased, thus, the Committees, which defend human rights, announced their re-establishment and the resumption of their activities more freely. They issued a number of statements and a yearly report. Lately, new efforts were imposed for forming a national independent committee of human rights and fundamental freedoms, which led to establish the Association of Human Rights in Syria on the 2nd of July 2001. In 30.7.2001, the first meeting of this association was held in Damascus, where its administrative cadres were selected.

The social movement, which was initiated by the intellectuals and supported by the opposing democratic national Parties, especially, the Parties that were included within the frame of democratic national assembling, assisted to exceed the screen of fear, rejected violence with all its political and social forms and features. Also, it achieved a sort of contact with the intellectuals and the political movements. As well as, it assisted the appearance of a new age, which adopts the principles of individual freedom and citizenship, plus, the equality of law.

The statement of the general national concordance that was established by the foundational institution of the committees for the revival of civil society had less propaganda but deeper and wider effect. This effect was clarified among all Syrians, who were interested in the general affairs, inside and outside the country. Even the prohibited Party of Muslim Brotherhood announced its support to the Statement of the Thousand and issued the Convention of Honor, which seemed to accord completely with it. The convention of Muslim Brotherhood included the rejection of violence and an invitation for a comprehensive national dialogue, in which it admits the political and intellectual plurality, the democratic principles and peaceful alternation of authority. Moreover, the convention recognizes religion as a civil identity instead of a political doctrine.

During the former months, new political and cultural features were formed. Thus, there became a deepened tendency toward an open and frank comprehensive national democratic dialogue. Also, there was a tendency for a national reconciliation that would lead to exceed the past and exit from the state of negative protest and disguise strikes into the state of positive participation. Furthermore, to pave a safe way to transfer into the State of rights, law and democracy system, plus, replacing the cultural base in which the suzerain state grew by a democratic base. The Syrian nation tried, and still tries to help the authority to get rid of its chronic crisis by producing a mutual political and intellectual sphere with it due to the speech of oath. According to some predicaments of that speech, some flatterers consider that it was an ideal complete presidential program, which was impeccable. Of course, this is not true. Unfortunately, the authority still refuses and prohibits the nation's help.

As a response to the demands for a national dialogue, the authority decided to close the forums, accused the intellectuals and charged them with treason. Moreover, the authority went to extremes in monopolizing the truth, nationality and the continuous corruption, which file was not yet opened, if it will ever be opened. The Nationalist Leadership of Ba'ath and most of its members, who were referred to as symbols of corruption and, as was said, who were supposed to be interrogated in the regional conference that was held after the death of Assad, attacked the nation. Besides, other supporting Parties of the national front and all the bodies of security shared the attack. They all led launches of slander and attacks against the idiotic and ignorant people, who did not deserve liberty. Also, the launch attacked the intellectuals who dealt with foreign embassies and evil external powers. Moreover, they started to mobilize the Party and public organizations against the civil society; also, they aroused the anger of the president against the intellectuals. Thus, the president declared in an interview to the 'Middle East' newspaper and in other declarations the contrary to what he said in his speech of oath. Actually, the president sketched red lines, which implied the impossibility of freedom of opinion and conscience or legitimacy of the other opinion if it does not accord with the authority's opinion. So, the "other", which the authority approves, should be an exact copy of it.

All the former responses are headed by the title 'the primacy of administrative and economical reformation', without the need for a political reformation. In spite of the prevailing corruption among the advanced national front, according to the president, the political positions seemed to be fine. Therefore, every discussion about the political reformation became a calumniation against the modern history of Syria and the former president's way; besides, it was interpreted to offend the Party and destroy its authority. Probably, this condition urged the remarkable intellectual Antoin Makdesi to say at the beginning of his letter to the president the following:

"Humans, individuals and groups, are recognized by their future. The past is always present in the future as a span of its range. The opposite can not be true, because the future is always surprising. We Arabs have to live this matter because the Arab man, always, considers his golden age had passed and he has to go back to it. However, the daily experience shows us clearly that the past, in whatever power of presence it affects the present or the future, it had already passed and terminated, and will never be back."

I believe that the sheik of Syrian intellectuals, who is madly in love with his country and people, tried to draw the attention of the young president to the past, which passed and has no more interpreted value. Furthermore, the persons of that past were neither always right, nor always wrong. It seems that Makdesi regained the Arabic poet saying "I was not honored by my people but I gave them honor and I was proud of myself not of my grandfathers". As if he wanted to say "you are the president, not the son of the president, thus, it is your duty to preserve the republic and defend it. However, the heritage of your father is grand and proud in your view, it is not your duty to preserve it and defend it, because life is passing as the current water of a river, where a person can not swim in the same water twice".

According to the researcher, it seems that the authority, today, is hesitating between the absolute need of reformation and the fear from the expected and the delusional results. This fear is due to different visions and private benefits, which were produced by the operation of possessing the State. Therefore, there are meaningless discussions about the primacy of administrative and economical reformation instead of the political reformation. As if the social fields of life are separated and unconnected, and the serious reformations in any of these fields do not need a paralleled reformation in the other fields or does not relate to it. For the first time, the authority confessed about the economical stagnancy and administrative corruption, mainly, in judiciary, education and information. This confession brought the authority out of the complete yielding position, the complete believe and the state of avoiding reality into the admission of some truths. It seems unable and does not want to confess the political crisis, which became a relating type to all other crises. Actually, reformation can not start before confessing the political crisis and criticizing the past. There should be deep criticism for the foundations, which established the policy since the 8th of March in 1963. If we take this matter out of the pessimism and optimism circle, which means from the subjective circle into the objective circle of possibilities and probabilities, we can say that reforming the present situations of the country became an urgent and actual necessity. Furthermore, the authority, which still holds the reins of initiative and decisive power for reformation, has two equal choices. First, to close the doors which it opened and await the future. Second, to go ahead in the compulsory dangerous critical way if it does not accept a national reconciliation, which enables the civil society's powers of actual participation in the political life. In fact, it seems that the Syrians have a wide range of time to wait.

__________

Footnotes:

1) We do not agree with the distinction of Khaldoon Hasan Al Nakeeb between the dominating state and the Sultanic State according to their resemblance in the grade of despotism and their differences of capacity to organize the structures of the society. We believe that there is a correlation between despotism and organizing the structure of society besides absorbing its powers. Jamal Al Gaitani in his magnificent work "Al Zaini Barakat" described skillfully the Sultanic State. He related the most prominent features of the Sultanic State to the Modern dominating authority.

2) Khaldoon Hasan Al Nakeeb, "The Dominating Authority in the Arab World", a comparative structural study, The Center for Studies of the Arabic Union, Beirut, 2nd edition, 1996, p. 24-25.

3) Review Al Nakheeb, previous source, also, Hanna Arndt " the Foundations of Totalitarianism", Edgar Moran "Introductions to leave out the Twentieth Century" and "the Spirit of Time" in two parts. Besides, a group of Arab researchers of "The State and the Society in the Arab World".

4) Al Nakheeb, previous source, p. 32 and the following.

5) Previous source, p. 36 - 37.

6) Yaseen Al Hafez, "The Debacle and the Debacle Ideology", 2nd edition, Dar Al Hassad, Damascus 1997, p. 172.

7) Previous source, p. 173 - 174.

8) Previous source, p. 212 - 213.

9) Patrick Seal, "Assad, the Conflict Over the Middle East", the translation of the General Organization of Studies, Publishing and Distribution, there is neither date nor place of publishing, p. 132.

10) Previous source, p. 133.

11) Previous source, p. 133.

12) A letter sent by the well-known Syrian intellectual Antoin Maqdesi to the President of the Syrian Arab Republic, Dr. Bashar Al Assad, dated 03.05.2001. Mr. Maqdesi is one of the first Ba'athi generation. He said in his letter "The Party did not hold the authority on the 8th of March, but the military formed a new Party, which number exceeded one and a half million members".

13) Patrick Seal, previous source, p. 142.

14) Previous source, p. 174.

15) Hanna Arndt, previous source, translated by Antoin Abu Zaid, Dar Al Saki, 1st edition, Beirut 1993, p. 221 and the following.

16) Previous source, p. 17.

17) We use the concepts of the political state, the political authority and the political Party as a substitute for the State of the one Party or, the leader Party, and the revolutionary authority. Thus, it is Patriarchal and disguises its military reality and security nature, also, instead of the ideological Party and in contradiction with it. Or let us say that we use the concept of policy instead of ideology and in contradiction with it.

18) Here, we distinguish the class conflict, being the logic of history, as Karl Marx said, from the conflict of the "modern tribes" over wealth and authority, which happened in our country and other backward countries. This conflict continued and no one gained unless in a personal and illegal way.