Sami Moubayed highlights the considerations and concerns of upcoming Baath Party Conference, and the likelihood of reform from within "The coming period will be one of freedom for political parties (in Syria)," Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad told reporters in Damascus last week. Asked if this upcoming period would include fair elections, Al-Assad replied, "of course. There will be different parties and more than one candidate." His statements, greatly overlooked by the Syrian, Arab, Israeli, United States, and Western press, mark an important transformation in Syria's modern history. Political freedoms are expected to be the cornerstone of the upcoming Baath Party Conference, scheduled for 1 June 2005. The first of its kind since 2000, this conference is expected to note the changes taking place in surrounding countries and affecting Syria directly, most notably the occupation of Iraq, the re- election of George W Bush and his increased pressure on Syria and the withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon. The conference also aims to grant the Syrian public greater political freedom. United Nations Terje Roed-Larsen was given the details for the pull-out of remaining forces when he met Syrian leaders in Damascus on Sunday. Roed-Larsen announced the final withdrawal date after holding talks with President Al-Assad and Foreign Minister Farouq Al-Sharaa. Damascus pledged that all Syrian troops, military assets and the intelligence apparatus will have been withdrawn fully and completely by 30 April 2005 at the latest. Roed-Larsen said the commitment implied all Syrian security forces would be withdrawn in line with the 1989 Taif agreement, which paved the way for the end of the 1975-90 Lebanese civil war, and September's UN Security Council Resolution 1559. Syria has also made gestures towards internal reform. In March 2005, over 300 Kurds, arrested one year earlier for disturbances in the Qamishli district, were released by President Al-Assad. The two parliamentarians Maamoun Al-Homsi and Riyad Sayf, arrested in 2001, are also expected to be released by June 2005, one year before completing their five-year prison sentence. Many long- time officials are meant to retire in the upcoming conference, and a new party law -- promoting political pluralism -- is expected, on the condition that these parties steer clear from encouraging religious or sub-Syrian loyalties. Another groundbreaking statement, greatly overlooked outside Syria, was made by Information Minister Mehdi Dakhlallah, when asked by journalists about amending Article 8 of the Syrian Constitution, which states that the Baath Party is the ruling party of the state and society. He replied: "Everything is subject to change. Constitutions are not holy and can be amended." These words suggest that the political climate is rapidly changing in Syria and that real reforms are on the way, in an attempt to create a united front and avoid further clashes with Washington. The London-based pan-Arab daily Al-Hayat ran a story on 27 March 2005 saying that sources close to the US Congress confirmed that a bill was being prepared to brand the Baath Party in Syria as a "terrorist organisation". This idea was proposed in a meeting on 9 March by the Helsinki Committee (US Committee on Security and Cooperation in Europe), headed by Sam Brownback, the Republican senator who played an influential role in lobbying for war on Iraq in 2002-2003. Earlier, on 8 March 2005, in the House of Representatives, a bill was introduced calling for "Assistance to Support a Transition to Democracy in Syria". It reads: "the president is authorised to provide assistance and other support for individuals and independent non-governmental organisations to support transition to a freely-elected, internationally recognised democratic government in Syria." The question asked all over Damascus today is: "How can Syria reform itself politically from within while preventing any outside forces from meddling in its domestic affairs?". For one thing, the answer depends on how serious the regime is about its promised reforms, and how much it recognises Bush's insistence on the formation of a new Middle East. A utopian model would consist of reform from within, granted by President Al- Assad and involving fair parliamentary elections, a multi-party system, an effective and uncorrupted civil service, free press, an independent judiciary, and as Al-Assad said, elections in 2007 where more than one candidate would compete for office. When thousands of Syrians took to the streets in March 2005 in solidarity with President Al-Assad, one visible trait was the absence of the Baath Party flag, and its broad replacement with the Syrian flag. The Baath Party anthem was also absent, indicating that for the government and public alike, the coming period emphasis would be placed on a Syrian national identity that would encompass everyone. Some fear, and argue, that if democracy were implemented, Islamic groups, and the banned Muslim Brotherhood, would win any parliamentary elections and transform Syria into a theocracy. This is utter nonsense. It may have been true in the 1980s, but the Islamic fundamentalists are not popular today, and many view the Brotherhood as a terrorist organisation for having inflicted so much senseless killing and bloodshed on Syria in 1979-1982. Muslim groups are likely to win some seats, but this would be nowhere near a majority. The fundamentalist threat was destroyed in 1982. The future, if true democracy is implemented, would incorporate non-ideological and liberal parties that represent the socio-political, and economic interests of Syrian groups, towns, and districts. These would be similar to the parties that operated prior to 1963, where the National Party represented the interests of Damascus, and the People's Party represented the interests of Aleppo. In 2000, two feeble attempts were made at resurrecting the National Party of Damascus, and the People's Party of Aleppo, but they were both in vain. The new Syria that is being created will witness the founding, and mushrooming of such parties for Damascus, Aleppo, Homs, Hama, Lattakia, and even a party representing the interests of rural Syria, similar to the grouping of Akram Al- Hawrani in the 1940s. Of course, there will remain a few Communists here and there, and those Baathists who joined the party out of conviction in its ideology and not for material gain or professional development. Some members of the Syrian Social Nationalist Party (SSNP), the only ideological party that is still popular in Syria although it has been outlawed since 1955, would also remain. If a true democracy were to be implemented in Syria, pro-American politicians would be the least popular, since the majority of Syrians have lost faith in US promises of democracy. Many are still greatly annoyed by the US bias towards Israel in the Arab-Israeli conflict, and its occupation of Iraq. This immediately writes off pro-American figures such as the US-embraced Farid Al-Ghadri, and others who are working and receiving funds from the Americans. The current figures in the opposition, inside Syria, are also, not too popular among the Syrians. They are either leftovers of the early Baathist era (1966-1970), members of the Muslim Brotherhood, or Marxists, Communists, and socialists. They are people who tried and failed to change things. What they have been demanding for many years, however, remain without doubt, the desires of every Syrian. Everyone wants democracy, respect of human rights, political pluralism, freedom of the press, and a general amnesty to be issued. Yet, as ideologies fail their creators all over the world, the new generation of Syrians will head towards politicians who have no static ideological convictions, and are working only for the interests of their respective communities, rather than for those of a specific party.
