Syrians see conspiracies everywhere
Ibrahim Hamidi

The global and regional picture looks different from Damascus than it does from any other part of the world.
One cannot fail to be struck by the consensus that emerges when discussing current developments that affect Syria with people from different walks of life ­ be they entrepreneurs, members of the intelligentsia or ordinary citizens. The analysis one is offered is similar, and perhaps simplistic. And the same opinions are expressed with regard to the underlying reasons that are cited to explain any phenomenon, major or minor.
All are linked to one common theme: conspiracy.
Virtually everything that happens around us is either the work of Israel or the “Zionist movement,” or failing that, of the CIA acting on the Jewish state’s behalf and in the service of its interests.

This applies, most recently, to Israel’s invasion of the Palestinian autonomous enclaves starting on March 29. Everyone you ask in Syria is convinced that this was the product of an understanding between Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Palestinian President Yasser Arafat, who colluded in order to get rid of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), Islamic Jihad and the Fatah movement’s Tanzim ­ all of whom oppose a deal between the two men.
As proof, they will ask questions like: “How come Arafat was allowed to escape from Jordanian forces during Black September in 1970?” “Why did Sharon decline to kill Arafat when he could easily have done so during the 1982 siege of Beirut?” “For what reason did US intelligence pull out all the stops to save him when his plane crashed in the Libyan desert in 1992?” “How come he survived politically, despite siding with Saddam Hussein after Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990?”

The answer: “The Americans and Israelis kept him in power, because he is the only person capable of giving them what they want.”
In other words, he is their agent!
If you point out that Arafat stood fast at Camp David in July 2000 and refused to sell out to them either over Jerusalem or the refugees, your interlocutor will reply: “He couldn’t do otherwise at the time, but now he has allowed the Israelis to come in and get rid of those who would have opposed him.” Why else, they add by way of example, would CIA Director George Tenet have gone to Palestine and Israel and spent two weeks there, if not to map out the conspiracy?

As for the siege to which the Israeli Army has been subjecting Arafat at his headquarters in Ramallah, the explanation is that it is calculated to bolster his public image so as to make it easier for him to make major concessions. Should the Palestinian leader be killed or forcibly removed from power, Syrians will conclude that this is because he has expended his role as the Israelis’ collaborator, “and they need a new agent.”
This perception led to the issuing of a directive during the latest siege instructing that no sympathy should be shown for Arafat. That also reflected the persuasion of Syrian officials that the collapse of the 1993 Oslo Accords vindicates their view that they were never viable. They cite late President Hafez Assad’s verdict that “every clause of the Oslo agreement requires another agreement” to make sense of it.
Views on Saddam differ.

Until a few years ago, the view was that he too was an “American stooge.” That was supported by evidence and information linking him to US and British intelligence before he assumed power in the late 1970s and proceeded to renege on the “Pan-Arab Charter” concluded by presidents Assad and Ahmad Hassan al-Bakr in 1979. It was because Saddam was a “foreign agent” that he invaded Kuwait in 1990, and prior to that waged war against Iran between 1980 and 1988, all with the aim of sapping the Arabs’ energies and resources and preventing them from directing them against Israel.
Nowadays, a different view is taken. Following the start of the normalization process between Baghdad and Damascus in 1997, he is perceived merely as a fool, a political simpleton or at worst a megalomaniac.

As regards Jordan, although bilateral relations have developed since King Abdullah II assumed the throne three years ago, the verdict on his father, the late King Hussein, remains the same. He was a “licensed agent,” not only because he was paid a monthly stipend by the CIA, but also because he made many clandestine visits to Israel in order to betray the Arabs’ secret plans to the Israelis ­ including to Golda Meir on the eve of the October 1973 war.
And how do Syrians interpret the events of Sept. 11?
The analysis is simple and straightforward: It was a conspiracy. But opinions differ as to precisely who was behind it.
Some believe it was the Zionists, the “evidence” being that 5,000 Jews didn’t show up for work at the World Trade Center that day, and US investigators apprehended a number of Israelis who were “implicated” in the attacks, but they hushed up the matter in deference to Israel and the Jewish pressure groups in Washington.

Others think forces within the US establishment, especially in the Pentagon and the military-industrial lobby, were behind the attacks. The intention was to give these groups control of policymaking and enhance the military’s influence. In other words, it was a coup, but American-style.
Alternatively, the oil industry lobby arranged it to secure control over the rich resources of Central Asia and the Caspian Basin.
At best, intellectuals or analysts may start by explaining that they don’t believe in conspiracy theories, before proceeding to explain how in this case it definitely was conspiracy, and then detailing the supporting evidence with reference to how things function in America. This, without having ever visited America, read a word in English, or even watched an America movie.

It isn’t easy to ascertain how and why the conspiracy theory has established such a strong and entrenched hold in the Arab world ­ particularly in Syria. Some credit Zaki al-Arsouzi, co-founder of the Baath Party that is currently in power in both Baghdad and Damascus, with having institutionalized this way of thinking.
In retrospect, the outcomes of various crises often vindicate the conspiracy theorists, as they provide the US with opportunities that it seizes on to promote its interests and enhance its influence and control.
But there can be no doubt that the paucity (if not total lack) of information, life on the margins of political decision-making and inefficacy in international affairs, are all factors that greatly contribute to the prevalence of the “theory.” For they serve to encourage mental lethargy, superficial analysis, the striking of postures, the sense that we are being victimized by developments beyond our control, and the perception that we are the center of the universe ­ and everyone is plotting against us.

Ibrahim Hamidi is a Damascus-based journalist specialized in Syrian affairs. He wrote this commentary for The Daily Star

Copyright © The Daily Star