Damascus is in pain, and we are not helpless or naked. Damascus is the one that allowed others to write its history. Damascus is not foolish or naive; it even fears its own people. In its neighborhoods and diversity lies a scene from the future: it can be beautiful or ugly. As residents of Damascus, with different locations, wealth, dreams, and ambitions, you all know this. The dispute is not about knowing what is happening in Damascus, but rather, how can we save Damascus?
I asked a rational and honest friend to some extent: What reactions did Mr. Khaddam’s interview on Al-Arabiya channel evoke among the Syrian people? He answered me with a bit of regret: The Syrian people, in general, believe everything Mr. Khaddam said about the Syrian regime, just as they believe everything the Syrian regime said about Mr. Khaddam. However, I returned and asked him in a very private session why there was regret in your voice when talking about this matter? He replied: What scares him now is that Mr. Khaddam’s movement, according to the Syrian reality produced by the authority, is participating in it until a recent period. What he fears is that Mr. Khaddam’s movement takes on a sectarian face, and this is what the authority is trying to spread among the people now, following the same oral culture that constituted the cornerstone of the authoritarian, corrupt, and repressive cultural producer.
He also fears that things will return, after creating some hope for change among the people, to a state of applied despair, sinking the Syrian citizen more into poverty, deprivation, and the search for his livelihood in a way that makes him think of nothing more than a loaf of bread.
The Syrian people have reached a point where thinking about change and the return of their dignity, freedom, and decent living is impossible for the Syrian citizen. The return of security to his future, his country, and the future of his grandchildren is impossible to contemplate for the Syrian citizen. I heard from Mr. Khaddam in his interviews a hint that he will return to Syria soon, and his name will not be registered on the list of Syrian expatriates. Whether it’s a promise, a dream, or a necessity for political action, in any case, the non-fulfillment of this promise makes my friend’s words true and plunges the Syrian citizen once again into a completely closed threshold of despair.
Honestly, in many matters, an important approach to understanding and changing reality is through a bit of humor/tragedy. Mr. Khaddam was asked about the conflict within the Ba’ath Party or, to be more precise, the power that covers itself with the Ba’ath, along with the Muslim Brotherhood. The results were disastrous for the Syrian people, especially the way the power imposed a sectarian aspect on this conflict. Some leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood helped in that through their practices and some violent acts they carried out. The authority helped in solidifying sectarian and tribal backward sentiments in society to keep itself as the oppressive, stealing, and tyrannical authority.
Now, is there a return of an alliance between the Ba’ath and the Muslim Brotherhood that brings back Syria’s civil face? What encourages this is the deep review carried out by the group’s leaders, both individually through their writings and at the party level through the documents representing their opinions after reviewing their experience. They envision a real civil future for Syria and hope for a broader, genuine democratic alliance in Syria through the National Salvation Front.
I also sensed from Mr. Khaddam a seriousness in reviewing his experience in power on the grounds of democratic awareness. This review, with all the courage required to confront oneself, is also needed by the Syrian citizen regardless of how this review will be conducted and separate from the statements of some opposition leaders calling on Mr. Khaddam to apologize for his past. It should aim to communicate this review to the Syrian citizen.
Speaking from the perspective of an observer, and perhaps more concerned about this matter than others, I want to emphasize that Mr. Abdul Halim Khaddam does not need support from the opposition from a material perspective. Also, in the event he returns to power, he does not intend to pass it on to any of his sons because they are outside this context.
So, what prompted him to join the Syrian opposition and form a serious and genuine nucleus that can carry a real democratic project?
I believe that this question needs to be answered repeatedly, especially since there are forces accusing this new alliance of exclusion and levying many charges against it. There is traditional internal opposition that rejected this coalition and insists on excluding Mr. Khaddam from the honor of turning into a Syrian opposition figure. Why this insistence is indeed a striking determination by some opposition figures. There is also another opposition accusing this front of exclusion, such as the Reform Party in Washington and other opposition groups inside and outside the country. Some forces that wanted to be informed about it at the Brussels conference and participate in its preparation registered their reservations and comments.
A Syrian opposition figure currently in France sent me a message saying, “I hope first that Mr. Abdul Halim Khaddam will be open to many questions that will be directed to him, not with the intention of harm but for clarification. Fifteen years ago, when asked about the Syrian opposition, Mr. Abdul Halim Khaddam answered: it is the opposition of the Champs-Élysées. Why doesn’t it return to Syria if it is a serious opposition?” The sender continues, “Now, since that date, we are moving freely, but Mr. Abdul Halim Khaddam is moving in the Champs-Élysées according to a calculated security movement due to fear for his life. This is painful for him and his family. That’s why he asked me, if I have the opportunity, to ask Mr. Abdul Halim Khaddam about this matter, and I hope Mr. Khaddam will answer it if he reads this text. Because Damascus is eagerly awaiting many answers.”