March 8, 2004 was the 41st anniversary of the ruling Syrian Ba'ath party's rise to power, and of its enactment of emergency law. This year, unlike in previous years, the Syrian and Lebanese press featured criticism of Syria's government under President Bashar Al-Assad, who has not carried out the reforms he promised in his inaugural speech. The following are excerpts from the articles:
The Laws Against Freedom of the Press
In her column in the Syrian government daily Teshreen, [1] Syrian author Nadia Khousat expressed her disappointment with the restrictions imposed on writers and journalists in Syria in discussing domestic problems – problems that President Al-Assad himself "speaks of honestly and courageously" in his media interviews: "Hisham Bashir, editor of the [Teshreen] paper, warned me about a word I wrote in an article … that might lead to punishment under the Printed Material Law. [Bashir] has already suffered [this punishment] personally in the past, and perhaps is still [suffering]. He urged me to reread the law…
"We stand before a program of reform and change that faces the writer with the need to criticize honestly, in light of the importance of examining the proposed programs, [which requires] refraining from hypocrisy, flattery, and 'you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours.' Above all, the [external] events that are heating up face the writer with external pressure that accuses anyone who disagrees with the American view of terror…
"In addition, the satellite channels, and the Arab papers in the kiosks and on the Internet, present a wide spectrum [of views], some of which refer to international problems with a courage that [we] have not yet attained…
"In his conversations with the media, the president speaks honestly and courageously about the state's internal political matters. But if a Syrian journalist tries to do likewise, he encounters rigid restrictions… The main problem is not the Printed Materials Law, but the [government's] stance towards the press itself. The writer is charged with expressing the general conscience. The press has the right to point out mistakes [it finds] in any plan, whether of administrative institutions, economic institutions, or cultural institutions.
"With regard to the Printed Materials Law – is it the media's mission to convey the words of the officials and to conceal the words of the people? Do we want [the media] to support the reform program? Do we want [it to be able to withstand] external pressure? Are we a risk to personal interests, forbidden profits, or obsolete laws…? We do not want a weak press that is printed but read by no one."
'Must We Stop Reform Just Because the U.S. Supports It?'
In an editorial by editor Ayman Al-Dakar,the independent Syrian weekly Abyad WaAswad (Black and White), which is owned by the son of Syria's chief of staff, expressed its objections to the vacillation of the reform process that, according to Al-Dakar, stemmed only from the U.S.'s attempt to force its own reform program on the Arab world. [2] Al-Dakar wrote that the current American administration has never been as embarrassed as it is now, and therefore it declared its "Greater Middle East" plan aimed, he said, at "presenting the American president as a statesman and not only as a war president, and presenting the U.S. itself as the first democratic state in the world, [and is concerned about] the interests of the peoples, without noting that the Arab countries themselves oppose the imported reform programs forced [upon them] from without."
He continues, "But don't the Arabs need reform, be it cultural, social, or economic? Do the Arab countries live in a good situation that allows them to stop or slow down the processes of internal reform just because the U.S. proposes or seeks to make [such reforms]?
"If we examine the matter in itself, and in light of the history of the Arabs with the U.S., we will find that the absolute no's and the resistance to [the U.S.] proposals have sometimes led to losses. All agree that the reforms that the Arabs require in their countries are an internal need. All also agree that the American dictates are unwanted because they are external. All agree that the U.S. will oppose reform in the region if it does not mesh with its interests.
"Perhaps the American democratic experience that the U.S. has brought with it – which led to the destruction of Iraq – together with the U.S.'s current activities in Iraq, are the best proof of the quality of democracy imported from without. Yet [because of this] must we stop reform and development in Arab countries [only] because the U.S. again raised an idea or ideas that [we ourselves] have in the past adopted for the sake of reform?
"Why don't the Arabs continue with internal reform, in accordance with their plans, even if some points overlap the American proposals but are in the framework of national Arab interests, and not part of the American will and interests?
"The similarities between the U.S. proposals and the national reform programs in the Arab countries should not be seen as surrender or shame – rather, like the launching of reform programs, with decisiveness and persistence, in a realistic response to the American proposals whose content and aims are a trap."
'Stability is Not the Same as Freedom'
The Lebanese Al-Nahar daily devoted its cultural supplement to Ba'ath Day, printing some articles stating that as long as the party retained its hegemony in Syria, no genuine reform would be possible. [3]
Syrian opposition activist Yassin Al-Haj Saleh, who was jailed in Syria for membership in the Communist Party, wrote in Al-Nahar: [4] "In principle, stability is not the same as freedom, and is even counter to it. The stability experienced by Syria since 1970 … is based on force, not law… Thus, there has been stability in the ruling system, but not in Syrian society…
"The future of the Ba'ath party depends on its ability to free itself from the situation in which there is a one-party system in Syria. The Ba'ath's revival [Ba'ath means 'revival' in Arabic] lies in its liberating itself from ruling. If it insists on remaining 'the [only] strategic option' of all Syrians, it is liable to discover that the transition to democracy will be the end of its road. A party that rules solely by virtue of an unlimited and never-ending state of emergency will find that its rule is unnatural, and that it risks becoming an oddity in the history of its country…
"Syria's best option today is also the Ba'ath Party's best option. It is not a choice between the existence or non-existence of the Ba'ath, but between its existence as [both] a party and a state or its existence as a party among other parties in normal political life." Also in the cultural supplement, Syrian journalist Muhammad Ali Al-Atasi [5] wrote: "Today freedom knocks on Syria's doors, seeking dialogue, internal peace, and healing of wounds. Isn't it preferable to open these doors from within for the sake of the people inside, before the foreigner opens them with its tanks and armored personnel carriers? Ultimately, he [i.e. the foreigner] is coming from outside, for the sake of those who are outside."
[1] Teshreen (Syria) March 5, 2004
[2] As cited in Akhbar Al-Sharq (Syria), March 8, 2004.
[3] It is noteworthy that since Bashar Al-Assad became president, Al-Nahar has provided an outlet of expression for Syrian journalists whose writings are not published in their own country.
[4] Al-Nahar (Lebanon), March 7, 2004.
[5] Syrian Civil Society activist Al-Atasi founded the Al-Atasi Institute in Damascus; in his November 2003 interview with The New York Times, Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad referred to this institute to demonstrate Syria's political pluralism. See Assad Tampers with New York Times Interview: One Message to Americans, Another to Syrians, January 7, 2004, "Assad Tampers with New York Times Interview: One Message to Americans, Another to Syrians,"; MEMRI Intellectuals Petition for Democratization and Reform in Syria, February 26, 2004" Intellectuals Petition for Democratization and Reform in Syria,"
