Tag Archives: Syria

Compassion in a Time of War

On Good Friday, in preparation for Easter, a few Christians in the Middle Eastern country of Syria meditated and prayed. They gathered within the walls of an ancient monastery, Deir Mar Musa. During years of conflict and suffering, this monastery has endured, a witness for peace in a war ravaged country.

Suddenly a Muslim young man entered into a quiet corner of the monastery. He also was a searcher for a place to pray. He spread his prayer rug, then began his prayers. A photographer, Cécile Massie, there to observe the monastic community in Good Friday meditations, snapped the picture of the Christians and the young man in their prayers (Stephanie Saldaña, “All Sorts of Little Things: On Compassion in a Time of War,” Plough Quarterly, Summer, 2018).

Writes Saldaña: “Together and separately the Muslim and Christian faithful turn toward God. This shared prayer—and with it a hope—enters into our suffering and becomes known.”

In the midst of unprecedented numbers of refugees and victims of hatred and war, she identifies the meaning of compassion as “to suffer with.” She means to suffer with all, not just those of our religious persuasion.

When Whole Populations Flee

We can understand why Syrians are leaving their country. Were we living there, the anarchy would tempt most of us to leave also. We can see why Afghans flee, too, a country split into corrupt, warring factions. Iraq? Not much better.

Others flee Libya, just as broken as the rest. Still others leave corrupt governments and economic hardships in Yemen and Somalia and Nigeria and a dozen or more other places.

Though neighbors to Syria—Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey—absorb the most refugees per person, masses flee toward the more diverse European countries. Why do so many refugees seek these culturally different countries?

Economic opportunity, of course, and relief from overcrowded refugee camps. Still, we might be surprised that so many flee toward Europe’s secular culture.

European countries uphold freedom of religion, impartial judicial systems, and representative government. Such policies create the societies toward which refugees flee. Do they understand what creates those societies? Can they, someday, replicate policies in their own countries?

Egypt and Syria: Worrying Prelude to the Future?

 

Are the Egyptian and Syrian conflicts typical of the near future for the Middle East? Good guys, bad guys, sometimes on the same side? Ethnic and religious attacks? Plenty of villains but no clear heroes? The Syrian conflict, especially, now involves nearby countries: masses of refugees, arms shipments, and occasional spillover of armed forays. Are these preludes to larger conflicts? What does past history tell us?

The Spanish Civil War of 1936-1939, a war forgotten by most of us, is called by some a prelude to World War II, which began a few months after the end of the Spanish conflict. The more traditional Spanish citizens, including many in the Catholic Church and landowning and business classes were called nationalists. Many urban workers, middle-class liberals, and some Communists were called republicans. The nationalists received support from Nazi Germany. The republicans received support from the Soviet Union.

Both sides committed atrocities. The town of Guernica was pounded to rubble by incendiary bombs. A third of its population was reported killed or wounded.

The United States was not directly involved, but some Americans joined the republicans, most in a youthful desire to liberate. Earnest Hemingway wrote about one such fictional character in For Whom the Bell Tolls. The story ends tragically for the hero just as the war did. For almost four decades afterward, Spain was ruled by the dictator Francisco Franco.

At the time, European countries had been in a state of tension caused by the horrible brutality of World War I and its unresolved ending. Hatred, pride, and humiliation all played a part in the inability of Europeans to come together to prevent World War II. This hatred was evident in the Spanish conflict. Unfortunately, a failure to understand hatred’s consequences prevented the compromises necessary to resolve the differences.

At this chaotic time, we follow the promise of talks between Israelis and Palestinians. All parties suggest that any progress will be difficult. Bitterness, grievances, and brutalities haunt the process. A look into history should convince us to try anyway, to understand, this time, that only forgiveness offers hope.

Syria: Do We or Don’t We?

 

Bachar-al-AssadThe war in Syria is a conundrum, a problem that appears to have no favorable resolution. The opposition, assaulted by a brutal dictator, plead for weapons to unseat Bashar al-Assad. Clinging to power appears to be Assad’s main goal in life, even if he must slaughter civilians to do it. The poorly-armed opposition asks for weapons to equalize the conflict.

Few Americans seriously entertain sending American troops into the Syrian maelstrom, but many question our lack of support for other nations to arm the opposition with weapons to shoot down Assad’s planes that sow such carnage.

The reason for our reluctance is the presence in the opposition of terrorist elements, perhaps a small minority, but we don’t know the extent. We fear that weapons will end up in the hands of the terrorist element. We fear, if they gain the upper hand, that they will replace Assad, not with a republic offering equal protection for all religious and ethnic groups, but with an Islamist republic akin to the theocracy in Iran. In a shooting war which changes daily, picking the good guys from the bad ones is difficult. The mixed results of other Middle Eastern countries who have thrown off dictators give us pause. Minorities in Egypt, for example, fear that the new constitution there may take away their rights.

Sometimes the happy ending, so beloved by Americans, is not possible in the short run. We make adult decisions, some would say moral ones, knowing the risks we take.

Syria’s Chemical Weapons

 

While Christians in this country celebrate Jesus’ birth, we recoil at the horrors unfolding in the region where he was born. Will Syria’s Bashar al-Assad use chemical weapons on his own people? Perhaps creating a tragedy as happened when Iraq’s Saddam Hussein used chemical weapons on his Kurdish citizens in 1988, killing and maiming thousands? (We ignored this atrocity at the time because Saddam was our ally against Iran.)

Why does Assad not step down? He could find sanctuary. Russia has supported him. Supposedly, he has friends in South America. Why does he insist on this war of brutality against his own people?

Perhaps he fears retribution against his ethnic sect, the Alawites. The Alawites, a minority in Syria that has ruled the Sunni Muslim majority for decades, fear his downfall, sure of a war of revenge against them if he goes.

The use of chemical weapons is “a red line,” so we are told. What then is our response? What are our plans? We are weary of war. Chemical weapons apparently is the one step Assad could take which would bring retribution on him. But will we be able to act effectively?

What will happen to Damascus, one of the oldest continuously inhabited cities in the world? The apostle Paul was headed there when he experienced a spiritual turnaround so dramatic that the phrase “Damascus Road experience” has become the code for a life altering conversion. We are in need of such today.

Unfortunate Choices and Their Consequences

 

Past choices bring consequences, for individuals and for nations. Our past choices, for example, limit us in the help we can offer the uprising against the Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad. Thousands of men, women, and children have died in brutal circumstances. Tens of thousands more have fled and become refugees.

The issue of chemical weapons hovers over the conflict. Bashar al-Assad has chemical weapons and has threatened to use them. No one doubts the brutality of the al-Assad famly. The father of Bashar massacred and obliterated the village of Hama in 1982 because of its opposition to his rule.

We can choose to send weapons to the Syrian opposition, but the opposition is fractured. It includes extremists like al-Qaeda. How can we be sure who is receiving the weapons? The opposition is fluid: groups frequently change alliances.

Our entry into Afghanistan and then Iraq after 9/11 wearied us and taught us the limitations and the costs of military involvement. Our actions in Iraq lost us good will among the Arab nations when no weapons of mass destruction were found there, which we gave as our reason for entry to that country. Whether true or not, other nations now assume that any move we make in the area is because we want the oil and has nothing to do with compassion for the Syrians or anyone else.

Our support for dictators in the Middle East haunts us. We supported them because they kept a lid on Islamist regimes, at the same time becoming both corrupt and brutal to their own people. Now that dictators in Tunisia and Egypt have been overthrown, the new government leaders remember our support for the dictators who sometimes tortured them.

Decades ago, in 1973, oil producing nations began an oil embargo against the United States because of our support for Israel. Gas prices soared. U.S. President Richard Nixon led the nation in measures to reduce our oil consumption. We talked glibly of loosening our dependence on oil in the Middle East. Once the crisis passed, we chose to return to business as usual, willing to pay a higher price at the pump. Eventually we paid on 9/ll and in Afghanistan and in Iraq.

Our desire for the oil of the Middle East has driven much of our foreign policy in the region since the Second World War. We are reaping the results of those policies.

Syria’s Nightmare

 

Bashar al-Assad, the dictator of rebellion-challenged Syria, has threatened to use chemical weapons on his own people if outside nations come to the aid of the rebels that Assad’s forces kill without mercy. No one takes Assad’s threats lightly. His father, dictator before him, massacred thousands, including women and children, in the village of Homs, for their part in a 1982 rebellion.

Few people suggest that the U.S. become involved with ground forces, given Iraq and Afghanistan. Instead, the U.S. works with contacts developed by the U.S. embassy in Damascus before its closure due to the war.

Robert Ford, the U.S. ambassador to Syria, remained in Syria as long he could with members of his staff. Very unpopular with Assad’s government, they risked their safety to stay as long as possible in order to maintain and develop contacts within the Syrian opposition.

Most believe Assad will leave, though no one knows when. At present, the forces opposing Assad are suffering serious losses after they took the battle to Syria’s major cities. The longer it takes for Assad to leave, the stronger the desire for revenge when he does exit the scene. To discourage this outcome and provide support for a country that will respect all ethnic and religious groups, the U.S. works with the Syrian opposition, now based in neighboring Turkey. Past contacts by the embassy prove valuable.

Fear of ethnic killings haunts anyone engaged with the Syrian conflict. The minority Alawites, a branch of Islam considered heretical by most Muslims, have ruled Syria for decades through the Assads. Revenge reprisals against innocent members of this sect are possible, as are actions against the minority Christians within Syria. The Christians have generally supported Assad, despite his brutalities, because his government is secular and not interested in religious extremism. Rumors float of al-Qaeda terrorists sending in fighters to vie for an extremist state.

Let us hope and pray that the engagement of the international community, including America’s diplomats, will find success against the tide of anger and hatred bubbling in Syria’s multi-ethnic cauldron.

 

When Religion Is A Pawn

 

When the former Soviet Union was ruled by an atheistic communist regime, Christians in the West worried about the fate of Russian believers. The government shunned and sometimes persecuted them. After the fall of Soviet communism, Christians hoped the new Russian government would embrace religious freedom.

The situation has improved for Christians of the Orthodox persuasion. In fact, Russian President Vladimir Putin stands accused of using the Russian Orthodox church as a means of bolstering his less than democratic regime. Some Russians are concerned by the power the church appears to be gaining in Putin’s government. Reports suggest that the church’s influence may be one reason for Russia’s support of the bloody Assad regime in Syria.

Syria is Russia’s remaining ally in the Middle East and hosts a Russian naval base. The church, rightly, is concerned about the fate of their fellow Orthodox believers in Syria should the Assad regime fall and be replaced by a possibly Islamist government. However, to suggest that Assad should be allowed to slaughter innocent civilians so that Christians might—possibly—be better protected, seems contrary to Jesus’ teachings, to say the least.

Religious freedom must be at the forefront of any Christian agenda, for Christian believers as well as for adherents of other persuasions. We cannot equate religious freedom, however, with a tyranny that uses Christians to support a brutal regime. Christians must reject any power play which employs them as political pawns. Jesus lived his life in direct opposition to political gamesmanship, even to his willing death on a Roman cross.

He May Be a Brutal Dictator, But He’s Our Brutal Dictator

 

The Cold War between communist nations led by the Soviet Union and anti-communist nations led by the United States fades into memory, buried during the late twentieth century revolutions in eastern Europe. Yet similarities linger in the more recent revolutions, the ones where citizens are revolting against tyrannical leaders in the Middle East.

In those earlier times, the U.S. was accused of supporting dictatorial regimes in certain African and South American countries because the regimes touted themselves as anti-communist. Now the U.S. is accused of propping up former dictators like Ben Ali in Tunisia and Mubarak in Egypt. These men clamped down on the growth of Islamists in their countries, so we supported them even if they employed brutal methods. Egypt, especially, became a huge recipient of U.S. aid.

Have such policies backfired as newly-freed citizens elect their own governments, seemingly more attuned to the Islamists? Was it better when we supported corrupt leaders who became wealthy by showering their cronies with public largesse? Who didn’t quibble at torturing their own people?

We don’t know if the new Islamists will continue to support democratic elections once in power. We don’t know if they will allow religious freedom. Perhaps if we had been less supportive of the former dictators who tortured them, the new governments now would be more supportive of our policies. In that earlier confrontation with the Soviet Union, at least the eastern Europeans knew we were on their side and became our friends once they gained their freedom.

We should question both the wisdom and the morality of giving support to inhumane governments. (As we now accuse the Russians of doing with Syria.) It can lead to disastrous consequences later.

 

A Concern Beyond American Idol

 

In my novel Singing in Babylon, the female protagonist, Kate, moves to Saudi Arabia from her native Tennessee to teach. She travels for her first time outside the United States. On a drive with her friend, Philip, an American journalist on assignment to the Middle East, she notices a veiled and gloved woman pushing a child on a swing in a public park. The woman glances at the unveiled Kate, and Kate wonders how the woman feels about this Western female’s intrusion into her world.

Later, she and Philip explore a seaside camp for Western expatriates on the shores of the Red Sea. She compares the women in bikinis with the veiled woman she saw earlier. For the first time, Kate understands the struggles of an ancient civilization to come to terms with the strange culture thrust into their lives by oil money.

Fast food restaurants, unveiled women, and automobiles bring unprecedented freedom and rapid change to a nation in one or two generations. These changes arrived in a country accustomed to centuries-old merchant towns, Bedouins herding camels and goats, and ancient tribes familiar with the customs of generations.

Kate’s exposure to other cultures allows her further understanding of her own country, what is of  value and what is neglected, and what directions it should take. Her experiences mature her perception of the world.

Travel to other countries is not the only path to an informed view. We have easier access to news reporting about world events today than at any time in the past. If we confine ourselves to the latest celebrity stories, however, and ignore the in-depth news, the advantage of this wealth of information will do us no good.

The unrest in the Middle East, for example, has a direct bearing on our future. The current brutality in Syria, where unarmed women and children were murdered this past weekend, and the unrest caused by Egyptian elections will affect us. When desperate millions thirst for security, they will choose whoever promises it: dictators, Islamists, or al-Qaeda.

Our response to such challenges will be wiser if we understand the problems. Ignorance and uninformed politics can lead to disastrous decisions.

 

A Tablecloth, Syria, and the Arab Spring

While working in the Middle East, I purchased a tablecloth from Syria, famous for centuries for its lustrous damask fabric. After reading of current atrocities committed in that country, I pull it out and examine it. Cerulean and gold threads form geometric figures against the white background. What has happened to the weavers, I wonder.

Damascus, the capital of Syria, where damask was first produced, is one of the world’s oldest cities. The apostle Paul was on his way to Damascus when he experienced his dramatic conversion (Bible, book of Acts, ninth chapter). Christian tourists still visit the street called Straight, where Paul lodged afterward.

Under the dictatorship of the Assad family since 1970, the country lately has been affected by the Arab spring, the demands for change in other Arab countries. The Assad family’s responses to the uprisings in Syria are especially brutal. They include jailing merely for demonstrating and torture, even of children.

Different ethnic and religious groups inhabit Syria, making the outcome of the rebellion hard to predict. Christians have lived there since Paul’s time. Today they are estimated to make up about ten percent or less of the Syrian population. Despite the Assad family’s harsh rule, Christians have generally been protected from persecution. If the Assad family loses power, what will happen to them?

A hard decision for Christians to make: should they support an inhumane dictatorship in order to preserve their tenuous place in society? Or should they support change, hoping and working toward a more just society when that outcome is not guaranteed?

It is not the first time for Christians to choose between their own comfort and the risk of speaking out against injustice.