Syrian President Bashar Al Assad has been ousted and has fled to Moscow, Russia, after almost 13 years of battling rebels.
Assad inherited the presidency from his father, Hafez al-Assad, who was president from 1971 until his death in 2000. Together, they ruled Syria for almost half a century.
Assad’s fall was long overdue. The Arab Spring uprising that began in Tunisia ultimately led to his downfall.
However, even before that, he had turned his country into a deep police state to cling to power. With his backers, Russia and Iran, unwilling or unable to defend him, it took 11 days for his regime to fall.
The stunning defeat shocked everybody because many had anticipated a civil war would continue until he was captured or killed.
This article examines the similarities and differences between Syrian and Tanzanian political predicaments to extrapolate where Tanzania is hurtling.
The Assad family, which ruled Syria for almost 50 years, operated as a pseudo-democracy monarch.
The result was known before the elections were even conducted: the Assad kingdom was never under threat, regardless of the voter’s voice in the ballot box.
Unlike Saudi Arabia, where there is no democracy, the Assad monarch pretended to be a democracy while it was a deep police state.
RELATED: U.S. Foreign Policy and Lessons for Tanzania: Navigating a Multipolar World
Elections after elections, the Assad family claimed it had won 92-95% of the vote. Assad was not popular like his father and had to rely heavily on his tribesmen from his Alawite tribe to prolong his stay in power.
However, institutionalized corruption, geopolitical meddling, economic downturn and political turmoil undermined his legitimacy and hold on power.
Assad tried to kick-start the economy with economic liberalisation policies that worsened economic inequalities and centralized political and economic power in the hands of his loyalists.
He alienated other socioeconomic classes like the Syrian rural population, urban working classes, businessmen, industrialists and people from once-traditional Ba’ath strongholds.
Those policies led to even more discontent against his rule. In 2011, the United States, European Union, and majority of the Arab League called for Assad to resign following the crackdown on Arab Spring protesters during the events of the Syrian revolution, which led to the Syrian civil war.
The civil war has killed around 580,000 people, of which a minimum of 306,000 deaths are non-combatant; according to the Syrian Network for Human Rights, pro-Assad forces caused more than 90% of those civilian deaths.
The Assad government perpetrated numerous war crimes during the Syrian civil war. At the same time, its army has carried out several attacks with chemical weapons (most notably, a sarin gas strike in Ghouta on 21 August 2013).
The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights stated that findings from an inquiry by the UN implicated Assad in war crimes, and he faced international investigations and condemnation for his actions.
Assad Syria had all the mockery of democracy in place but never practised it. The People’s Assembly of Syria was Syria’s legislature. It had 250 members elected for a four-year term in 15 multi-seat constituencies.
The Syrian constitution 2012 introduced a multi-party system without guaranteed political party leadership.
Syria’s judicial branches include the Supreme Constitutional Court, the High Judicial Council, the Court of Cassation, and the State Security Courts.
Islamic jurisprudence is a main source of legislation, and Syria’s judicial system has elements of Ottoman, French, and Islamic laws.
Syria had three levels of courts: courts of first instance, courts of appeals, and the constitutional court, the highest tribunal. Religious courts handle questions of personal and family law.
In July 2011, President Bashar introduced multiparty democracy to deflect the UN Security Council’s condemnation of his regime’s use of force against demonstrators.
The council was unable to agree on a resolution but settled on a less-binding statement condemning “the widespread violations of human rights and the use of force against civilians by the Syrian authorities”.
Russia and China opposed a resolution that had been discussed for months.
Following changes in the text, Russia lifted its objections, and its UN envoy, Vitaly Churkin, called the new version “balanced”.
The Syrian state-controlled SANA news agency reported that the decree on multiparty democracy was aimed at “activating the political life and citizens’ participation.”
SANA also said a party established under the new law would have to show commitment to the constitution, principles of democracy, respect for liberties, and international human rights declarations.
It also said a party could not be founded on a “religious, tribal, regional, denominational, or profession-related basis” or be a “branch of or affiliated to a non-Syrian party or political organisation”.
Syria has been a one-party state since 1963, and the constitution stipulated that the Baath Party is “the leader of state and society”.
There was no effective multi-party system in Syria. The 1973 constitution explicitly establishes the Ba’ath (Renaissance) Party as the “leading party in the society and the state.”
In the 250-seat unicameral parliament, the Ba’ath Party leads the National Progressive Front.
This includes other leftist and nationalist parties allowed to exist as loyal adjuncts. (Government-controlled Electoral Commissions carefully vet “independents” who are allowed to run for parliament.)
Under the constitution, power is concentrated in the presidency, which appoints and may dismiss the prime minister and cabinet.
Previously, the Ba’ath Party leadership nominated a candidate for president for approval by the parliament.
The choice was then confirmed in a referendum lacking any other candidates.
Changes to the constitution in 2012 introduced direct elections and a two-term limit. Despite already serving two terms, Bashar al-Assad ran again in 2014 and 2021 under the amended constitution.
He received 92% and 95% of the vote, respectively, against token opposition. Advancement through the party ranks, government, and military depended on loyalty and personal connections.
Hafez al-Assad favoured members of his Alawite sect, a Shi’a denomination making up 11-12 per cent of the population.
This practice was continued under his son, Bashar, but he broadened his patronage to include several Sunni groups. Criticism of the government or suspected disloyalty brought quick reprisals, including arrest, torture and murder.
Control was maintained through an elaborate internal security network incorporating police, intelligence services, the military and a network of civilian agents.
Repression had intensified during a protracted civil war that began following the military suppression of Arab Spring protests in 2011.
The conflict lasted 12 years and resulted in a profound civil and humanitarian disaster.
The Fleeting Damascus Spring
At the beginning of his reign in 2000, Bashar al-Assad brought hope of change. In his first six months in office, he ordered the release of 600 political prisoners, allowed public debate, and took initial steps at reform.
Some referred to this period as “the Damascus Spring,” which was about the 1968 communist reform movement in Czechoslovakia, also known as the Prague Spring.
Like the Prague Spring, which the Soviet Union suppressed, the Syrian version was quickly put to an end.
Assad ordered the arrests of many he had encouraged to speak up for reform. Some civic and human rights activists continued to challenge the regime internally, but many were imprisoned or forced to emigrate.
After that, Assad reinforced the state’s repressive apparatus and maintained control over society through police, security and other government agencies.
Assad Does It Again!
Following popular pro-democracy uprisings in Tunisia, Egypt and other Middle Eastern countries in late 2010 and early 2011 ─ collectively called the “Arab Spring” ─ Assad again hinted at making changes to the constitution.
When no action was taken, the masses took to the streets in March 2011 in pro-democracy protests in Damascus and Deraa.
They demanded the release of political prisoners and a new constitution.
Assad ordered tanks and soldiers to put down the protests in Deraa and authorized police to fire on protesters in Damascus.
Subsequent protests in Damascus and other cities were mostly met with force, although some were so massive the authorities let them take place without attack.
A civil war began after the Assad regime continued abducting, torturing and murdering opponents who later took arms to defend themselves.
Geopolitical intrusions also played their part, with both Russia and the US attempting to ensure a puppet regime was in place sympathetic to their interests.
Russia is interested in having military bases in Syria, and the US harbours similar aspirations.
By the time Assad fled Syria for Moscow, Russia, he had lost the support of the military, which for months was communicating with a variety of rebels over a power transition deal.
The Syrian military had endured months without being paid their dues as a result of debilitating civil war, and the US-led economic sanctions had hollowed the economy.
Since loyalty was bought, the Syrian military had lost any allegiance to President Assad.
Having come to the harsh terms of his predicament, Assad fled lest he be caught and murdered by his enemies like Saddam Hussein of Iraq or Muammar Gaddafi of Libya.
As rebels with ties to international terrorist organisations of Al-Qaeda and ISIS entered Damascus, there was no shot fired because the Assad military had informed the rebels that it had no intention of fighting for their boss.
The Syrian army, exhausted by defending the indefensible, capitulated with such enthusiasm that it should worry civilian politicians who depend on the power of a gun and not the power of the ballot to hold onto power.
Seminal Lessons to Tanzania
Multiparty democracy, when not practised in substance but used to deceive the international community, institutionalized corruption, economic divide and human rights abuses tend to keep the rulers of the day in power temporarily.
As public discontent grows, productivity is nosedive, and non-violent protests are being spearheaded.
These may be idleness, mass demonstrations, civil unrest, or bribe demands for those in positions of authority.
The regime doubles down with violence to crush the disobedience; the regime identifies rebel leaders, detains, tortures and kills them without addressing the causes of discontent.
Since the reasons behind protests are not addressed, agitations for change spike, with the regime making empty promises like the vacuous 4Rs.
The presidential 4Rs are similar to Assad’s “brief Damascus Spring,” which was long on “blah blah” but short on delivery.
President Samia’s 4Rs have not reformed the constitution, and even the minimal proposed criminal reforms advocated by her acolytes will not end state-sponsored abductions, tortures and murders.
When it comes to accountability, those deemed to have harmed those sympathetic to the state are quickly rounded up, tortured and brought to courts or just vanish without a trace.
But those who allegedly have harmed those in the opposition corner against the state rarely investigate their disappearances or murders, polarizing the nation to a breaking point.
al-Assad had the humility to claim he had won elections with 92% and 95% without counting the votes. In Tanzania’s hubris, elections are now being won with a margin of between 99% and 100%.
It looks like all the wickedness Syria did is being replicated in Tanzania wholesale and to the letter.
So, can we reap differently by sowing the same seeds of civil unrest and a failed state?
