As for the second phase, it began after the collapse of the Soviet Union and accompanied the tremendous development in information and knowledge transmission means. In this stage, it became challenging to conceal what is happening globally in terms of events and developments. With the collapse of the Soviet Union and its system, changes occurred in thought, politics, security, and the economy, and the Soviet era became a part of history.
Since the beginning of this phase, people started questioning the fate of the regime in Syria, wondering when it would collapse. Voices were raised not just within the walls but also in cafes, forums, and gatherings. There was also a movement within the Baath Party in wide sectors of its base—some were afraid of the collapse, and others wondered why serious measures were not taken to transition from a state of stagnation, weakness, and contraction to a state of progress and change, moving towards the release of public and individual freedoms, developing work formulas in the state, and transitioning to a state of institutions.
In this phase, the wall of fear began to crack, and the ruler’s fear increased that political activism in society might lead to a change in the regime. Therefore, repression and the arrest of those with free opinions continued.
It is noteworthy that this phase witnessed the birth of cultural forums and gatherings of intellectuals who called for the repeal of the emergency law, the release of detainees, and the lifting of restrictions on freedoms. All of this confirms that the citizens’ vanguards have started to break down the wall of fear and recognize the need to act in various sectors of society. This was not possible in the first phase.
You share with me the opinion that change has become a national necessity, as the country has weakened, and the suffering of the people has increased. Poverty and backwardness have grown, creating a wide gap between Syria and its sisters in the Arab world and other developing countries. Meanwhile, Syria faces increasing dangers due to the adventurous and emotional policies practiced by the regime’s leader.
Undoubtedly, the responsibility of the youth to engage in change is a matter tied to their fate and the fate of the nation. How can the younger generations confront the challenges amid the prevailing fear? However, the valid question is also: how can millions of Syrian youth, for whom all doors have been closed, including job opportunities, with their aspirations thwarted, continue in a situation that threatens their future with loss and suffering?
How can they endure when they see a few of their peers from the ruling family and its circle possessing billions of dollars and hundreds of millions, while they find no employment opportunities? How can these generations, constituting the backbone of the country, stand hesitant as they witness the looting of the country by Bashar al-Assad, his brother, brother-in-law, uncle, cousin’s son, and their close associates—amounting to no more than fifteen people—while unemployment spreads, and economic crises deepen?
How can the younger generations accept the loss of their future without defending their right to a decent life, freedom, and a bright future? I believe that Syrians, especially the youth, are questioning what Bashar al-Assad has offered to the youth after six years of his rule, other than unemployment, poverty, fear, and a bleak future.
The call from the Salvation Front for the youth of Syria to mobilize and engage in dialogues individually and collectively within and beyond their universities is an invitation to chart their own course. Forming small groups that can serve as a starting point to shape their future and the future of Syria is crucial. Their future has been stolen by Mohammad Makhlouf, his sons, his associates, Bashar al-Assad, his brothers, his brother-in-law, his sons-in-law, and his close relatives. They have robbed your future, young people, to enjoy what they looted from the people’s money—a money that should have been spent on building projects to create job opportunities, not invested abroad by a group of regime thieves.
As for your mention that some of the youth are still attached to Bashar al-Assad and see him as a hero for the Golan, I doubt this statement because everyone knows that someone who robs the state, spreads corruption, oppresses people, and promotes poverty and unemployment cannot be a role model for the youth or anyone else. What you observe from some applauding crowds and chanting groups are opportunists, the offspring of some officials, or those aspiring to jobs or wages. Regarding his actions to liberate the Golan, he did two things: weakening the country and loudly proclaiming resistance and resilience, celebrating the resistance’s victory in Lebanon, following the saying, “The wedding is in Mazaa, but the drum is in Harasta .”
Secondly, the issue of brainwashing:
The regime adopted this brainwashing approach from the communist countries of Eastern Europe. Here, I ask you, isn’t it true that the millions who poured into the streets of Moscow, Berlin, Prague, Budapest, Bucharest, Sofia, and Varna grew up under the brainwashing approach since childhood? Weren’t they all raised and educated from their early years in primary schools until adulthood under systems that adopted the brainwashing of their citizens? Did brainwashing prevent the peoples of those countries from mobilizing and overthrowing their brainwashed systems?
Despite all this, at the first crack in the walls of those systems, the breezes of freedom entered, toppling a great nation and powerful states with their security and dominance. Wasn’t security in Romania during Ceaușescu’s era stronger and more extreme than security in Syria? Weren’t the millions of Romanians who overthrew their regime raised within the Romanian Communist Party? Where is the security now, and where is the production of brainwashing?
This existing regime in Syria has aged and lost its function, transforming into a gang that has seized the country without having a national role. The Syrian regime lost its function within the country when it failed to solve its crises, oppressed its people with injustice and tyranny, and froze the possibilities for progress and development.
I am confident, dear brother, that the regime is on the verge of collapse because it has lost trust in its people. A regime that considers itself national should not close the doors of colleges, military schools, security colleges, and important state sites to the people, reserving them exclusively for those it believes constitute its security and protection.
Bashar al-Assad has lost trust in those around him. He sidelined Farouk al-Sharaa after he became a burden, just as he put his brother-in-law, Brigadier General Assef Shawkat, under surveillance. He transferred a large number of officers from the Military Intelligence branch and replaced them with officers from the Republican Guard. He also gave instructions to Brigadier General Ali Younes, deputy to Assef Shawkat, to collect the department’s mail and send it directly to the office of the Commander-in-Chief. In a meeting with Ali Younes, he asked him to keep a close eye on Assef Shawkat because he is treacherous.
You might wonder, dear brother, how I obtained this information. I can tell you that the flaws are widening in the structure of the regime, and information in Syria is not secure. After meeting with the president, Brigadier General Ali Younes met some of his friends and told them about the president’s trust in him and the tasks assigned to him, including the president’s warning about Assef, saying, “Be careful with Assef; he is treacherous.”
How can this regime, with all its mistakes, crimes, and the growing doubts among its members, not be poised for a fall?
Our responsibility, dear brother, is to work together, each from their position, to save Syria and achieve its salvation. I am confident, with the help of God, that the day of change will be very close, God willing.
Wishing you success with warm regards.
