This article examines the contrasting agendas of Western and Arab nations regarding the future of Syria amidst the rising influence of a recognized terrorist organization. It highlights the urgent Western concerns of immigration and extremism, alongside the strategic maneuvers of Arab states, focusing on Turkey’s potential role in regional negotiations, while also scrutinizing misperceptions surrounding the leader of Hay’at Tahrir Al-Sham, Al-Julani.
The recent influx of Western and Arab leaders into Syria, paired with extraordinary economic backing, illuminates an alarming trend: the legitimization of a group recognized globally as a terrorist organization. This entity, devoid of any legal foundation to govern a nation fractured by civil war since 2011, is strategically promoting its agenda under the guise of international endorsement, potentially rehabilitating its image through substantial financial support.
The perspectives of Western nations starkly contrast with those of Arab countries regarding Syria’s future. Western leaders primarily focus on addressing the increasing rates of illegal immigration stemming from political instability and conflict, which have led to substantial social and economic challenges. This rising tide of immigration has bolstered right-wing nationalist sentiments, impacting the political landscape in countries such as France, Italy, and the United Kingdom, with similar shifts expected in Germany. Moreover, the escalation of violence and extremism in Europe has resulted in notable casualties and economic ramifications, driving the urgency for a stable Arab regime that aligns with Western interests.
Conversely, many Arab nations have historically supported extremist political factions as a strategic maneuver to extend their influence, despite the limits of their military and political power. Some countries feel compelled to vie for dominance in this domain to ensure their own internal security amid shifting regional dynamics, especially following the recent geopolitical upheavals in the aftermath of the October 7 war. Most remain cautious, monitoring developments and awaiting the new American administration under Donald Trump.
Turkey views the evolving situation in Syria as a significant opportunity, especially for negotiation with Israel, to counterbalance Iranian power. From Ankara’s perspective, filling the resultant power void is crucial for addressing longstanding issues, such as the Kurdish conflict and disputes over Mediterranean gas. For Israel, the Assad regime’s survival has historically provided stability, especially along the Golan front, which has remained tranquil since the 1973 war. Surprisingly, Tel Aviv’s support for the removal of Assad in favor of an extremist group seems inconsistent, yet recent strategic arms agreements with the Biden administration shed light on this dynamic.
Analysts frequently describe the leader of Hay’at Tahrir Al-Sham, Ahmed Al-Sharaa (also known as Abu Mohammad Al-Julani), as pragmatic. However, such assessments often reflect a Western cultural perspective that overlooks the intricate realities on the ground. The Western narrative about Arab leaders typically infers a desire for stability and international cooperation, neglecting the region’s deep tribal, ethnic, and sectarian conflicts, which continue to exacerbate tensions.
Consequently, the Western interpretation of Al-Julani’s behaviors—such as adopting Western attire and exercising restraint—underscores a crucial misunderstanding rooted in cultural dissonance. His actions, perceived as signs of moderation, align instead with a tactic known as “taqiyya,” where one conceals true intentions for strategic advantage. Al-Julani’s reliance on “hudna,” or temporary ceasefires, embodies this practiced duplicity.
The inevitable realization among Western observers that they have misread Al-Julani’s signals will come with a sobering reckoning: Al-Julani remains committed to an ideological jihadist agenda, utilizing diplomacy and Western misconceptions as tools to further the aims of his faction. His ostensible moderation masks a dedication to extremist objectives that fundamentally oppose the aspirations of peace and prosperity as envisioned by Western nations.
The situation in Syria has been fraught with civil and sectarian strife since 2011, attracting the attention of both Western and Arab political leaders. The divide in reactions and strategies highlights the complexities of international diplomacy concerning the legitimacy of governance amidst terrorism. This dynamic is further complicated by the varying geopolitical interests of countries in the region and the historical context of conflicts deeply rooted in tribal and religious identities.
In summary, the distinct approaches of Western and Arab nations towards Syria reveal a profound disconnect influenced by cultural perceptions and political objectives. As Arab countries navigate their strategies influenced by regional powers, the West faces pressing domestic challenges shaped by immigration and security concerns. The misinterpretation of leaders like Al-Julani further complicates the quest for stability, underscoring the depth of ideological divides that persist in shaping the future of the region.
Original Source: www.dailynewsegypt.com
