He told “Al-Eqtisadiah,” Abdul Halim Khaddam, the former Deputy President of Syria, “There are four factors that prove that Bashar al-Assad has decided to change his approach in the conflict with the revolution and the Syrian people to a path that ignites sectarian warfare as a prelude to declaring a state in the coastal region.” Khaddam considered the escalating situation in his country an indicator that the current ruling regime in Damascus has “entered a phase of collapse,” pointing out that the battles around the airport aim to prevent President Bashar al-Assad’s relatives from escaping.
The former Syrian Vice President warned of the consequences of a “sectarian conflict” in Syria, going so far as to say, “There is a group of Alawites who see the danger of the situation, but so far, they have not taken action to avoid this danger, and most likely, the reason for this is fear of the revolution.” On the other hand, a French diplomatic source told “Al-Eqtisadiah” that the United Nations Security Council may issue a resolution condemning the repression in Syria. The resolution, he explained, will support the Arab League’s plan to resolve the crisis in Syria without explicitly calling for the departure of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. The resolution will also include a ban on sending weapons to Syria.
Summarizing the dialogue:
Abdul Halim Khaddam, former Deputy President of Syria and member of the National Support Body for the Syrian Revolution,
Where are the situations heading in Syria?
Undoubtedly, the developments in Syria are heading towards escalation, indicating that the current regime has entered a phase of collapse. You can observe that after the Arab initiative, the intensity of killings increased, and after resorting to the Security Council, the acts of invasion and killing escalated. Bashar al-Assad realizes that he does not have the ability to control the situation, and that is why he has decided to send his family, including his wife, children, mother, his brother Maher’s family, and his cousin Rami Makhlouf, abroad. The clashes around the airport were intended to prevent them from escaping.
Some fear that the protest movement may turn into a sectarian and religious conflict?
There is indeed significant sectarian tension in Syria, and a shift towards sectarian conflict is another matter, which is more dangerous because it tears apart national unity and leads to a bloody conflict with many casualties. The danger lies in Bashar al-Assad’s plan to develop his conflict with the people into a sectarian conflict.
Where does the Alawite community stand on this plan?
There is no doubt that there is sectarian tension, and there is a portion of our Alawite brothers who are involved with Bashar al-Assad, either in acts of murder, destruction, and looting, or in acts of terrorism. Thus, their fate is tied to his fate. There is a group of Alawites who see the danger of the situation, but so far, they have not taken action to avoid this danger. Most likely, the reason for this is fear of the revolution and fear of committing crimes against them carried out by Bashar al-Assad and his supporters in those areas.
Fear is not limited only to the Alawites; Christians are also afraid and cling to the regime?
You cannot generalize that statement. There is indeed a group that supports Bashar al-Assad due to various factors unrelated to the people or the revolution, and we find it perplexing that these fearful individuals exist. None of the revolutionaries have attacked citizens of any religious or sectarian affiliation. No incidents have been recorded throughout more than ten months of the revolution where a citizen was targeted due to their sectarian or religious beliefs. Thus, this excuse is a justification for a stance that is fundamentally rejected by the Syrian people. The Syrians are struggling to build a democratic state, which will be achieved through free elections under Arab and international supervision. It is the right of any group that garners the majority of citizens’ votes to assume power and be held accountable by the people for their commitment to national goals. So, why the fear of Islamic leadership? Isn’t this fear similar to the fear of Maronites in Lebanon that led to a bloody conflict lasting 14 years? When you say that you believe in democracy and want democracy, it is not our right to object to the choices of the people.
Continuing repression and killings, can’t this lead to a violent reaction against the main defenders of the regime, against the Alawites and those who stand with the Syrian President?
Revolutions and peoples don’t harbor grudges or get affected, they hold accountable. It’s natural that all those who have committed crimes will be held accountable. If this doesn’t happen, the people won’t witness stability.
But you warned a few days ago about the dangers of sectarian war in the region, what reasons make you concerned?
These reasons aren’t mere predictions, but the result of information indicating that Bashar al-Assad has decided to change his approach in the conflict with the revolution and the Syrian people to a method that ignites sectarian war, a prelude to declaring a state in the coastal region. This information is confirmed by the following factors: First: the distribution of massive amounts of weapons to his supporters and allies from the Alawite sect in the areas they reside. Training a very large number of Alawite youth in combat operations to involve them in this conflict. Second: transferring all strategic weapons and storing them in the coastal mountains, including missiles and chemical weapons. Third: moving the warplanes to Latakia Airport and keeping a number of military aircraft that are no longer relevant in combat operations. Fourth: during his meeting with some of his Lebanese friends, Bashar al-Assad talked about the situation in Syria and concluded that he won’t surrender or give in. He stated that he would ignite a civil war and move to the coastal area to declare a state there. All these pieces of information have convinced me that he is seeking this war. Indeed, we have noticed an increase in the escalation after the Arab initiative and the attempt to go to the Security Council. Therefore, Bashar al-Assad’s plan aims to further escalate the situation and change the nature of the conflict to declare a state in the coastal region. This indicates his unparalleled madness, similar to Muammar Gaddafi’s madness when he went to Sirte, his hometown, where his fate was known, and this will be the fate of Assad.
Regarding the mention of the Security Council, the French Foreign Minister, Alain Juppe, is heading to New York in an attempt to pass a resolution condemning the repression in Syria. Moscow has announced that it refuses Assad’s resignation, as well as sanctions on the Syrian regime and the arms embargo to Syria. In your opinion, will Juppe succeed in his attempt?
I would like to emphasize that the French policy is well-received by the Syrians, and we appreciate the French government for its positions. Of course, the problem facing the French Foreign Minister is the Russian stance. We know that there’s a strong alliance between Russia and Iran supporting the murderous regime in Syria. Their goal is to control the region and dominate its strategic position and resources.
But didn’t the West eliminate the Gaddafi regime? Does this mean that Russia is seeking revenge against the West?
Not at all, Russia has a strategy that revives its Soviet policies, aiming to control parts of the region. It’s not surprising to see this alliance between Iran and Russia in the region and in many areas of Asia and Africa. The difficulty of issuing a resolution from the Security Council will lead to convincing the Syrian President to stay in power.
How do you envision a solution and what could happen?
The main solution in the region involves forming an international military coalition to save the Syrian people and empower them to determine their fate. Meanwhile, the Russian-Iranian alliance’s progress towards reviving the Cold War must be halted.
Wouldn’t Western military intervention in the region potentially ignite it?
Western intervention wouldn’t ignite the region. Instead, it would restrain Iran and halt Russia’s interference. Iran doesn’t fight beyond its national borders. It sends aid, sends elements to fight alongside Bashar al-Assad, but it can’t send an army. Russia won’t engage in war. Russia wants to eat the Middle Eastern cheese through its alliance with Iran, not through wars. We saw that Western intervention against Gaddafi in Libya eradicated the regime but didn’t bring Libya out of conflict.
Isn’t this experience likely to repeat in Syria?
No, the situation is different, the social situation is different, and the psychological situation is also different. Of course, there are differences among politicians in Syria, but they won’t exceed that. Syria’s history is well-known in its structure and in the practices of its people.
France is calling on the Syrian opposition to unite. Where is Khaddam today regarding the Syrian National Council and the opposition inside?
Let me differentiate: there’s a revolution inside and there’s an opposition outside. The revolution in Syria was initiated by the people. It wasn’t led by a party, politician, or family. Young people erupted like volcanoes due to over 40 years of oppression, humiliation, and repression. There are opposition groups outside. Every citizen has the right to choose the political option they believe is right, and thus coalitions formed outside. The Syrian National Council isn’t the opposition; it’s a part of it. It doesn’t have the right to speak on behalf of the Syrian people, and anyone who believes that an agreement has been reached that they represent the Syrian people is not only mistaken but their agreement isn’t executed. The Council is composed of one group, the Muslim Brotherhood, along with some figures that have no political presence in Syria, who also didn’t have a political presence in the opposition outside. Among them is Burhan Ghalioun, along with a small Marxist party in Syria, and thus the Muslim Brotherhood dominates the Council, while the others are merely a facade. This led many Syrian citizens to distance themselves from the Syrian National Council.
However, the West and the Arab League deal with the Council, and its leader Burhan Ghalioun went to New York?
I believe that the West knows well that this Council lacks representativeness. So, you’ll often hear French officials calling for the unity of the opposition. This also applies to other Western countries.
You were the first to defect from the regime, and you had formed an alliance with the Muslim Brotherhood through…?
I refrain from… We formed the National Salvation Front. However, the problem is when the commitments of an alliance aren’t upheld, it becomes valueless. During the Israeli aggression on Gaza, I was surprised by a statement issued by the Muslim Brotherhood, halting their opposition to the regime under the pretext of confronting the aggression on Gaza. I contacted one of their main leaders and asked him why this statement was issued without being presented to the Front? Is it reasonable that we learn about it through the media? He replied on the phone, saying that you waiting for an hour or two endangers the cause. Is Bashar al-Assad’s army amassing at the gates of the Golan to invade Palestine and liberate it? Or are your armies amassing at the gates of Damascus to overthrow Bashar al-Assad? I didn’t understand the justification for this decision, as neither Bashar is fighting nor will you fight. We agreed to discuss the issue in a Front meeting, and we disagreed on the stance. The matter ended with them withdrawing from the Front.
Many considered that Hafez al-Assad was one of the causes of the civil war in Lebanon?
Hafez al-Assad benefited from the war in Lebanon to gradually intervene in the country. However, those who caused the war were the Kataeb Party, leftist parties, and Yasser Arafat.
