It’s time the West understood why Syria matters [THE NATIONAL]

July 30, 2015

Federica Mogherini, the EU’s foreign policy chief, argued this week that the Iran nuclear agreement was a “disaster” for ISIL. Her point was that it showed cooperation between the West and the Muslim world. Indeed, Ms Mogherini may even be short-changing the potentials of the deal. The signatories go beyond West and Iran. They include China and Russia, two of the world’s most significant global players. Their presence creates the potential for further discussions on other issues. That’s not a foregone conclusion, by any means – but it does establish avenues to be explored that did not exist hitherto.

For the moment, let us compare the agreement against populist narratives in the centre of the Muslim world. For most supporters of Iran, the P5+1 didn’t enter into some kind of arrangement to begin an alliance of civilisations. When considering much of the suspicion of the deal in the region, the agreement was similarly not interpreted as beginning a new pact with the Muslim world. On the contrary, it was interpreted as a prioritising of the Iranian agenda over the Arab one.

If we look at the disaster that the deal is meant to be for ISIL, the scene looks murky. This is a group that thrives on sectarianism and uses it as a tool for recruitment. Part of the strategy against ISIL has to be the interruption of its recruitment capabilities.

In Iraq, ISIL has played the sectarian card effectively against Baghdad, with many Iraqi members of ISIL perceiving themselves as being part of a Sunni uprising against an oppressive Shia government.

Perhaps, more importantly, across the border in Syria, the Assad regime utilised sectarianism as a tool from the outset, drawing in Shia militia forces from Lebanon and elsewhere. Those fighting the regime from among the Sunni Syrian population know this well – and they are the most vulnerable to ISIL recruitment. In the extremist narrative, Sunnis are fighting against the “Crusader West” and the “Shia oppressors” – and the two groups now appear closer. That is not a disaster for ISIL – on the contrary, its narrative will use the deal as a means for further recruitment.

There is another scenario in which the deal could, indeed, be a deathblow for ISIL. Iranian activists who seek a more progressive future for Iran could be emboldened by this agreement.

If the more moderate elements in Iran do have a stronger role, do they have another plan for Syria that involves recognising the legitimate desires of the 2011 uprising?

As an analyst and academic, I support the deal. But a better deal would have taken positive movement in Syria into account.

It is the Syrian catastrophe that powers the political narrative of ISIL and its supporters. Without it, ISIL would, doubtless, be a lot less able to recruit.

Ms Mogherini is correct in affirming that an “an alliance of civilisations can be our most powerful weapon in the fight against terror”. A true and genuine alliance can only be built on a common understanding of basic principles. The Muslim world and the P5+1 are not such separate and distinct civilisations, so the task should be easier.

When I wrote a book on the historical interchange between Europe and the Muslim world, which argued against the clash of civilisations thesis, I had a plethora of works on which to base my writings: scholars such as Columbia University professor Richard Bulliet, who wrote The Case for Islamo-Christian Civilisation paved the way years before.

The issue isn’t whether there is sufficient precedent in our history – as Muslims and Christians, Jews and others, as Europeans, Arabs and more, as westerners and those living in Muslim majority states – to establish an alliance of civilisations based on common principles. That is a struggle in and of itself against the rise of extremism in different parts of the world – but political will can overcome that.

The real question is whether or not we will recognise the political imperatives that are derived from the impetus of such an alliance. That requires the international community to recognise the possibility and benefits of an alliance. But it also requires the recognition of the right of autonomy of Syrians to seek their own future, without the threat of death and destruction from the likes of Assad’s regime. As long as their autonomy ceases to be taken for granted, ISIL will have an extra pool of recruits. No deal with Iran can be a substitute for that.

Dr HA Hellyer is an associate fellow in international security studies at the Royal United Services Institute in London, and the Centre for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution in Washington, DC

On Twitter: @hahellyer

Source: The National

Photo Credit: "Syrian refugee center with soldiers protecting" by Voice of America News: Henry Ridgwell on Turkish border, "Refugees Flee Aleppo; Hot, Barren Turkish Camps Await". - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpYAoR5nzBo&feature=plcp. Licensed under Public Domain via Wikimedia Commons