Thomas Friedman, "The New Hama Rules": Out to Lunch

Finally, a meaningful effort by a New York Times op-ed pundit to relate to the horror in Syria, which is growing worse with each passing day. Yesterday, we saw bloody bodies being tossed by the Syrian security apparatus into the Orontes River to cries of "Brother of a whore!" (see, if your stomach permits it: http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/meast/08/02/syria.video/).

In his latest New York Times column, "The New Hama Rules" (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/03/opinion/the-new-hama-rules.html?hp), Thomas Friedman observes the link between the 1982 massacre of Hama's residents by Bashar al-Assad's father, Hafez, and the events occurring today. Today, however, Friedman contends that the people are "not afraid anymore" and will prevail over the Syrian despot.

Yes, as I observed in prior blog entries (e.g., http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.com/2011/07/assad-is-finished-obama-again-on-wrong.html), Assad's days are numbered. His army and security forces commanded by Alawaite loyalists will ultimately not be able to put out the flames of revolt which extend far beyond Hama. But Friedman, still harboring romantic illusions about the root cause of the so-called "Arab Spring," i.e. a struggle for democracy which he now acknowledges might take considerably longer to achieve, remains out to lunch. Friedman writes:

"That is, once these regimes are shucked off, can the different Arab communities come together as citizens and write social contracts for how to live together without iron-fisted dictators — can they write a positive set of Hama Rules based not on anyone fearing anyone else, but rather on mutual respect, protection of minority and women’s rights and consensual government?

. . . .

Now Yemen, Libya, Syria, Egypt and Tunisia are all going to attempt similar transitions — at once — but without a neutral arbiter to referee. It is unprecedented in this region, and we can already see just how hard this will be. I still believe that the democratic impulse by all these Arab peoples to throw off their dictators is heroic and hugely positive. They will oust all of them in the end. But the new dawn will take time to appear."

This is nonsense. First, each of these Arab uprisings has its own unique set of underpinnings: for example, tribal in Libya as opposed to economic in Egypt. Democracy has little or nothing to do with any of this, unless one wishes to make the argument that the attempt by Syria's majority Sunni population to rid themselves of minority Alawite rule has anything at all to do with "one person, one vote."

What has "precipitated" the uprising in Syria? Actually, a prolonged drought, which has destroyed the Syrian economy and has forced hundreds of thousands of people to abandon their rural homes (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/14/world/middleeast/14syria.html). This grim states of affairs, coupled with dwindling oil reserves, has resulted in massive unemployment among Syria's youth (see: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130222200). With nothing to lose, Syria's Sunni were primed to revolt against their Alawite overlords, whom they consider to be heretics or not even Muslims.

Where does this lead? Sorry if I can't strike a chord of optimism. Economic stagnation and unemployment in Syria will only grow worse as the population continues to grow. Democracy? Sorry, Tom, not a chance, not now, not ever.