A Preliminary Study on the “Extremist” Nation-State System in Syria ‘’ Failure and a Democratic Alternative’’

Syria has not known political stability since its independence in 1946, which has generated social, intellectual, and cultural complexities that the country could do without. The main reason for this is the failure to involve representatives of all components in the process of building the Syrian entity before independence and managing it in a participatory manner afterward. All Syrian governments were either the product of unilateral nationalist movements or emerged from military coups. This negatively impacted the content of Syrian constitutions, which ignored the country’s ethnic, sectarian, and cultural diversity, enshrined nationalism, and marginalized the rights of non-Arab nationalities or peoples. This has resulted in the emergence of social, ethnic, and cultural issues throughout the history of the current Syrian entity since 1920, including the Kurdish and Syriac issues.

 Furthermore, the concentration of administration in the hands of a specific component or group has led to policies of terrorism, tyranny, and political and social repression, as well as national and sectarian entrenchment. Perhaps the massacres, injustice, and oppression that the country witnessed at the hands of the Baath (sectarian nationalist) regime for half a century against Syrians of all components is sufficient evidence of the evils of the approach of unilateral nationalist or sectarian rule, which deprived other components of their rights.

The “extremist” nation-state in the Middle East

The “state” is one of the most problematic concepts in the history of human thought. While Western theorists consider it a necessity imposed by the development of civilization and urbanism, there are numerous intellectual movements, such as anarchism and Ocalanism (the philosophy of democratic civilization), that oppose the idea of ​​the existence of an artificial entity above societies, considering it an oppressive authority on societal freedoms and local cultures, especially when state power is assumed by groups that follow extremist nationalist or religious policies.

The term “nation-state” emerged in the modern era, specifically in the post-French Revolution era. The international system—represented by European colonial powers—worked to divide their spheres of influence in the Middle East into nation-states, dispersing the people of certain ethnic groups under the principle of “divide and rule.” This was done to facilitate their subjugation and thwart any comprehensive civilizational renaissance in the region. This included the Arab nation, which was divided into 22 states. Other nations were similarly dispersed among states with single national regimes, such as the Kurdish nation, which was divided across more than four nation-states in the Middle East. The goal was to sow the seeds of discord among peoples and create a state of long-term instability

National extremism is the superiority of one nationality, people, or ethnicity over another, accompanied by efforts to exclude and assimilate the others within its own framework. This concept is referred to as (chauvinism). Among the most prominent chauvinistic ideologies in the modern era are German Nazism, Italian Fascism, and Turkish Turanism.

In addition to the deep-rooted history of extremist nationalist mentality and practices in the countries of the Eastern Mediterranean, many theorists of pure Arab nationalism (which is extremist and exclusionary toward indigenous nationalities and communities) emerged during the mid-20th century. Most of these theorists studied in Western missionary schools or were influenced by Nazi and Fascist ideas. Notably, the emergence of the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party in 1947, founded by the racists Zaki al-Arsuzi, Michel Aflaq, and others, was one of the most prominent outcomes of that extremist nationalist mentality and ideology.

A brief overview of the consequences of adopting an “extremist” nation-state system in the Middle Eastern countries reveals horrific atrocities and enormous complexities, including massacres and ethnic and cultural genocides, national and sectarian wars, poor economic and living conditions, suppression of freedoms, political and social repression, and a blatant disregard for human rights…

The Establishment of the Syrian Entity

“Syria” is a name that historians, as well as the Romans, used to refer to the region of the Eastern Mediterranean (specifically the areas of Damascus, Homs, Hama, Lebanon, and their surroundings). This name was revived in the second half of the 19th century, specifically in 1865, when the ‘’Ottoman Empire’’

 (the Sublime Porte) decided to merge the Damascus province with the Sidon province to form a large province called the “Syria Vilayet,” with Damascus becoming the capital of the new province. Meanwhile, Aleppo and its surrounding areas formed a province with its own administrative identity, while the Jazira region was mostly under the jurisdiction of the Diyarbakir province. Additionally, the Euphrates basin area (Deir ez-Zor and its surroundings) was also outside the Syria Vilayet.

When the “Arab Syrian Kingdom” was declared by King Faisal in 1918–1920, following the success of the Great Arab Revolt, it included the provinces of Damascus and Aleppo after the withdrawal of the Ottoman Turks from these areas. However, the Syrian Kingdom collapsed in the face of the French forces’ advance, who imposed the mandate over the country according to international agreements that divided the region into states under French and British mandates. This division was based on the Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916 and later the San Remo Treaty in 1920.

The future of the Jazira region and the Euphrates basin (“eastern Euphrates”) was determined in favor of their inclusion in the emerging entity of “Syria” during the border demarcation negotiations between Turkey and Syria between 1921 and 1930. These negotiations took place between the Turks and the French, who were the mandate powers over Syria, in Ankara. The two sides reached several agreements to demarcate the Turkish-Syrian border.

The First Ankara Agreement was signed on October 20, 1921, between the French diplomat Henri Franklin-Bouillon and the Turkish Foreign Minister Yusuf Kemal.
The Second Ankara Agreement was signed on May 30, 1926, between the French High Commissioner in Syria, Henri de Jouvenel, and the Turkish government.
The border demarcation was completed with an additional protocol dated June 22, 1929, under the Second Ankara Agreement.
The final official report of the treaty for border demarcation was submitted to the League of Nations on May 3, 193

The future of the Jazira region and the Euphrates basin (“eastern Euphrates”) was determined in favor of their inclusion in the emerging entity of “Syria” during the border demarcation negotiations between Turkey and Syria between 1921 and 1930. These negotiations took place between the Turks and the French, who were the mandate powers over Syria, in Ankara. The two sides reached several agreements to demarcate the Turkish-Syrian border.

The First Ankara Agreement was signed on October 20, 1921, between the French diplomat Henri Franklin-Bouillon and the Turkish Foreign Minister Yusuf Kemal.
The Second Ankara Agreement was signed on May 30, 1926, between the French High Commissioner in Syria, Henri de Jouvenel, and the Turkish government.
The border demarcation was completed with an additional protocol dated June 22, 1929, under the Second Ankara Agreement.
The final official report of the treaty for border demarcation was submitted to the League of Nations on May 3, 1930.

On the ground, the efforts of France and the authorities in Damascus continued from 1930 until 1943 to fully integrate the Jazira region and the Euphrates basin into the Syrian entity. Initially, these regions were annexed to the State of Aleppo after the division of the area into small states (Damascus, Aleppo, Alawite Mountains, Jabal al-Druze). Gradually, these states were reunited under the name of the State of Syria, which came to include a diverse ethnic and national composition — Arabs, Kurds, Syriacs, Armenians, Circassians, Turkmen, Assyrians, Chaldeans, and others — as well as religious and sectarian diversity: Sunnis, Alawites, Druze, Shiites, Ismailis, Catholic and Orthodox Christians, Yazidis, and more.

The International System and its Role in Syria

France, along with England, played the central role in implementing and directing the policies of the dominant international system in the first half of the twentieth century. In the second half of the twentieth century, they were succeeded by the United States and the Soviet Union (Russia). Therefore, all the policies implemented by France and England in the Middle East at that time were directed by the mastermind of the dominant global system—the influential powers of the capitalist system—which aimed to sow discord and hatred among peoples, pit them against one another, plunder and steal the resources and wealth of nations, and destroy the economies of the peoples of the Middle East to prevent any effective civilizational renaissance in the region. These powers were largely successful in implementing their plans, including creating division, discord, and civil war among the peoples of the region. The acts of genocide against Armenians, Syriacs, Assyrians, Chaldeans, and Kurds in the region, the civil war in Lebanon, the Iran-Iraq War, and others are all evidence of this.

During its presence in Syria, France — like any occupying power — followed specific policies towards every ethnic group, religion, and sect. In fact, its resort to dividing the country into small states — a “process of dismantling Syria and then reassembling it anew” — aimed primarily at creating divisions, conflicts, and disputes along ethnic, sectarian, and even regional lines, rather than securing and fulfilling the aspirations and desires of the inhabitants of those areas. This left a profound impact on the political, social, economic, and cultural life of the country later on.

This was a cause for the emergence of sectarian conflict over political power, with the rise of groups adopting an extremist nationalist rhetoric. Especially since none of the Syrian constitutions guaranteed equal rights for all peoples residing in the country nor recognized the particularities of some cultures. What has occurred over the last decade falls within the context of this conflict, which has led many Syrian regions to systematic destruction by local hands.

This has caused weakness and fragility in the structure of the Syrian entity and also affected all sectors related to the lives of Syrian citizens.

In the field of administration and economy, the French occupation authorities placed the actual decision-making center in Syrian administrative, service, and economic institutions in the hands of French advisors. Consequently, Syrian “technocratic” administrators were unable to develop themselves or improve their administrative experiences. Therefore, when the French left Syria in 1946, local institutions remained weak in terms of administration, structure, and functional performance after independence. Indeed, corruption and favoritism were widespread within them. Moreover, the country’s central financial institutions remained linked to France for many years after independence, to the point that the “franc” currency remained in circulation in Syria for decades. In other words, France only left Syria after realizing that all its political and economic aspects would proceed in accordance with its desire for it to be: a “weak, corrupt, and fragmented Syria’’.

Another point worth noting is the opening of Masonic lodges in Arab countries since the second half of the nineteenth century. In Syria, their pace increased after the French entered the country, to the point that large numbers of the political and social elite joined these lodges; due to their hidden power, and in the hope of obtaining privileges, positions, and money. Thus, the role of the dominant international system in spreading its octopus-like “Masonic” network in most Syrian regions and penetrating local communities is clearly evident. Its goal in doing so was to create a corrupt, weak, submissive, subservient political, intellectual, and cultural elite that was domesticated by its policies and incapable of producing ideas and projects for renaissance in the region. Consequently, these well-pleased rulers had no choice but to follow the policies of their masters and financiers, who, in any case, were dissatisfied with any ideas, projects, or policies for renaissance and unification among the peoples of the region. Nationalist politics and “national extremism” are at the core of the ideas issued by the dominant global order to the countries of the region, with the aim of thwarting any positive rapprochement between the peoples of the region

We must not forget here that the dominant international order did not merely penetrate local communities through Masonic lodges, but also established schools and universities in many Arab countries, graduating academics in accordance with its own ideas, policies, and ideology. It must be said here that most of the pioneers of the Arab nationalist renaissance “from Syria and Lebanon” at the beginning of the twentieth century were graduates of European universities and were influenced by the ideas of Western political and intellectual theorists.

Extremist Nationalist Political Movements in Syria

Most political parties and movements have been dominated by unilateral nationalist ideas since the founding of the Syrian entity until the present day. This is due to the influence of the theorists and leaders of Arab nationalist movements and parties on the extremist ideas of European nationalist theorists, such as German Nazism and Italian Fascism. Western colonialism also encouraged the growth of extremist Arab nationalist thought, using it to suppress and marginalize the rights of other ethnic groups, such as the Kurds, Assyrians, and Syriacs, for example. Some Syrian thinkers and their political movements have exaggerated their Arab nationalist theses, and so have the orientations of some political blocs regarding Syrian nationalist theses, all at the expense of the rights of the rest of the nationalities and peoples inhabiting the country. Rather, it has completely marginalized their existence, and no efforts have been made to research the reality of those nationalities and develop solutions to their just issues. Rather, the “Kurds” were accused of various false accusations such as “separatism, populism, the second Israel, etc.” On this basis, they were treated as second- and third-class citizens, and a state of marginalization and systematic oppression was imposed on them from the political, administrative, social, cultural, and economic aspects, despite the fact that the Kurdish people had a major contribution to the liberation of The region was freed from the Ottoman Turkish occupation, and the national struggle against the French occupation in most of the areas of its presence in the country, “the Kurdish neighborhoods in Damascus, the regions of Al-Jazeera, Kobani, Aleppo and its countryside’’.

Sati’ al-Husri, Zaki al-Arsuzi, and others such as Constantine Zurayk and Muhammad Izzat Darwaza worked to establish the theory of Arab nationalism, which contained many exaggerations in its arguments and was adopted by Arab parties and movements with nationalist leanings, including the ‘’Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party’’, which ruled Syria (1963-2004) and Iraq (1964-2003). Sati’ al-Husri was an active member of the extremist Turkish Union and Progress Party, which was Masonic in origin and orientation. He was appointed supervisor of the education sector after the Unionists assumed power in the Ottoman Empire. His mission was to Turkify the education system in the Ottoman Empire. Overnight, shortly after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and Sharif Hussein’s success in liberating the Arabian Peninsula and Syria from Ottoman rule, al-Husri transformed from being responsible for the Turkification of education in the Ottoman Empire into a theorist of Arab nationalism and a proponent of Arab unity. King Faisal relied on him to base his rule on his theory of Arab nationalism, and appointed him supervisor of the Arabization of the education system in Syria and Iraq by assuming the position of Minister of Education.

Sati’ al-Husri’s theory relied on the ideas of German nationalist theorists’’ Yohann Fichte’’, ‘’van den Broeck’’, ‘’Martin Heidegger’’, and ‘’Osvald Spengler’’ in his call for Arab nationalism. Al-Husri is criticized for exaggerating his theory, which had an impact on Arab political and cultural life in Iraq and Syria. His theory was adopted by some political movements and factions. Michel Aflaq, one of the most prominent founders of the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party, even relied on this theory in establishing the Arab Ba’ath Party. Zaki al-Arsuzi, who witnessed the annexation of his hometown of Alexandretta to Turkey, which forced him to flee to Syria, also called for Arab national unity. He also wrote his dissertation on the Arab nation, influenced by the nationalist ideas of European nationalist theorists, particularly German and French, during his university studies at the Sorbonne in France. He denied the distinction between other nationalities living alongside Arabs in a number of Arab countries, claiming that the Chaldeans and Assyrians were Arabs, using flimsy and astonishing arguments.

‘’Were not the peoples who carried the banner of civilization in ancient times from the Urmia of Arabism? The names of the Pharaohs, Chaldeans, and Assyrians are merely distortions of Arabic names: Pharaoh is from a branch (Silalata), the Chaldeans are from (Banu Khalda), and the Assyrians are from (Banu Thawr)

زكي الأرسوزي: “الأمة العربية.. ماهيتها، رسالتها، مشاكلها”، 1958.

– The National Action League

Zaki al-Arsuzi was one of the founders of the National Action League in 1933, which called for absolute Arab sovereignty and independence and comprehensive Arab unity, adopting the slogan “Arabism First.” The League attempted to compete with the “National Bloc” in Syria, engaging in debates with the Communist Party and the Syrian Social Nationalist Party, and receiving support from Iraqi King Faisal to form an Arab nationalist movement loyal to him. In preparation for achieving his dream of establishing a unified Arab kingdom under his leadership, the League quickly collapsed after the death of King Faisal in September 1933, the death of its most prominent leader, Abdul Razzaq al-Dandashi, in an accident in 1935, and the rise of the National Bloc to power in Syria in 1936. The fragility of the League’s organizational structure was then exposed, and the League collapsed in the face of the positions and temptations offered to its members. Despite this, many of its members, imbued with extreme nationalist thought, infiltrated Syrian political parties and blocs, such as the National Bloc, which split after independence into the “National” and “People’s” parties, and later the Ba’ath Party, thus spreading the spirit of nationalist exaggeration among Arab political circles and movements.[1]

The League refused to recognize the existence of diverse ethnicities and cultures in the Arab countries, emphasizing the single Arab nationality of the Arab countries and Arabic as their official language.[2] The Muthanna ibn Haritha al-Shaybani Club (named after the commander who defeated the Persian Sassanids at the Battle of al-Qadisiyah), supported by King Faisal in Iraq in 1935, had an intellectual and organizational influence on the National Action League in Syria. One of the most prominent founders of the Muthanna Club was Sami Shawkat, who was appointed Director of Education in Iraq in 1938. He agreed with the German ambassador to Iraq, Fritz Grobba, to establish an extremist military youth organization called “Al-Futuwa,” similar to the Hitler Youth. This influence later influenced the establishment of similar formations within the Iraqi Ba’ath Party.

The People’s Party

Founded in 1948 after the collapse of the National Bloc and its split into two competing factions (the People’s Party, representing the notables of Aleppo and Homs, and the National Party, representing the notables of Damascus). Among its most prominent founders were Rushdi Kikhia, Nazim al-Qudsi, Ma’ruf al-Dawalibi, Abdul-Wahhab Houmed, and Mustafa and Rashad Barmada. It enjoyed the support of the Atassi family in Homs.

The People’s Party formed the largest bloc in Parliament between 1949 and 1958 and played a prominent role in forming all Syrian governments during that period, through an alliance with the Ba’ath Party and the Muslim Brotherhood. The party was forced to dissolve itself, along with all other political parties in Syria, between 1958 and 1961 during the era of the United Arab Republic. However, it returned to power in 1961 after the secession. Nazim al-Qudsi, the party’s leader, was elected President of the Republic after winning a majority in the 1961 parliamentary elections. The party was dissolved after the Ba’ath coup in 1963.

Ideologically, the party belongs to the extremist Arab nationalist movement. During her government, constitutional provisions were included that cast the country in a monolithic nationalist tone and abolished the rights of other (non-Arab) nationalities. During her rule, racist decrees were issued against the Kurds, and the consequences of these decrees and racist policies resulted in the tragedy of the Kurds, who were stripped of Syrian citizenship.

– Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party

After the dissolution of the National Action League, Zaki al-Arsuzi resorted to establishing the Arab Nationalist Party in 1939, similar to the League. However, the party lasted only a few months. The following year, al-Arsuzi proposed establishing a party called the) Arab Ba’ath Party (in 1940. The students who had emigrated from the brigade were the nucleus of his party, which was being established. However, he was unable to achieve any popular base for his party and expand it. He faced fierce competition from Michel Aflaq, who, with his friend Salah al-Din Bitar, founded the Arab Revival Movement in the same year (1940). Aflaq and Bitar had studied together at the Sorbonne University in France and were influenced by the ideas of German nationalists, as well as al-Arsuzi and al-Husri. After intellectual skirmishes with al-Arsuzi, Aflaq was able to defeat and isolate him within Syrian political circles. He changed the name of the Arab Revival Movement to the Arab Ba’ath Party in 1943. Consequently, the relationship between Aflaq and al-Arsuzi was always tense, and al-Arsuzi accused Aflaq of stealing the name of his own party. Finally, the remnants of al-Arsuzi’s bloc (most notably Wahib al-Ghanim from Latakia) and the Aflaq-Bitar bloc merged under the same name (the Arab Ba’ath Party) at a meeting held in 1947.

The meeting approved the party’s constitution, which was dominated by nationalist extremism. It openly affirmed its quest to seize power by force, imbue public life with an Arab nationalist character, reject ethnic and cultural diversity, and work to melt everyone into a single melting pot, namely “Arabism.” Article (8) of the constitution stipulates that: “The official language of the state and the language of citizens recognized in writing and education is Arabic.” Article (15) states: “The national bond is the only bond existing in the Arab state that guarantees harmony among citizens and their fusion into a single melting pot, and combats all sectarian, denominational, tribal, ethnic, and regional fanaticism.” Article (45) also stipulates: “Imprinting all aspects of intellectual, economic, political, urban, and artistic life with an Arab nationalist character that restores the nation’s connection to its glorious history and motivates it to aspire to a more glorious and ideal future.”[3]

 ((The Baath is largely the heir to the National Action League. The nucleus of the Arsuzi and Aflaq organizations is from this party… We were ethnic admirers of Nazism. We read its books and the sources of its thought, especially Nietzsche (Thus Spoke Zarathustra), Fichte (Addresses to the Democratic Nation), H.A. Chamberlain (The Rise of the Nineteenth Century) and his Dar (Race). We were the first to think of translating (Mein Kampf). Whoever lived during that period in Damascus can appreciate the Arab people’s inclination towards Nazism, as it was the force that took their revenge. The defeated loves the victor by nature, but we were another doctrine. Whoever reads may go astray and not delve deeply into the principles of the Arab Nationalist Party, which became the principles of the Arab Baath Party.))

Public Works at the beginning of independence, and one of the founders of the People’s Party), Farid Zeineddine (appointed Secretary-General of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Syria’s representative to the United Nations, and Syria’s ambassador to the United States in the 1950s, and led the Nasserite Unionist Organization in Damascus during the secession era), Dr. Rushdi al-Jabi (appointed head of the Damascus Health Directorate in Jamil Mardam Bey’s first government), Ghaleb al-Azm (founded a new organization called “The Hama Youth”), Jalal al-Sayyid (from Deir ez-Zor, one of the founders of the Arab Ba’ath Party), Ahmad al-Sharbaty (dismissed from the League for supporting the National Bloc, became Minister of Education in 1945, and Minister of Defense in the first government after independence).

In 1952, the two parties (the Arab Ba’ath Party) led by Aflaq-Bitar and (the Arab Socialist Party) led by Akram al-Horani (who founded his party in 1950 and whose stronghold was in Hama region, with influence in the army), merged to form (the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party). It is worth noting that the Ba’ath Party began its attempts to implement its extremist nationalist ideas even before it took over the rule of the country in the coup of 1963. The ministries and positions that the Ba’ath held during that period were sensitive in nature and had a role in bringing about changes in the structure of society,5 such as Michel Aflaq’s assumption of the Ministry of Education (the former name of the Ministry of Education) in 1949. Through these positions, Ba’ath Party leaders and members incited against the Kurds in Syria, weaving lies about a secret Kurdish infiltration in Al-Jazira and its danger to the country. Among them was the intelligence officer “Muhammad Talab Hilal,” who took over the management of political security in Al-Hasakah in the early sixties of the last century, and who presented to his party’s leadership a booklet6 containing a systematic program to suppress the Kurdish people in Syria, eliminate their cause, displace them, and impoverish them.

After the Ba’ath Party took over the rule of Syria, it completed the implementation of policies to suppress the Kurds in all respects. Following the secession government’s stripping of a large segment of Kurds of their Syrian citizenship at the beginning of the sixties, turning them into citizens without identity and stripped of civil rights, the Ba’ath-al-Assad regime resorted to escalating Arabization operations, preventing Kurdish ownership of their lands and real estate, and implementing the Arab Belt project in the Kurdish regions (especially Al-Jazira) in the late sixties and early seventies of the last century. In 1968 (after the February 23 movement), the Regional Command of the Ba’ath Party formed a committee called (the Arab Belt) and appointed “Abdullah al-Ahmar,” a member of the Regional and National Commands of the Ba’ath Party, as its head.

((When the Ba’ath Party took over the rule of Iraq and Syria, the Kurdish problem was created. After 1963, I noticed that the Iraqi Ba’athists attacked Kurdistan and the war began, and the Syrian Ba’ath helped them at that time. The basis of the Kurdish problem in Syria began in 1962 as a result of what was called the census, as a section of the Kurdish brothers were deprived of their citizenship documents, and it is known that whoever does not have citizenship documents is stripped of their civil rights. In 1968 (after the February 23, 1966 movement), the Regional Command of the Ba’ath Party formed a committee called (the Arab Belt) and appointed a member of the Regional Command of the Party, “Abdullah al-Ahmar,” as its head (he was a member of the Regional and National Commands, and one of the strongest members of the leadership at the time). After the setback of June 1967, we were supposed to create a security belt on the Golan borders (to deter Israel), but we were surprised by the leadership’s move to create the Arab Belt in northern Syria. What does the Arab Belt mean? It means that the Kurdish villages on the borders are having their Kurdish names changed to Arabic names, and this creates provocation and a problem. So, we have a city called (Al-Qahtaniyah) and another named (Al-Yarubiyah), and others… Some Kurdish farmers were also moved inland, and farmers from Raqqa were brought in instead of them, and they did not agree, but they were forced to do so, and large sums were spent on the Arab Belt Committee during its implementation. The goal of the Arab Belt, in my personal conviction, was to create strife between the Kurds and Arabs for the benefit of the regime, and to create strife between the Kurds and Turkey, and between the Kurds and the Arabs in Iraq, and this is what happened, meaning it was just stirring up the problem, and this project burdened the Kurds and increased their worries…)).

Asaad Mustafa: Interview with Al Arabiya channel, Political Memory program, 2013.7

In the midst of a power struggle within the Ba’ath Party, which seized power in the country in a military coup on March 8, 1963, an alliance of officers (Salah Jadid, Muhammad Umran, Hafez al-Assad, and Salim Hatum), who were members of the Syrian Ba’ath Party’s regional command, managed to remove the founders of the Ba’ath Party (Michel Aflaq and Salah al-Din Bitar), who were from the Ba’ath’s national command, in February 1966. In 1970, Hafez al-Assad, through another military coup, managed to monopolize power after removing Muhammad Umran and Salah Jadid. Hafez al-Assad then legalized the Ba’ath Party’s leadership of the country and consolidated his power through Article 8 of the 1973 constitution, which guaranteed him leadership of the Syrian state and society. Al-Assad also restored Zaki al-Arsuzi to the rank of spiritual father of the Ba’ath Party, meaning adopting his extremist nationalist ideas in governance. The Assad regime immediately implemented these policies by accelerating the implementation of the racist project (Arab Belt) in Kurdish-populated areas of the Syrian Jazira and maintaining all repressive policies towards the national components of the country.

The Ba’ath Party’s national policy was based on the concept of “Arabism,” claiming that it is a civilizational and human concept more than a national and ethnic one, and that all ethnic elements in the Arab world, including Syria, must melt into the melting pot of “Arabism.”

The unilateral national policies continued under “Bashar al-Assad,” who took over the rule of the country after the death of his father, “Hafez al-Assad,” in 2000. Despite some positive stances regarding some issues related to the Kurdish component in Syria, including statements in which he affirmed the authenticity of the Kurds in Syria in the wake of the Kurdish popular uprising in March 2004, and granting Syrian citizenship to Kurds classified under the category of (foreigners of Hasakah) in 2011; despite all of that, he did not recognize the national, cultural, social, and economic rights of the Kurds. The Kurds continued to be marginalized in the administration of their regions or participation in official Syrian institutions, and the effects of the Arab Belt project continued, preventing Kurds from owning their lands and properties, and officially banning Kurdish culture and language, and so on.

In the face of the expansion of the Syrian popular revolution, which sparked in March 2011, the last fig leaf fell from the Ba’ath Party, which the Assad family (the ruling family) uses as one of the pillars of consolidating their despotic and repressive rule, and revealed the extent of the Ba’ath Party’s poor system in spreading corruption, exploitation, injustice, and oppression in the country. Bashar al-Assad was forced to reconsider the Ba’ath Party and its role in the Assad family’s ruling system, so he abolished the article that considers the Ba’ath Party the leader of the people and society from the Syrian constitution, and constitutionally recognized political pluralism (2012 constitution), and changed part of its upper structure and members of its leadership, and presented himself before the Syrian and international public opinion as if he is working hard to reform the Ba’ath Party, despite his emphasis on the survival of the “Ba’ath” as an intellectual reference for the policies of the Syrian state. However, his endeavor was not successful; because he was not serious enough to change the extremist national ideology of the Ba’ath Party, but rather continued with the idea of “Arabism” as a misleading ideological cover for the Arabization of non-Arab nationalities in Syria, claiming the importance of national and cultural diversity in consolidating the concept of “Arabism.”

((In the same context, they created a contradiction between Arabism and the other national components in our region, considering that Arabs represent an ethnicity and the other components also represent ethnicities. All people are equal, meaning all people are ethnicities, and this is dangerous because it confined Arab thought to ethnicity, and Arabism is not like that. The Arabism we always talk about is the comprehensive civilizational Arabism built on ethnic and religious diversity, and this means that civilizational Arabism means integration between the components and does not mean assimilation. On the contrary, it means preserving the component of each of the identities in our society, and the more this diversity in Syrian society increases, the more Arabism becomes rich and wealthy, and the more this diversity appears and emerges, the more Arabism becomes confident and well-established…))

Bashar al-Assad: Expanded meeting of the Central Committee of the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party, May 4, 2024.

Finally, following the fall of the Bashar al-Assad regime in December 2024, the Ba’ath Party and the parties of the National Progressive Front (loyal to it), as well as all formations, organizations, and institutions affiliated with it, were dissolved, and their re-establishment under any other name was prohibited. In addition to the above, many other political forces and movements of a national and religious extremist nature have emerged on the Syrian scene during its modern history, and these movements have played negative roles in consolidating extremism in local communities in Syria.

Single Nationalism and Syrian Constitutions

The constitution is the legal reference and the rules governing a country or an administrative and political entity; therefore, it is of great importance to societies and peoples, and to their reality and future. Looking at the Syrian constitutions, most of them adopt the concept of one-sided nationalism and deny the rights and identity of non-Arab peoples and national components in the country.

The 1920 constitution (the first Syrian constitution) is considered exceptional compared to subsequent Syrian constitutions; as it was issued during the era of the Syrian Arab Kingdom (the era of King Faisal) before the French occupation of the country. That constitution approved the Arabic name for the Syrian Kingdom, and also considered “Arabic” the official language of the country; that is, a single national identity was officially approved for the nascent Syrian entity, and this was the result of King Faisal’s reliance on some extremist Arab nationalists in his rule. The only positive thing about this constitution was the recognition of religious and sectarian diversity and freedom of belief, and the adoption of seats for minorities according to their population, as well as the adoption of a system of administrative decentralization, through provinces, and each of those provinces has its own parliamentary council, and no one interferes in its administration and internal affairs except in general matters that are within the jurisdiction of the central government, while the king appoints the governor-general of the province, but the negative aspect here is the requirement that the governor-general be Arab, and this is contrary to the principle of equality between the sons of the components, nationalities, and sects in occupying official positions.

The constitution was issued on July 13, 1920, and was applied for only fifteen days, and in fact, many of its articles were not applied, including those related to administrative decentralization; due to the developments of events that culminated in Gouraud’s ultimatum and the French occupation of Damascus on July 25, 1920, and the exile of King Faisal on July 28, 1920. The French stopped the 1920 constitution and ruled the country after dividing it into regional and sectarian states through the French High Commissioner, who was the supreme authority in issuing laws and decisions, and in the face of the pressure of the Great Syrian Revolution that broke out in 1925 and the national political movements, the French administration was forced to submit to the demands of the Syrians in electing a constituent assembly and drafting a constitution for the country, and the result of that was the issuance of the 1930 constitution. Among its most important features:

• Adopting (the State of Syria) as the name of the Syrian entity.
• Adopting (the parliamentary republic) as the system of government for the country.
• Islam is the religion of the president of the republic.
• Freedom of worship for all religions and beliefs, and the rights of religious sects are protected.
• Arabic is the official language in state departments, with the possibility of adding other languages.
• Equality in civil and political rights, and no discrimination between Syrians based on religion, sect, origin, or language.
• Taking into account the representation of sectarian minorities in the election law of the parliamentary council.

Work continued with this constitution – despite its suspension during the years of the Second World War – until 1949 (the date of Hosni al-Zaim’s coup), which was among his measures the declaration of martial law and the dissolution of the constitution.

No constitutional amendments were introduced during the period of integrating the eastern regions (especially Al-Jazira) with a Kurdish and Syriac majority into the Syrian entity in the 1920s and 1930s, despite numerous demands from dignitaries and representatives of the Kurds and Syriacs in Al-Jazira, Kobani, and Afrin for constitutional recognition of administrative decentralization for their regions, as well as constitutional recognition of Kurdish and Syriac identity and culture and the right to education in their mother tongues.

During the era of the third military coup (led by Adib al-Shishakli), known for his strong relationship with the American Central Intelligence Agency and Syrian Freemasonry, the country entered an escalating phase towards non-Arab nationalities, especially the Kurds. He aligned himself with the campaign launched by the American intelligence agency in March 1950 to encircle the alleged Soviet use of the Kurds at the regional level. The agency published that the Soviets were training the Kurds near the Turkish-Iranian border in preparation for a Kurdish revolution against Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria in the event of a third world war due to the tense Soviet-Turkish relations. Moscow considered Ankara’s permission for the American fleet to enter the Sea of Marmara a violation of the Straits Agreement, turning Turkey into an American colony…8

Al-Shishakli tried to remove Kurdish officers from the Syrian army under the pretext that some of them (especially the Kurdish soldiers who volunteered to defend Palestine in 1948 under the name of the Kurdish Regiment) had obtained Syrian citizenship illegally. He also issued a legislative decree in 1952 to prevent Kurds from owning land and real estate in northern Syria.9 He involved extremist Arab nationalist parties in the administration of the country. A new constitution for the country was drafted by a committee stemming from the constituent assembly that was formed in 1950. The committee was dominated by figures from the People’s Party (the largest party in the council at the time), the Ba’ath Party, and the Muslim Brotherhood. Therefore, the essence of its articles was consistent with the visions of those extremist nationalist forces, and Nazim al-Qudsi (a prominent figure in the People’s Party and the Syrian Prime Minister at the time) was the head of the Constitution Committee.

The most prominent features included:10

• Adding an introduction clarifying that those who drafted the constitution were (representatives of the Syrian Arab people).
• Adopting (the Syrian Republic) as the name of the Syrian entity.
• Considering Syria an Arab representative republic.
• Considering the Syrian people part of the Arab nation.
• Islam is the religion of the President of the Republic.
• Respecting all heavenly religions, and the personal status of religious sects is protected.
• Arabic is the official language.

The issuance of this constitution was the result of the extremist nationalist movement’s control over the official institutions of the Syrian entity (the presidency, parliament, government, and security apparatus). Therefore, the marginalization of non-Arab nationalities continued, and even overt racist projects and plans targeting Syrian Kurds were adopted and implemented. In parallel with al-Shishakli’s measures against the Kurds, the government of Nazim al-Qudsi submitted a bill to the parliament in 1950 regarding the census and registration of the population in Al-Hasakah Governorate, with the aim of withdrawing citizenship from the Kurds under the pretext that large numbers of them had infiltrated Al-Jazira during the 1940s. Since that time, the media and parliamentary machine of the extremist nationalist movement (the Ba’ath Party, the People’s Party…) began to spread a virtual conspiracy about the alleged Kurdish infiltration and its danger to the security of Al-Jazira and northern Syria.

The census law was issued in 1950, but it was not implemented at the time due to a lack of financial allocations. In 1956, the Syrian government ratified the law and requested a deadline until the end of 1957 to complete it. However, due to the developments of the Syrian-Egyptian union, its implementation was postponed until the era of secession. Nazim al-Qudsi (then President of the Republic) issued a presidential decree on August 23, 1962, to conduct the population census in Al-Hasakah Governorate only. The census was actually carried out in the same year (on the fifth of October 1962), resulting in a tragedy that targeted the Kurdish community and left negative effects that continued for decades since that date. Through it, a large part of the Kurds was stripped of their Syrian citizenship, including families known for their history and long-standing presence in Al-Jazira. Some Kurdish families had citizenship withdrawn from some of their members while retaining the citizenship of others. This is an indication of the deception practiced by the nationalist movement that controlled the government at the time regarding the Kurds and their alleged migration and infiltration from abroad into Al-Jazira.

The 1950 constitution did not quench the thirst of the nationalist movement in emphasizing the singular national identity of Syria. The same ruling circles in the early fifties, after returning to power during the secession era, amended the 1950 constitution regarding the name of the Syrian entity, changing it from “The Syrian Republic” to “The Syrian Arab Republic,”11 in their insistence on continuing extremist nationalist policies and working to abolish other nationalities and exclude them from participating in public life in the country.

A few months later, the Ba’ath Party seized power through a military coup on March 8, 1963, declaring a state of emergency and martial law. They drafted a provisional constitution similar to the constitution of the secessionist era, with the addition of clauses stipulating the Ba’ath Party’s leadership of Syrian society and the state. After Hafez al-Assad’s coup against his Ba’athist comrades in 1970, he established a permanent constitution in 1973, which continued to adopt unilateral nationalist policies, emphasize the Arabization of the state system and its institutions, marginalize the rights of non-Arab ethnic groups such as Kurds and Syriacs, and uphold the leadership of the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party over society and the state.

Article Eight: The Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party is the leading party in society and the state, and it leads a progressive national front that works to unify the energies of the masses of the people and put them at the service of the goals of the Arab nation.

Article Twenty-One: The education and culture system aims to create an Arab generation that is nationalistic, scientifically minded, connected to its history and land, proud of its heritage, imbued with the spirit of struggle to achieve the goals of its nation in unity, freedom, and socialism, and contributes to serving humanity and its progress.

From the Constitution of 1973 (era of Hafez al-Assad’s regime).

Faced with local and international pressures and the outbreak of a popular revolution in the country, Bashar al-Assad (who assumed the presidency of the country after his father Hafez al-Assad, following constitutional amendments regarding the minimum age for the presidency) was forced to issue a new constitution in 2012. He abolished the Ba’ath Party’s leadership of society and the state, and his constitution recognized political pluralism and the cultural diversity of Syrian society, but without explicitly recognizing the specificity of non-Arab ethnic groups and their constitutional rights. Instead, he introduced an article prohibiting the establishment of parties based on race, religion, sect, or gender, even though the party he leads is a purely ethnic party (the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party), and all the parties of the National Progressive Front loyal to his regime are ethnic (Arab) parties. Therefore, the aim of that article – for example – is to prohibit the establishment of Kurdish parties and associations seeking to secure the political, social, and cultural rights of Kurds in Syria.

Although Bashar al-Assad issued decree No. (49) on April 7, 2011, which included granting Syrian Arab citizenship to those registered in the registries of foreigners in Al-Hasakah (Kurds stripped of Syrian citizenship), his failure to adopt a comprehensive plan to resolve the Kurdish issue in all its aspects and include it in the Syrian constitution was a factor in the failure to build mutual trust with the Syrian Kurdish side, in addition to his commission of major massacres against Syrian citizens, and his non-recognition of the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria. This led to the expansion of the opposition front to his rule, which was a sufficient reason for his downfall and the demise of his regime (and with it the Ba’ath Party regime) at the end of 2024, despite his desperate attempts to reform and revitalize the Ba’ath Party as a guarantor of the continuation of his family’s rule, after the popular revolution revealed its flaws and faults.

The failure of the nation-state in Syria and the democratic alternative:

All the governments and regimes that have ruled Syria have failed to achieve a civilizational renaissance in the country. The situation of the country was, as the popular saying goes, “out of the frying pan, into the fire,” meaning that when Syria gained its independence in 1946, it was backward and primitive in all respects. After more than 70 years, it was in a very devastating state as a result of the civil war, which was one of the effects of the extreme national policies of the ruling authority.

The pursuit of policies of repression, tyranny, rejection and exclusion of others, national assimilation, demographic change, rejection of the legitimate rights of peoples, failure to accept the privacy of local communities, administrative, financial and moral corruption in the joints of society and institutions, and the use of violence and police and security rule, which are at the core of the policies and characteristics of the extremist national and religious state; all of this was the reason for bringing the Ba’ath authority to the swamp of collapse, and with it the fall of the extremist national state in Syria. This is an inevitable result of following policies that are hostile to societies and peoples.

The issue of Arab nationalism poses an intellectual problem among Arab intellectuals and rulers. Perhaps the tendency of a group of Arab nationalists towards extremism and exaggeration in their national ideas and perceptions, in the context of building Arab liberation movements and managing the countries of the region, was a grave mistake and a deadly trap into which they fell. This can be applied to the Armenian, Syriac, Assyrian, and Kurdish national movements in the region.

It is impossible to build purely ethnic entities and countries in the Middle East, as this region enjoys great ethnic and sectarian diversity. Therefore, the key to the stability of the countries of the region, including Syria, lies in administrative partnership, regardless of the formula agreed upon between the peoples, sects, and components of a country or region (centralization, decentralization, self-administration, autonomy, federalism, confederation, etc.). What matters here is not to resort to violence, tyranny, and the imposition of administrative systems on the residents, components, and peoples of the region, who are more aware of the appropriate way to achieve their demands and obtain their legitimate rights.

Perhaps the failure of the previous regimes that have passed through the history of Syria (People’s Party governments, the Ba’ath Party regime…) makes us reconsider the entire unitary national ideology, and draw lessons from it in the context of the efforts of all Arab, Kurdish, and Syriac movements and organizations to achieve their national goals and their social and cultural renaissance.

This is at the same time an affirmation that the Syrian peoples and sects are linked by a common destiny, and are historically, geographically, and socially intertwined. Therefore, abandoning the idea of ​​national exaggeration and the elimination of the other, and recognizing national, religious, linguistic, intellectual, and cultural diversity as a source of richness and strength for human civilization, is the path and way to achieve true democracy and the desired civilizational renaissance in Syria and the entire Middle East.

[1] – Among the dissidents from the League after the National Bloc came to power in 1936 were: Sabri al-Asali (nominated for parliament in Damascus and won a seat on the National Bloc’s lists, and became Minister of Interior and Justice in the 1940s. During independence, he became Secretary-General of the National Party and Prime Minister several times in the 1950s. During the era of Syrian-Egyptian unity, he became Deputy Prime Minister to Gamal Abdel Nasser), Adnan al-Atassi (appointed Minister Plenipotentiary to Turkey, served as Minister of Public Works at the beginning of independence, and was one of the founders of the People’s Party), Farid Zein al-Din (appointed Secretary-General of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Syria’s representative to the United Nations, and Syria’s ambassador to the United States in the 1950s, and led the Nasserite Unionist Organization in Damascus during the secession era), Dr. Rushdi al-Jabi (appointed head of the Damascus Health Directorate in Jamil Mardam Bey’s first government), Ghaleb al-Azm (founded a new organization called “The Hama Youth”), and Jalal al-Sayyid (from Deir ez-Zor, one of the founders of the Arab Ba’ath Party). Ahmad Al-Sharbaty (expelled from the League for supporting the National Bloc, became Minister of Education in 1945, and Minister of Defense in the first government after independence).

[2]  – الأحزاب السياسية في سوريا السرية والعلنية، هاشم عثمان، رياض الريس للكتب والنشر، بيروت / لبنان، 2001.

[3] سامي الجندي[3]: “البعث”، دار النهار – بيروت 1969

5 Akram al-Horani, in his capacity as head of the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party, made a deal with Adib al-Shishakli, according to which he received the Ministry of Defense and brought hundreds of Ba’athists into the Military Academy, forming a huge nucleus of Ba’athist officers. This enabled them to extend their control over a considerable number of Syrian army units, making them centers of control and a threat to successive governments. Source: The Syrian Ba’ath Party: A History Full of Coups… and Assassinations. Taher Ibrahim, website of the Cultural Center for Research and Documentation/Lebanon (article).

 6 راجع الكراس: دراسة عن محافظة الحسكة من النواحي القومية والاجتماعية والسياسية، محمد طلب هلال،1963م.

7 Testimony of Asaad Mustafa, Syrian Minister of Agriculture during the era of Hafez al-Assad between 1992-2000, in an interview with Al Arabiya channel, Political Memory program, the fourth episode of the meeting, September 28, 2013 (official website of Al Arabiya channel – www.alarabiya.net).

 8 التكوين التاريخي الحديث للجزيرة السورية، محمد جمال باروت، المركز العربي للأبحاث ودراسة السياسات، بيروت  2013.

9 Adib al-Shishakli issued Legislative Decree (193) on April 3, 1952, stipulating the suspension of all transactions related to real estate properties located in border areas except with a prior license issued by decree from the President of the Republic based on a proposal from the Minister of Justice after the approval of the Ministry of National Defense to prevent the leakage of Syrian lands and real estate in those areas to undesirable persons in their ownership directly or through pseudonyms. Prior to this decree, al-Shishakli, in his alliance with (Akram al-Horani), issued Legislative Decree No. (96) on January 30, 1952, regulating the state’s possession of land in Al-Jazeera and the Euphrates, setting a ceiling on ownership, and settling the tribes there.

 التكوين التاريخي الحديث للجزيرة السورية، محمد جمال باروت، المركز العربي للأبحاث ودراسة السياسات، بيروت 2013. Source:

10 See, the Constitution of the Syrian Republic for the year 1950.

11 The Syrian Parliament in the era of the Mamoun al-Kuzbari government (when Nazim al-Qudsi was President of the Republic) held an extraordinary session on September 11, 1962, devoted to proposed constitutional amendments. Marouf al-Dawalibi proposed adopting the 1950 constitution with amendments, stipulating the replacement of the name (Syrian Republic) with (Syrian Arab Republic) and replacing the name (Syrian people) with (the Arab people in Syria) wherever it appeared in the constitution. The committee elected for the constitutional amendments in the parliament approved the proposal during the two days of September 12 and 13, 1962. Source: Minutes of the Syrian Parliament, the official website of Nazim al-Qudsi (nazemalkoudsi.com).