03 April 2012 By Abdul Rahman Al-Rashid The press conference held by the Syrian Muslim
Brotherhood in Turkey on Sunday was a very significant
step, because it finally addressed the increasing
fears over the possible rise of Sunni Islamists to
power in Syria after the fall of President Bashar al-Assad;
with the concern that a religious Sunni regime could
pose threats to other sects. Syria is characterized by
a great diversity of religions, factions and sects;
and it is widely believed that if the country were to
transform into a religious state, this would certainly
lead to divisions. However, the Brotherhood's leadership moved before
the fall of the regime to reveal its plan to everyone,
and especially the Syrians; declaring it will accept a
pluralistic democratic system that treats all groups
and sects equally. The Syrian Muslim Brotherhood went
further than what was asked of them, declaring their
commitment in a national covenant calling for a civil
state - not a religious one - where any citizen could
become president regardless of faith or race. In other
words, the Brotherhood would change the existing
constitution that stipulates the president must be
Muslim. According to the national covenant, the only
precondition for a presidential candidate is that they
must be a Syrian citizen. We could be skeptical and say that the Brotherhood
members are skilled politicians who could change their
stance once they come to power. Nevertheless, at this
moment, the Syrian Brotherhood can do nothing more
than declare their commitment in public, as they did
on Sunday in Istanbul. This is the best we can hope
for from one of the main opposition groups that has
wide public support in Syria. It is a courageous step
that deserves our appraisal. Accordingly, the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood have
proven to be more progressive than their Egyptian or
Jordanian counterparts, or other Brotherhood
organizations, simply because they have accepted the
rules of the democratic process that permits all
Syrians to equally participate in the political state.
Indeed the Syrian Brotherhood, after their statement
on Sunday, have proven to be more progressive than the
Syrian regime itself, which claims to be the protector
of minority Muslim groups, with the Syrian
constitution (as it is) requiring the Syrian President
to be a Muslim. This was an issue that preoccupied the
late President Hafez al-Assad, who on numerous
occasions was forced to declare in public that he was
a Muslim and recite the Shahada, in order to respond
to those skeptical about his faith, and respond to
those who adopted an anti-Alawite sectarian stance.
The Syrian Muslim Brotherhood, along with other
Syrian opposition groups, should accept the concept
that the nation is for all citizens. They should
realize that the biggest challenge they face, from now
on, is to convince everyone that the future will never
be based on religious or racial rules, whether between
Sunnis and Alawites, Muslims and Christians, Arabs,
Kurds or Turkmen. Here it is beneficial to recall that what preserved
Iraq's unity after the fall of Saddam Hussein's
Baathist regime was the determination of all countries
in the region, as well as the various Iraqi powers and
international organizations, to maintain the unity of
the country. This is why Iraq has not been divided so
far. In the case of Syria, it is up to its people; if
they want, they could preserve its unity, or they
could fight and divide the nation into many warring
states. There are no regional powers keen to fight for
Syria's unity and ready to defend it. On the contrary,
it would even benefit some countries if Syria was
divided. For Israel, to see Syria divided into smaller
states scattered along its border, this would ensure
its occupation of the Golan Heights, as well as
guarantee its security for decades to come. This is why the national opposition powers in
Syria, including the Muslim Brotherhood, have no other
option than working together. They should assure the
Syrians that the fall of Bashar al-Assad and his
villainous regime will open the doors to a modern,
civil state. The al-Assad regime does not represent the Alawites,
who are mostly marginalized and live under difficult
conditions. The al-Assad regime in reality is a
suppressive security system and has been for four
decades. Its only parallel is the North Korean regime,
where the security and military forces control the
people and the slightest details of their lives. By putting an end to the al-Assad regime, prospects
would be wide open for a modern democratic Arab,
Middle Eastern, developed and enlightened country. Al Rashed is the general manager of Al -Arabiya
television. He is also the former editor-in-chief of
Asharq Al- Awsat, and the leading Arabic weekly
magazine, Al Majalla. He is also a senior Columnist in
the daily newspapers of Al Madina and Al Bilad. He is
a US post-graduate degree in mass communications. He
has been a guest on many TV current affairs programs.
He is currently based in Dubai. Comments 💬 التعليقات |