Syria Again

I realize I have already blogged on this, but I can't help myself.  I spent too many hours learning to understand Syrian politics and social structure to not follow the events of the last few weeks.

Finally today there is an article that points out the involvement of the Muslim Brotherhood and the desire of fundamentalist Islam to overthrow the Alawi dominated regime.

"Syria's exiled Muslim Brotherhood, which has been largely on the sidelines of the protests so far, called on Syrians to take to the streets on Friday in support of Deraa, where a rights group said civilian deaths from the army attack rose to 50.
It was the first time that the Brotherhood, ruthlessly crushed along with secular leftist movements under the rule of late President Hafez al-Assad, had called directly for protests.
The group said accusations by Syrian authorities that militant Islamists were behind the unrest were wrong and aimed at fomenting civil war and undermining nationwide demands for political freedoms and an end to corruption.
But a Jordanian Islamist, Abu Muhammad al-Maqdisi, said that Muslims were obliged to join the protest and that the overthrow of Assad's minority Alawite rule would be a step toward implementing Sharia law in the mainly Sunni Muslim state."

What is highlighted by these comments is one, the Muslim Brotherhood is still around despite Hafez Al-Assad's attempt to eradicate the group; and two, interest in removing the Alawi regime comes from within and without the country.  Syria sits in the middle of the region and is a crossroads for movement of arms and people involved in terrorism and actions against the state of Israel and its primarily Jewish population.  These facts make it necessary for us to closely watch Syria as a real precursor of the type of change that protestors across the region really want.  Do these protestors want democracy?  All I have heard is that they want the existing regime to be gone.  And now, someone is actually saying we want a Sharia law state in Syria.  Let the good times roll... 

Answering Drezner's IR 101 Contest

Dan Drezner, in response to the idea that aspiring leaders should read particular authors (Tom Friedman) asked people to suggest three books a President should read (Announcing the IR 101 Contest).  Most respondents to Drezner have offered a list of books that no policy-maker will read (be honest, how many academics would read many of the books we read if we did not feel it was expected of us to read these books?).

So, here is my pathetic attempt at what a President should read.  I start with the holy scriptures of Christianity, the Bible (which version some may ask, not realizing there is only one version that has many translations and to which some Christian sects/denominations have added material).  The Bible is not just a morality tale or a list of laws to follow in one's daily life.  The work, however, does paint as folly the understanding of man regarding the ultimate in heroics, not that one gives up his life for another, but that man as God's creation has failed and must be saved.  The fact that man has failed should be remembered by every politician and every person in general as this fact explains a lot of rotten behavior.  Ok, I'll take heat on this one, don't really care that I will take heat on this one. 

Second, I would say that the President should read Chandrasekaren's Imperial Life in an Emerald City.  I found this a very interesting read.  While I thought about Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War) or Robert Gilpin (War and Change in World Politics), something Drezner laughs about because of the fact of the primary focus of politicians--getting re-elected, one a quality understanding of prudence and reality, the other a great realist read of the nexus of economy and politics causing change in the world (even has a little undertone of Marxist thought to flesh out the understanding of economy), I decided instead upon something more recently published that has lessons of importance for contemporary policy debate.

Finally, I would tell a President to read Hugo Slim's Killing Civilians.  The President is the Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces.  The President should at least be well versed in understanding what the use of force means--killing people.  But, more than just killing, the President should be aware than the use of force means declaring two entire population (the population of the President's country and the population of the country where force is being applied) as subject to the perils of armed violence.  Slim does a great job of carefully spelling out differing theories that explain the translation of force to violence against civilian populations.

So, what does your list look like? 

Risotto

Lately I have become a big fan of risotto.  I had not eaten much risotto in the past 15 to 20 years, but in the last year I have had it numerous times prepared in a variety of ways.  The most enjoyable risotto I have recently had

opportunity to savor was a garlic and leek risotto with roasted red peppers and strips of filet mignon. 

I have also started dabbling in making my own risotto.  I recently made a garlic and shallot based risotto with basil, oregano, pine nuts, and salame Toscano finely sliced and diced added into the mix.  My only question when I finished this effort was what is the best wine pairing to serve with such a dish?  So, help me out, send me your thoughts on best wine pairing for the type of risotto I prepared. 

Syria, Part II

Earlier this morning I took some time to post about Syria.  Two things should be noted,

1) No, the Alawi population was not called by the name Alawi during Alexander's incursion into the region (obviously Islam had not made it onto the world stage before Alexander's trip through the area).  The population that is known as Alawi today did, however, exist as a population group at that time.

2) I hate being correct.   Read more about it here. 

Syria

Since 2000 I have followed political conflict in Syria with some interest.  I first started looking at Syria as part of a set of case studies that were first written for my dissertation and in 2010 my case study of ethnic conflict in Syria was published here.  What is not being discussed in the information distribution networks (Retuers, AFP, AP, etc.) is the ethnic dimension of uprisings in Syria.  Syria is 74% Sunni, Shia and Alawi comprise about 13% of the population with the Alawi population being less than 10%.  Most people I meet have no clue about the Alawi population, so here is a little information about the Alawi:

The Alawis are an Islamic ethnic group in which religion is not the primary identity characteristic. Alawis means “those who adhere to the teachings of Ali.” Ali was the son-in-law of Muhammad, the founder of Islam. The Alawis differ with traditional Islam in their rejection of dietary restrictions, and social restrictions. Additionally, Alawis view politics as separate from religion and consider themselves to be secular Muslims. In Syria the Alawis are descendants of an ancient group that populated the area of the coastal plain. They still maintain many Christian (Byzantine) practices—including the celebration of Christmas, Easter and Epiphany. Most Sunnis consider the Alawis as more heretical than Jews. The Alawis are reported in the historical accounts of Alexander the Great’s incursion into the region and in the accounts of the Holy Wars. Physically they differ from other Syrians in that many are blond haired and blue-eyed. Alawites make up less than ten percent of the population but control the government and military.

The Alawis are an excellent example of an advantaged ethnic minority group. By their seizure of power in the Ba’ath party and of the Syrian government under the leadership of Hafez Al-Assad, the Alawis positioned themselves to control a country and to control a society. To maintain his control over Syria, Assad instituted martial law that was still in effect during the years in this study. The primary concern for this group is how to maintain their advantage in the society. This advantage rested in the ability of Assad to stay in power. Until his death in 2000, Assad managed to stay in power by arresting and imprisoning anyone suspected of disloyalty and then releasing prisoners at times when it was necessary to appease factions of the majority population.

Bashar Al-Assad, the son and successor of Hafez Al-Assad, inherited a situation that required constant repression and appeasement of the majority in order to maintain power and control.  Appeasements since 2000 include the Syrian support for Iranian ambitions in the region, and support for Hezbollah (Assad has no real love for Radical Islamic Fundamentalism which views his own people as heretical in their religious and social practices).  Repression and appeasement are at opposite ends of the arc of the pendulum, when appeasement fails, the government swings back--usually too far--to repression, often operationalized at a high level of violence (anybody remember Hama (1982) with 20,000 dead when Hafez Al-Assad went after the Muslim Brotherhood and its primary location of popular support?). 

So, I am not surprised at the reports of government crackdowns on protestors.  The appeasement was offered--less restrictions on public activity.  The stick will be used--crackdown on anti-government protestors.  Who will win?

Model 1911--Still the Best

So, as a fan of firearms, my first ever blog will deal with the best sidearm in existence--the Model 1911 .45 ACP.  Learn more about this firearm here: Modern Firearms - Colt Govt. M1911 and clones .

This semi-automatic, single-action masterpiece was the sidearm of the U.S. military from 1911 to 1985 when compromise with allies (beware of having allies--I'll talk about this sometime in the future) forced the introduction of the current standard Beretta in 9mm.  There are still some units within the U.S. military that are allowed to carry the model 1911.  This beautifully designed, easy to operate, large caliber sidearm saw service in all areas of combat where U.S. troops fought from the Philippines, to the trenches of WWI, to the island hopping campaigns, invasion of Europe, sands of North Africa, and Italian campaigns of WWII, to Korea and the ill-fated campaigns in Vietnam and Southeast Asia.

The Model 1911 has one great benefit.  What you hit center mass with rounds from this firearm stays hit.  While there are multiple calibers that provide adequate wound channel (the whole that bores through the flesh and organs of the target) and will break bones well, there are no other handgun rounds that do it as well (ok you can argue for the .50 caliber Desert Eagle, but seriously does anyone want to lug that gun around regularly?).

Anyway, here is to the 100th anniversary of the Model 1911.