The War Between Jihadists And The Free Syrian Army
03 February 2013By Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed
A Salafi jihadist leader in Jordan was quoted as
saying, ?A war will break out between jihadists and
secular fighters (the Free Syrian Army) if President
Bashar Al-Assad falls.? This threat can be interpreted
in tow possible ways. It is either part of the Syrian
regime's campaign of intimidation or an honest
statement expressing the agenda of jihadist groups in
the region. Both possibilities are catastrophic.
The statement, hinting at a possible war between
jihadist and secular fighters in Syria, was attributed
to the Al-Qaeda supporter known as Abu Sayyaf. Since
he was speaking from Jordan, the statement is akin to
an observer making judgments from the outside, but its
timing only serves Bashar Assad. The Syrian president
is facing an uprising led by the majority of the
Syrians, whom he claims are terrorists with links to
Al-Qaeda.
Abu Sayyaf's statement corroborates the Syrian
regime's allegations. When one hears such statements,
they instantly think: Is it better for Syria is ruled
by an evil man with smart clothes like Bashar Assad,
or an evil man dressed in shabby clothes and carrying
a sword? Unfortunately, many could fall for this and
believe the situation in Syria is now a choice between
Bashar Assad and Ayman al-Zawahiri. Here they would
choose Syria's Assad instead of Afghanistan's Taliban
and Al-Qaeda. They would not accept a Somali version
of Syria and they would not fight for Damascus to
become another Timbkutu.
This terrifying vision is based on the following
scarecrow: The fall of Assad means the rise of
Zawahiri, Jabhat Al-Nusra and Al-Qaeda. But why do we
assume that overthrowing the Assad regime, which is a
popular demand, would inevitably be followed by Al-Qaeda's
seizure of Damascus? The truth is that Abu Sayyaf is
merely enhancing Assad's propaganda; a campaign
designed to intimidate the Syrians who have been
struggling for two years to topple a regime that has
suppressed them for forty.
It is an attempt to intimidate the countries that
support the revolution such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
It is an attempt to intimidate the global powers and
other European countries, which, despite their
reluctance, are tightening the noose around Assad's
regime on the financial and economic level, and will
have a major role in establishing a future Syrian
state.
But we do not want Abu Sayyaf to lie to us, and we,
ourselves, do not want to lie to others. Yes the
situation in Syria is very dangerous. Iran and Russia
are exerting great efforts to support and protect the
Damascus regime, and they hold the key to why Assad
remains in his palace to this day. Amid a campaign of
intimidation, starvation and genocide, it is normal
for groups to emerge seeking vengeance, and for
segments of society to support extremism. However, it
is certain that Assad's regime, along with Hezbollah
and Iran, are encouraging terrorist groups and
facilitating their entry into the opposition in order
to cause alarm within the international community,
which is fighting Al-Qaeda today in Yemen, Afghanistan
and Mali. It would not make sense for the west to
support any revolution raising an extremist flag.
Abu Sayyaf said that ?if Assad is toppled, the Free
Syrian Army (FSA) or those who oppose the ideas of
Jabhat Al-Nusra will request all Islamic groups to
immediately put down their weapons?Here a clash will
take place, and the losses will be grave. We cannot
say how exactly, because we cannot pre-empt events.?
In turn, we say to Abu Sayyaf that the extremists will
fail and the Syrian people will fight them. Look
around; Al-Qaeda has failed everywhere. It failed in
Algeria, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, and even
in Somalia. It is currently besieged in Yemen,
Afghanistan, and Pakistan. It is a Takfiri group
acting against 90 percent of the Muslim community.
I personally think that Abu Sayyaf's statements are a
free service to Assad in order to frustrate the
rebels' courage, raise the Syrians' suspicions
regarding their revolution, and intimidate the wider
world. The majority of Syrians are against Al-Qaeda
and Salafi jihadism. The overwhelming majority of the
Syrian rebels are defectors from the Syrian army;
young men who have risen up against injustice. They
are neither jihadists nor Al-Qaeda affiliates. If
Jabhat Al-Nusra is really affiliated with Al-Qaeda, it
will end like all other Al-Qaeda organizations; in
failure. But if it is genuinely a Syrian revolutionary
group, there will be a place for it among the others.
What we have to understand is that the FSA is the
overwhelming power. It is genuine and patriotic, and
its religious slogans must be understood in context
and not considered as extremist. Christian fighters
often draw the cross and Jews carry the Torah. It is
piety not extremism, and it is normal for people to
express their religion.
The FSA's agenda is to build a new country while Al-Qaeda's
agenda is destruction and bloodshed. This is why the
latter failed and why religion will always overcome
it. The US did not succeed in its war against Al-Qaeda
in Iraq but Sunni tribes managed to eliminate it. The
Syrian people are civilized, moderately religious, and
will not allow the evil of Al-Qaeda to replace the
evil of the Assad regime. They will do what the
Saudis, Egyptians, Algerians, and Jordanians did, and
what the Yemenis are doing no, by fully rejecting the
terrorist organization's ideology. Therefore, we do
not need to fear that jihadists will thwart the Syrian
revolution.
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.
©
EsinIslam.Com
Add Comments