Tuesday, February 28, 2006

The Economy - Jihad Yazigi Weighs in

Jihad Yazigi weighs in on the economy debate. Jihad is the editor of "The Syria Report," the best Syrian economic digest. He gives some historical perspective to the debate. He writes:

Hi Josh,

Syria Comment has recently posted a few contradictory essays on the economic situation in Syria. I will try to give my own appraisal of the situation.

In the last few months there has been a strange feeling that things are improving in the economic front among many policy analysts in Syria. There are several reasons for that.
One of these is that the Syrian economy grew by 4.5 percent last year. This is its highest rate over the last decade. At the same time the number of investments that were announced in the last 3 months alone is higher than the country’s annual Gross Domestic Product, which is around US$ 22 billion ! In the real estate sector alone you had three large projects from Gulf investment houses worth a combined US$ 21 billion. UAE’s Emaar is committing US$ 2 billion, the Kuwaiti Aref US 4$ billion and another Emirati group, Bunyan, close to US$ 15 billion for an investment in Mount Hermon. Then you had 2 large cement projects, 2 other sugar refineries, hotel resorts, etc. Syria never witnessed anything close to that maybe in its entire contemporary history. What is obviously striking is the fact that all this is taking place while the country is under very strong international pressure and the Syrian pound lost almost 10 percent of its value late last year, before recovering since.

What you have to do to understand this is to look at what is behind these data. Let’s start with GDP growth.

True, GDP grew by 4.5 percent last year. But, according to the official Central Bureau of Statistics itself, the two factors behind GDP growth in 2005 are (1) the rise in the price of crude oil (crude oil represents 70% of exports and 40% of budget income in Syria) and the excellent rainy season which helped agricultural production grow (agriculture makes up around 25% of GDP). So last year’s growth had not much to do with any significant capital inflow in the country but rather with two factors on which Syrian policy makers have no leverage. All other things remaining equal, GDP will be stagnant this year should the price of oil return more or less to normal and the rainy season be less wet.

As to private investment one has to be very careful. None of the very large real estate investments announced lately is anywhere close to materializing. Either the developers have only purchased the land on which they plan to build their estates or in some cases these announcements were only….announcements! and nothing else. Actually, there has been almost no single major construction site anywhere in or around Damascus in the last 3 or 4 years, except for the Four Seasons hotel. These investments won’t probably see the light of day before the overall political situation of the country stabilizes.

Then you have other projects that are taking place, in particular in the industrial sector. In terms of overall volume these investments are not insignificant and are a partial reflection of the country’s huge potential but also of the regulatory environment that has slightly improved in the last 2 to 3 years. Abdallah Dardari, Vice PM for Economic Affairs, and the strong man in the government, as well as Mohammad Hussein, Minister of Finance, have to take credit for that.

That’s for the good data regularly released by the government. Now if you dig in more and look at the business community and the people at large, I just have to refer to the post of your Aleppine friend, K, who best expresses what is taking place on the ground. The latest rise in the price of fuel (25%) and cement (50%) has raised the heat. The next move that everyone expects the government to take is to raise the price of diesel. Diesel is heavily subsidized and is costing the Government hundreds of millions of dollars every year. But should its price go up, every other item in the country will see its price go up, because of the increased cost of transport, the increased energy costs for industrialists, etc. The purchasing power of people will fall once more as it has been falling for the last two decades.

I would like to insist on that last aspect. While most analysts in Syria mention the rise of Islamism as the most significant change in Syrian society, in my view it is the rise in poverty that I have found most striking. I have been visiting Syria very regularly in the last 15 years and I have seen how at a very rapid pace purchasing power has been falling. The weakening and public avoidance of state institutions (schools, hospitals, etc.) is most worrying because it is a major reason behind the gradual reduction in the role of the state as a major integration tool for society. While, for instance, all my Syrian friends who are my age have studied in public schools none of their children is schooled there, but rather in private schools. Obviously not everyone can afford private schooling. State schools have classes of 50 children on average, the salaries of the teachers are so low that their motivation is also very low. (As they used to say in the USSR, “They pretend to pay us, and we pretend to work..”) Roads and public gardens are dirty, pavements are full of holes, etc. One should actually go to the suburbs of Damascus to see the conditions in which the struggling remains of the Syrian "middle class" live. Unemployment has been growing without interruption in the last 25 years in Syria, except for a 3-year respite in the early nineties.

What is upsetting and frustrating in this situation is that there is no excuse for it. Syria is neither heavily indebted nor is it scarce in resources. Ironically, the overall deterioration in the social conditions of average Syrians started in the early to mid-eighties at a time when the country started to pump high levels of crude oil (1987), when investment and production in the agricultural sector was on the rise (early nineties) and when the liberalization of the economy also started (1986).

Maybe the picture of the Syrian economy I am giving is bleaker that what I intended it to be. One, indeed, should not forget that this is a country of huge potential. Syria has the opportunity to become the most diversified economy in the region with a strong agricultural output, a very cost-competitive industrial sector, an amazing tourism industry, and an ideal geographic location. Unfortunately it has remained an unfulfilled potential and it will probably remain so as long as you don’t get to the core of the problem: the fight against corruption, the introduction of transparency and accountability, and the protection of a real independent judiciary that can provide guarantees for investors - in short, before the rule of law is enforced.

Jihad Yazigi
The Syria Report
editor@syria-report.com

Monday, February 27, 2006

"The Economy is Worse Today" by an Aleppine Businessman

I recently wrote a dear friend - a businessman in Aleppo - to find out how the economy is fairing in Syria. I had recently written a short post about government efforts to liberalize economic regulations, relying heavily on government news announcements. It was an optimistic appraisal. A number of friends wrote to warn me not to be optimistic. "Government plans do not translate into action," they reminded me. "The economy is in the dumps." So I wrote my Aleppine friend to get a bird's eye view. Here is his response. (I hope others doing business in Syria will give their appraisals of the situation.)I have one reservation about some of these observations (see end of post).

K., writing from Aleppo
February 27, 2006
for "Syria Comment"

The economy is worst than it was a few months ago. Prices have gone up due to the falling price of the Syrian pound and do not come down when the price of the dollar moderates. The increase in fuel and cement costs have hit people hard and increased the sense of pessimism among the residents of Aleppo. The paltry rise in government employee salaries came as a real blow. Everyone expected more. Private sector employees cannot ask for an equivalent 5% rise in their salaries due to the high unemployment rate, which always seems to be increasing.

The government is never short of plans and declarations about the improving economy. But they never seem to materialize. People are, as always, distrustful of the government. To give you one example, the chamber of industry finally managed, after years of lobbying, to cancel import permits for good necessary to local industries. As soon as this law was implemented, however, goods arriving at the ports were denied entry on the pretext that they were banned from import (at least the import permit listed the conditions for such imports). Bribes became more substantial because goods sat at port with increasing demurrage charges and holding costs. In recognition of the increased damage to industrialists and businessmen, the same chamber of Industry recently succeeded in re-installing the old system of import permits, which it had so assiduously struggled to abolish. Ultimately, well-intentioned reform only succeeded in opening up new and unexpected avenues for bribery and graft. The wolves are many and shepherds few and unarmed.

In short, the intricate details are never dealt with on the ministerial level. Technocrats are frequently brought from the outside to reform a system of governance that, ultimately, can only be repaired by determined leadership from the inside and by fixing the judicial system, which is broken. The results so far are very discouraging. The general attitude is that the government is so confused and does not know what it is doing.

Another example is the story of a UNDP program praised by the UN as the most successful program in the world (and being implemented as a model in other countries) to develop rural areas in Jabal el-Hoss south of Aleppo. The director, who was appointed by both the government and the UN, was an honest man who constructed the program from scratch. He organized the community and gave its leaders responsibility to issue micro loans to small farmers. It became a real success because the director of the program was a very honest man. (I know the director because he has been a consultant at my farms for 10 years.) Recently, he was fired because he would not give out concessions to people higher up at the Minister's level. Outraged by his temerity and refusal to honor them, they accused him of corruption and impugned his professional integrity even though an independent auditing commission from the UN had reviewed his program only 2 months prior to his being fired. The Saudis are now courting him to implement a similar program for them. The UNDP was furious; it threatened to pull out of Syria because the minister acted on his own initiative in firing the project director without consulting the UNDP representative, as he was required to do. Despite this lamentable travesty of justice, the Minister of Agriculture was renamed to the new government. Things are not changing.

Food Items are 20% higher than last year. Real Estate prices are taking a hike due to the 150% rise in cement prices. Imported raw materials are much higher due to global inflation and rising fuel costs. Salaries are stagnant. Unemployment is growing. As for this "5 year plan," how can we be optimistic. We have never heard how much of the previous 5 year plan was implemented, and presume the worst. Once more, a plan from the top does not deal with the obstacles at the bottom. You ask anyone about the 5-year plan and his first reaction will be a smile bitterly.

As for corruption, I have not heard or seen any effective steps taken from the government to fight corruption. Business goes on as usual. Work on the road junctions from Aleppo airport to town has halted. The money allocated for the project and contractors ran out, and the project is incomplete. The budget allocated did not cover much. No one seems interested or courageous enough to demand an accounting of how the money was spent.

Aleppo was recently chosen as the Capital of Islamic Culture. A committee was appointed by the government in early 2005 to organize and oversee the cultural events. The committee consisted of two priests, two communists and a bunch of artists from the actors union. No one from the religious community was even informed that the committee was being formed. For the whole year, this committee did nothing. They did not even advertise their existence to the public. At the end of 2005, the news broke and banners were raised throughout the city, declaring its new status as the capital of Islamic culture. At this time, a few Muslim scholars started to organize and joined the committee. They are now rushing to organizing some events. According to SyriaNews, the budget allocated by the government is a mere 35 Million SP or 650,000 USD. The governor of the city decides where to spend this insignificant amount and he is spending most of it to repave the streets and clean the building. The scholars are trying to raise additional funds. It is a mess. Last year’s work is being hastily done now. This cultural event has turned into a mockery of the people, but only a very few can find humor in it.

People continue to ask why Abdul Halim Khaddam was left to steal and steal and now is being condemned while many others like him today continue to steal without being stopped by anyone. Why is Miro not investigated for corruption when his dealings are common knowledge among the masses?

The Minister of Finance is very active at reforming the tax system so taxes are on the rise. What is certain is that last year we paid less tax than this year. This is further complicating the stagnant economic conditions of the country.

The Government has now been busy for three years, organizing committees to assess and repay landowners who had their lands confiscated in the land reform acts of 1958, 1963, 1965, 1971 ..etc. The act stipulates that full payment should actualize within 40 years (can you believe the injustice). Even though it has been now 48 years and still no payments have been made. It does not look like these committees are doing anything. Courts are refusing to hear cases in this regard pending the results of these committees. We don't even know if they are going to appraise the lands at 1958 prices when 1 USD equaled 3 SP or if prices will be assessed according to the worth of the land today.

Most important is the Justice system. It is as corrupt as ever, and verdicts are handed to the highest bidder. The system is very slow. If you have all the necessary proof that someone owes you money, the case will take no less than 3 to 4 years before you get your money returned, and only then so long as you are prepared to devote up to 50% of the total for buying your rights.

You asked me for some observations about the economy, so here they are – just a few of in a never-ending list. Use what you see is fit on “Syria Comment” without using my name since it is not yet the time to air dirty laundry. Let me know if you need more details. I don't want to use the government server, so please use this new email address in talking about "sensitive issues."

Very best, K
Addendum: My sister-in-law, who worked for the UN's World Food Program until recently, is visiting. She read K.'s remarks about the UNDP project at Jabal al-Hoss and doubted that his account captures the full story. She said that there have been a number of UNDP and WFP programs in Jabal al-Hoss over the years and "there has always been a question mark over them. The region is very poor. A great deal of money has been spent on Jabal al-Hoss over the past decade, but the results are ambiguous," she insisted. "There have been very poor follow up studies so we really don't know how effective the projects have been." She doesn't know about the particular program described by K. however.

She also doubted K's assessment of the Agriculture Minister. She said he had a good reputation and suggested there may have been other complications K. may be unaware of. On the whole, she said, the top officials at the wazara al-ziraa have been responsive to UN demands, cooperative, and genuinely interested in local development. She said that usually issues of corruption involve government project managers who are directors of a nahiyya or Qada, not the top administrators in the ministry.

News Round UP (February 27, 2006)

Al-seyassah just reported that Qatar is leading an effort by the Gulf countries to enlist Syria's support for sending an Arab army into Iraq to restore law and order. For that, Syria would get paid close to $ 1.5 billion a year which will exceed the help Iran is offering it, hence giving Syria the incentive to support the effort.

Ehsani2 sent me the above news. But Muqtada al-Sadr said only a week ago, during his visit to Lebanon that he would consider any Muslim troops sent to Iraq as occupiers and would fight against them. He asked Muslims not to send troops and force such a dilemma on Iraqis. It is too late for Syria to consider such an option, even if the US were willing to consider it, which is hard to imagine.

The extent of US and regional anxiety about the state of Iraq is made clear in this article by Megan Stack and Borzou Daragahi of the LA Times, "Analysts See Lebanon-ization of Iraq in Crystal Ball."


Gunmen hold sway over streets lined with concrete bomb-blast barriers and razor wire. Entire neighborhoods are too dangerous for police to enter. ...

The surge of sectarian fighting after a Shiite Muslim shrine was bombed last week has dealt a hard blow to hopes for creating a functioning Iraqi state.

Instead of laboring to create a well-run economy or a democracy, Iraqi and American resources are being diverted to stave off a civil war between Shiites and Sunnis, who are suspected in the bombing. And the formation of a new government appears likely to devolve into a series of capitulations to the various constituencies that have the power to plunge the nation, and the region, into chaos, officials and experts say.

"We are dedicating all our time to ward off what might be dire consequences," said Hussein Ali Kamal, the Interior minister's intelligence chief. "If the crimes and attacks increase, I do not think anyone in this country will survive."

The outlines of a future Iraq are emerging: a nation where power is scattered among clerics turned warlords; control over schools, hospitals, railroads and roads is divided along sectarian lines; graft and corruption subvert good governance; and foreign powers exert influence only over a weak central government.

The bleak prospects have serious implications for the U.S. Washington wants to tone down its overt political influence in Baghdad and decrease the number of U.S. troops precisely at a time when the fledgling Iraqi government has shown itself incapable of maintaining political or military control.

"This is something that's been leaning in this direction for some time, and the mosque incident has accelerated the process," said Edward S. Walker, a former assistant secretary of State for Near East affairs. "What we're talking about is people looking out for their own. I don't think it can be turned around."

Doomsayers long have warned that Iraq was turning into a failed state like Somalia or Taliban-run Afghanistan, a regional black hole. It's far too early to write Iraq off as a quagmire, analysts say, but the threat of contagious and continuous instability — like in Lebanon — looms. >>
Ziad Haydar explains that the Syrian government is planning to compensate landowners that lost their property in the 1958 agricultural reforms and has established a committee to oversee it. Ayman Abdulnour's "Kulina Shuraka" published the proposed bill. It is high time. The land confiscations soured relations between Syria and many Syrians now living abroad. It will help to end many old animosities.

Riad al-Saif, the recently released Damascus Spring leader, has reiterated his support for the Damascus Declaration leadership, who condemn external interference in Syrian affairs. He says that the West should confine itself to supporting human rights in Syria, which he does not see as interference. He expressed his concern about the situation in Iraq, which he indicated should be a warning to the Syrian opposition not to invite too much foreign intervention in Syrian affairs. He said that Bashar al-Asad could participate in peaceful democratic change.
* رياض سيف يميز بين "دعم المجتمع الدولي" والتدخل في الشؤون الداخلية .. ويرى أن بشار الأسد قادر على المساهمة في التغيير السلمي

The Kurdish Front for Promoting Democracy & Freedom in Syria is holding a conference on Democracy and Freedom for All Syrian and Kurdish Human & National Rights in Washington D. C. on March 13, 2006 in the Russell Senate Office Building. Representatives of Farid Ghadry's Reform Party will attend, I am told, as well as others.
The purpose of the conference is to explore the opportunities to unite the Syrian Opposition Front to establish through peaceful means a true democratic system in Syria where the human and the national rights of all components and minorities in Syria including the Kurdish nation are recognized. The conference highlights the suffering of the Syrian citizens in general and the horrendous suffering of the Kurdish people in Syria in particular.
Amaar Abdulhamid explains that "The Temporary Committee for the Damascus Declaration has announced plans to form a Permanent Committee that will include opposition figures from inside and outside the country. The new Committee will be made up of 23 members, eight of them will be chosen from the Syrian opposition abroad."

Omayma Abdel-Latif of al-Ahram, interviews a number of Syrians in his article, "What now for Syria? (Al-Ahram) She examines prospects for political reform in the wake of 12 unprecedented months.

Ibrahim Daraji, a law professor at the University of Damascus, nonetheless firmly believes that the process of democratic opening in Syria will have to come from the top, namely the president. "There should be a commitment from all parties to expand the existing space for democratic evolution." The problem, he added, is that "there is a deep crisis of confidence between the regime and the opposition." In this context, strained relations with Lebanon can only bear negatively on the process of politically opening in the country, Daraji believes. "If the regime's survival is at stake, the issue of political reform will definitely not be one of its top priorities," he said.

France refuses to extradite Syrian over Hariri murder

Mufti of the Syrian Republic Condemned the attack that targeted a shrine in Iraq saying destruction of holy sites and dirtying them is aimed at religious and ethical values.

Alawite authorities in Turkey, Syria and Lebanon have also condemned the criminal attack on the shrine of Imams Hadi and Askari in Samarra. The Alawites trace their origins to the eleventh Shia Imam, Hasan al Askari (d.873), who is buried in the destroyed mosque, and his pupil Ibn Nusayr (d.868). Ibn Nusayr proclaimed himself the Bāb "Door" (representative) of the 11th Imam. The sect seems to have been organised by a follower of Ibn Nusayr's known as al-Khasibi who died in Aleppo in about 969. Al-Khasibi's grandson al-Tabarani moved to Latakia on the Syrian coast. There he refined the Nusayrī religion and, with his pupils, converted much of the local population.

"A Bomb-Builder, 'Out of the Shadows',"By Karl Vick, Washington Post (February 20, 2006)
Syrian Linked to Al Qaeda Plots Describes Plan to Attack Cruise Ship in Turkey.

Saturday, February 25, 2006

"Khaled Taha, Ahmed Abu Adas, al-Qa'ida - a summary" by t_desco

The Lebanese daily as-Safir reported on January 13 that Lebanese authorities arrested 11 members of a terrorist cell, among them Khaled Midhat Taha. Later reports said that 13 suspects were arrested, but that Taha and another member of the group, Bilal Zaaroura, managed to escape.

Quoting "informed sources", Addiyar, an-Nahar, the Daily Star, L'Orient-Le Jour, al-Hayat, al-Rai al-Aam and the Lebanese TV channel LBC all confirmed that Khaled Taha was linked to the group. A source quoted by as-Safir even called him the "head of the Lebanese al-Qaeda cell", but to my knowledge no official statement has been made regarding Taha, and Ahmad Fatfat, the acting Interior Minister, avoided mentioning his name in the press conference on the arrests.

According to the first Mehlis report, Khaled Midhat Taha was a "religious associate" of Ahmed Tayseer Abu Adas, who claimed responsibility for the assassination of Hariri in a video broadcast by al-Jazeera. They were both students at the Arab University and "used to meet in the University’s mosque". Later they seem to have kept in contact by e-mail. The report further suggests that Taha may have had a hand in the disappearance of Abu Adas. Taha made a short trip to Lebanon on the same day that Adas left his home accompanied by a man who identified himself as "Mohammed".

Strangely, the Mehlis report contains no information on Khaled Taha's background. The Daily Star reported on January 21 that one of Taha's relatives is among the 13 arrested suspects: Amer Abdullah Hallaq, the son of Sheikh Abdullah Hallaq, a member of the Association of Muslim Scholars in Beirut.

An article by A. Nizar Hamzeh (MERIA, Issue #3/September 1997) mentions Sheikh Abdullah Hallaq as the founder of al-Haraka al-Islamiya al-Mujahid, a movement that aimed "to recruit Sunni and Palestinian fighters in the Sidon area".

A Country Information Bulletin issued by the UNHCR in January 2004 confirms the presence of the Islamic Mujahed Movement in the Palestinian refugee camp Ain al-Hilweh on the outskirts of Sidon. It's current leader seems to be Sheikh Jamal Khattab, the imam of al-Nour mosque (Ain al-Hilweh: Lebanon's "Zone of Unlaw", MEIB, June 2003).

According to Bernard Rougier (author of "Le Jihad au quotidien", a study on the rise of Islamism in Ain al-Hilweh) Khattab is ideologically close to bin Laden:

Le cheikh Jamal Khattab (imam de l'importante mosquée al-Nour à Aïn el-Héloué) par exemple, considère que la lutte est mondiale, qu'il faut couper la tête du serpent et frapper les Etats-Unis; l'ennemi n'est plus seulement israélien. Finalement, ne s'agit-il pas de la même dialectique que Ben Laden ? Il existe probablement des liens organisationnels entre eux, mais ils ne peuvent être à ce jour prouvés.
Réfugiés palestiniens du Liban: Nouvelles dynamiques religieuses

The Ain Hilweh camp, and in particular the al-Nour mosque, is home to several Sunni extremist groups:

Usbat al-Ansar, which is believed to have received funding from bin Laden and al-Zarqawi and was among the first eleven international terror groups listed in President Bush's executive order of September 23, 2001; its even more radical splinter groups Usbat al-Nour and Jund al-Sham, which has claimed at least four bombings following the assassination of Hariri (three explosions in Christian neighborhoods and an attack on Iqlim al-Kharub); and the Dinniyeh group, formerly known as Takfir wa al-Hijra, founded by Bassam Ahmad Kanj, who had fought alongside bin Laden in Afghanistan and was killed in an uprising against the Lebanese army in the mountains of Dinniyeh in January 2000. Some of the rebels escaped to Ain Al-Hilweh and found shelter in al-Nour mosque, among them Ahmed Salim Mikati, who was detained in September 2004 when a car bomb attack on the Italian embassy in Beirut was foiled. Together with another al-Qa'ida operative, Ismail Mohammed al-Khatib, Mikati had also planned to attack the Ukrainian Consulate General and Lebanese Government offices in central Beirut.

According to the first Mehlis report, Abu Adas, the suspected suicide bomber, "had been employed at a computer shop in the summer of 2004, which was owned in part by Sheikh Ahmed Al-Sani, who was a member of the Ahmed Mikati and Ismaíl Al-Khatib network". The report also quotes al-Ahbash sources saying that Adas had visited Abu Obeida (who, in an apparent contradiction, is described as "deputy to the leader of Jund al Sham" and as "deputy leader of the terrorist group Asbat al Ansar") in Ain al-Hilweh.

Some reports suggest that Khaled Taha is currently hiding in Ain al-Hilweh.

Other members of the suspected terrorist cell also have links to the Jihadi groups: Hassan Muhammad Nab'a took part in the Dinniyeh uprising. His brothers Khader and Malek Nab'a were also arrested. According to Murad Al-Shishani, Khader Nab'a "is associated with the appearance of the Salafi-Jihadist movement in Lebanon, when the leader of the al-Ahbash religious sect, Nizar Halabi, was assassinated in 1995." Halabi was killed by Usbat al-Ansar.
Other members of the terrorist cell have reportedly claimed to belong to "Jund al-Sham".

Bernard Rougier reported in 2004 that four out of six mosques in Ain al-Hilweh were controlled by Salafi-Jihadist groups, which received support from "hommes d’affaires du Golfe". The other two mosques were controlled by Hamas and the Ahbash movement, both supported by Syria (al-Ahbash was also a tool of Syrian intelligence, as the Mehlis report clearly shows).

Wednesday, February 22, 2006

Is the Syrian Economy Looking Up?

It is sometimes fun to look back at old reports on Syria to see if they get it right. This Sept. 2005 report by INEGMA (the Institute for Near East and Gulf Military Analysis) "Syria's Dilemma: Has Countdown for Regime Change Started?" was written only six months ago. It demonstrates the excitement in Washington about imminent changes in Syria in the wake of its withdrawal from Lebanon. Washington analysts were off the mark. The author of this report writes: "Developments in Lebanon this year have had a tremendous effect on the Syrian regime... The Syrian regime [is] under unbearable pressure that would force it to radically change from within or, alternatively, be forcefully changed by either outside or domestic forces.... One thing is for sure, Bashar will have to make a move soon."

This heavy breathing about the unbearable pressure placed on Syria by the US has proven just that, heavy breathing. So far, Bashar is in no perceptible trouble, nor has he changed his system of government. He has made no important concessions to the US, and his regime is certainly not about to collapse, as President Chirac enthused last year.

The one US-friendly move Syria has taken is to largely shut down the Iraqi border. This has been aided by the rapid buildup of US and Iraqi troops on the Iraqi side, who are finally developing effective surveillance capacities. But on Lebanon, Asad has been less than helpful. On booting out the Palestinian groups, he has also been stubborn. In fact, his unwillingness to dispose of Hamas under US and Israeli pressure, in the belief that loyalty to the group would pay dividends, turned out to be more far sighted than US calculations about Hamas.

The major Western trump card has always been the economy. Western analysts invariably devote a healthy section of their Syria reports to the impending economic crisis which looms some 5-7 years off in the future when oil runs out.

For Secretary Rice, taking Asad down, or, at least, forcing meaningful concessions from him, will be done through economic sanctions and isolation. She hardly talks about the Hariri investigation and threat of an international court any more. Perhaps that will resurface in her talks on Syria, but for the time being, it is moribund as the new investigation committee tries to find its feet. As of yet, nothing has been done to define or establish the international court that everyone speaks of. Its threat remains completely hypothetical. More immediate are economic sanctions. This week, the EU finally acceded to Washington's demands that it step up to the plate and impose sanctions. It agreed to impose personal sanctions on any official named by the Hariri investigators to be directly responsible for his murder. Not exactly a biggie, but if it is the beginning of a trend toward European sanctions, as Rice insists it should be, it could become a biggie.

On the economic front, Syria seems to be doing well. This is where President Bashar is reacting to US pressure. His moves to protect Syria from further US interference by switching to the Euro have been dwarfed by new measures to liberalize trade and stimulate investment, particularly in property and real-estate. Syria's land prices are seriously undervalued because of silly socialist laws and restrictions. Recent simplifications of land transfers, the announcement of several new mega-hotel and tourist projects, and the ratification of the ICSID Convention which will reassure investors, may cause a real-estate boom that could seriously increase the net worth of Syria's property owners and its overall national wealth. If Bashar continues along these lines, he will buy his regime considerable time and wiggle-room on the economic front.

Economy minister Amer Lotfi says "laws are being finalised to overhaul the commercial code, ease the establishment of new business and outlaw monopolies." He insists that Syria is in a "transition stage" to a freer economy and "will be able to avoid economic shocks." Trade with Iraq is expected to almost double this year from its 2005 figure of $800 million. Syria already functions as the main gateway for merchandise going to Iraq. Trade with Turkey is also expected to take a big jump. So is trade with China and other Eastern countries which are eager to replace the Europeans if and when they withdraw. If Syria expects to raise its growth rate from 4.5% to the 7% that Deputy Prime Minister Dardari promises in his new 5-year plan for the economy, Bashar will have to keep economic reforms coming at a rapid pace. This growth figure, which seemed laughably high last year, no longer looks beyond the realm of possibility.
By Joshua Landis, "Syria Comment" February 23, 2006

News Stories translated from the Arab Press
Accounts from the arrest of Syrians after the Tabaris protest
(mideast.wire)

In the February 21 edition of An Nahar, an independent Lebanese newspaper, Mohamed Abi Samra told the story of Jamil Abdo Youssef. Abi Samra wrote: “This account conveys scenes from the lives of Syrian workers in Beirut who were apprehended after the Tabaris protest, or ‘crusade,’ that occurred on the February 5. It is not enough to simply lay blame on ‘planted people’ so as to prove other Lebanese sides innocent -- though they took part in planning the act and influencing people. This account reveals that the Lebanese security apparatuses are corrupt and unqualified and shows how primitive its investigations are. It also shows the illegal and inhumane methods used during apprehensions, and while interrogating witnesses and possible culprits. It also proves how unknowledgeable and uneducated the security apparatuses are, which influences primitive racism in the way investigations are carried out and security information is collected. (Continued...)
Damascus: After the poultry demonstration, the judges’ demonstration (mideast.wire.com)

In its February 19 edition, Elaph, a web based pan-Arab newspaper, reported that: “In a second initiative this week, a new remarkable popular demonstration went out to the streets of the Syrian capital, to stand up against the regime in protest for all the mistakes that were allegedly committed against certain factions of the people, namely the judges. After the unprecedented demonstration of those who work in the poultry sector in Syria, in front of the Ministers’ Council, a significant number of judges who were discharged, came from all the Syrian constituencies and gathered today in front of the Syrian President’s office, Bashar Al Assad, to protest against what they referred to as an unconstitutional decision that put them all out in the street.

“Over 40 judges demanded to meet Al Assad to explain the dimensions of the discharge decision and let him know about all the suffering they endured following what they considered to be a liquidation by people in power. President Al Assad had issued a decree dated 4-10-2005, that stated the discharge of 81 judges... the decree gave the Cabinet the necessary prerogatives for 24 hours and ‘for reasons left to its own discretion’ […]. During the last few years, the Syrian judicial system had witnessed many cases of corruption, bribery, and many legal and human violations.

“Observers in Damascus told Elaph that they were following with much interest, the considerable shift in the Syrian street, that had, for over a quarter of a century, kept from raising its voice and demanding its rights, since security ghosts were always on the lookout and were present within each and every Syrian family. Nonetheless, the new openness that was brought on by the international and Arab changes, in addition to the emergence of civil society and human rights organizations in Syria, have all led to breaking the silence.

“Many judges spoke with reporters and voiced the suffering they endured since they were discharged. They considered that the presidential decree had given the executive authority a lethal power, which reveals the beginning of the downfall of the Syrian regime. Some judges even accused the Syrian Prime Minister Naji Atri of being behind the President’s decision. They said that he had personal reasons and purposes, and that he wanted to help certain people who work in Aleppo, ‘Al Atri’s hometown’, in coordination with drug dealers […].

“An official at the presidency promised the judges that President Al Assad would meet the demonstrators on Monday to hear their complaints and learn about their suffering, since many of these judges are now working for wealthy people to support their families, which is [humiliating] for persons in their position.” - Elaph, United Kingdom
International confirmation of weapons crossing between Syria, Lebanon (mideastwire.com)

Raghida Dragham reported in Al Hayat, a pan-Arab newspaper, on February 22 that: “Stephen Dujarik, spokesman of UN secretary of State, confirmed that there are weapons transfers from Syria to Lebanon, in the interests of the Lebanese militias. He said ‘this is a violation of resolution 1559 that calls for the disarmament of the militia’s weapons.’

“Dujarik revealed to Al Hayat that following negotiations that were held with Terje Roed-Larsen, special Envoy for the implementation of Security Council resolution 1559, and other Lebanese officials, it was clear that ‘the transfer of weapons happened across the Lebanese borders for the interest of the armed militias, and that is a violation of the 1559 resolution that calls for disarmament ... .’ He added ‘Lebanese officials confirmed to the United Nations that they will take the necessary measures to stop the flow’ of weapons to the militias' … .” - Al Hayat, United Kingdom
London seeking to open dialogue with Egyptian MB
In its February 22 edition, Asharq Al Awsat, an independent pan-Arab newspaper reported that: It received a copy of the leaked document in which the ‘Arab, North Africa and Israel group’ at the British Ministry of Exterior urges the government to ‘increase its contacts on a practical level, with parliamentarians from the Muslim Brotherhood (those against violence), namely the members in parliamentary commissions’. The document, dated last January 17, stressed on the necessity of ‘changing the content of the dialogue to focus more on information regarding our policy and on our willingness to listen’ to MB members of parliament.

“Even though the British Ministry of Exterior refused to comment on the leaked information, the Ministry’s spokesperson told Asharq Al Awsat that the cooperation with independent MPs is part of the British policy and added that: 'Britain has always enjoyed ongoing relations with members of the Egyptian parliament. They have been elected by the Egyptian people and there is no reason why we should not deal with them.’” - Asharq Al Awsat, United Kingdom

"Protecting Civil Society in Syria" by Joe Pace

A Better Way to Protect Civil Society in Syria
By Joe Pace
February 22 2006

While the international media busies itself (if at all) with the politicking and statements of prominent septuagenarians within the Syrian opposition, the future of Syrian civil society is being blotted out. The Syrian Committee for Human rights revealed yesterday that the secret police arrested two college students (Ali Nadir Ali and Husam Mulhem) on 24 December 2005 and another (Tariq Ghurani) last Sunday. Others are being summoned to security branches for daily interrogations and the security agencies have reportedly launched a manhunt to arrest their colleagues.

Their crime, a human rights activist within Syria informed me today, was trying to establish a political movement. Named "the son," it was apparently intended to be a liberal, secular trend.

One of the biggest problems afflicting the Syrian opposition is its inability to attract the youth. With the bulk of activists, party leaders, and association heads somewhere in the 60-80 range, a forty year old activist is considered a youth. While in Syria, I frequently saw students and young professionals scout out demonstrations in search of some movement to latch onto—rarely did I witness one see a demonstration to its conclusion. All of them would leave after trading a few words with the demonstrators. Some said that they were disappointed by the piddling size of the demonstration; others said that they left because they didn't encounter a platform that resonated with them. A recurring complaint was that the existing political parties were stuck in the 1960s, bogged down in the mire of petty ideological debates over the fine points of Leninism, socialism, or Nasserism.

As a result, many students have chosen to bypass the established parties all together and form their own groups. Frequently, these are not parties or hierarchically organized committees; they have no charter or official platform. They are more often discussion groups attended by clusters of oppositional-minded friends who have been disheartened by the existing options. The dialogue that happens in these groups has a vitality that is absent from many of the typical meetings held between opposition leaders. They are not battlegrounds for unwieldy egos, nor are they cluttered by the recycling of platitudes about free elections, annulling the emergency law, and releasing political prisoners—everyone agrees with these demands, yet these three alone are not enough to get anyone onto the streets. People will not risk beatings and imprisonment for free elections when there is no contender to demonstrate for; few Syrians support the emergency law, but to most it is an abstraction; most political prisoners are, unfortunately, a faceless bunch who enjoy virtually no name recognition among regular Syrians (as one college student who I dragged to a protest in front of the High Security Court remarked from the periphery, "Why should I take a beating for a writer who might be an agent of Israel or the US?")

The discussion groups are invaluable because they focus on the problems that afflict regular Syrians on a daily basis—in other words, the afflictions that can bring Syrians onto the streets. They are forums whose vibrancy makes gatherings by oppositional leaders appear stale and barren by comparison.

In the past few months, the US administration has finally begun making meaningful gestures toward reform in Syria. Its repeated calls for the release of Kamal al-Labwani and the Damascus Springs prisoners as well as the recent decision to earmark $5 million for the opposition are commendable. But the utility of these moves will be limited as long as the West confines its material and moral protection to the symbols of the opposition. Opposition leaders are aware that their status protects them against the most heinous abuses—the same cannot be said for less known activists, including students. Riad Seif and Haythem al-Maleh know that if they are imprisoned tomorrow an international uproar will ensue. Student activists can expect a few toothless press releases from Syrian human rights organizations—most of which will never be translated or read outside of the Syria's tiny human rights community—or at best a passing mention by Amnesty or Human Rights Watch.

Most of the opposition leaders today have faced imprisonment; they have built up social and financial support systems that sustain them through the harassment by the security agencies; they have files with the secret police that aren't going to get thinner. The foot soldiers of the opposition—the students, the young professionals, and those who have not been paid countless visits by foreign media correspondents—often have none of the above. They are the most vulnerable parts of the opposition: a student who runs afoul of the secret police is usually expelled from university or denied the opportunity to specialize, destroying his or her career prospects. These are the ones who are most often subject to capricious arrests and torture simply because they are easy targets for the regime and it sends the message that while the international community will protest the detention of a symbol, no one is going to utter a word of concern for the fate of the lesser activist.

Obviously, it's not reasonable to expect that State Department officials somberly recite a list of all the newly detained and demand their release in its daily press conference. Battles must be picked—political capital must be spent efficiently. But surely it is within the administration's capacity to broaden its condemnation of human rights violations in Syria beyond the harassment and imprisonment of icons. And there is more at stake than the wellbeing of these activists—it's also a matter of US credibility. A prominent opposition figure remarked to me that he would rather stay in prison than have Bush utter his name and be freed. That's because when the administration suddenly decides to come to the defense of a particular Syrian dissident after years of silence, that dissident becomes sullied and suspect. If the US were to more vocally condemn a greater proportion of human rights violations, its diplomatic interventions would appear less arbitrary and self-serving. The more uniformly human rights violations are publicly condemned, the less the individualized such attention from the US will appear. In other words, if it’s standard operating protocol for the US to denounce human rights violations, no activist's credibility will be tarnished when the US intervenes on his or her behalf.

"Hugo Chavez Economics For Syria?" By EHSANI2

By Ehsani2

In the comments to the previous post, an Anonymous writer expressed his frustration at Mr. Ajjan’s pole cards because their economic variable was focused on “attracting foreign investment.” The author objected to the notion of foreign investment. To be fair, I also do not like to define an economic policy purely as “attracting foreign investments”; nevertheless, I believe investment is important, both domestic and foreign.

Foreign investors decide to invest when they sense that a country has a friendly business environment that will protect capital and offer higher rates of return than elsewhere. Capital is unlikely to head to countries that have a poor legal system, heavy-handed state intervention, corruption, and cronyism. Capital migrates to vibrant market based economies, where property is protected. In sum, there is no economic system of “foreign investments.” Instead, a country needs to establish economic policies that attract investment, domestic and foreign. As I will argue later, business creation and competition creates jobs. For these businesses to continue to grow, they need to make a profit. When they make a profit, they decide to invest further in the business. This results in more hiring. The higher employment brings with it higher wages, income, and hence consumption. Businesses meet the increased demand with increased production and jobs. This is the virtuous circle that market economies have been able to deliver. The father of this simple economic approach is Adam Smith. But before I try to convince you about the powerful positive forces of capitalism, let us go back to what our Anonymous person wrote.

The suggestion was made that Syria should strive for economic development that would involve “very strong labor laws, mass participation in labor unions and syndicates, developing local industry and maintaining food self-sufficiency.” The Syrian people should in effect tell foreign investors to “go to hell” we were told. Syria is urged to follow a model of “democratization of capital” where “democratic and popular organizations” take more direct popular control over resources (as opposed to state or private sectors taking over such control). It was concluded that Syrians should work hard on rejecting foreign investments by adopting domestic economic policies that “will most definitely hurt foreign investors.”
What is this Anonymous person talking about? What does he mean by democratic and popular organizations taking direct control of resources? Why would he reject foreign investors and ask them to “go to hell”? Let us enter the world of Hugo Chavez, the economic hero of our Anonymous poster. I will start by explaining what the Venezuelan President’s record has been and whether Syria should embrace that country’s economic platform as it was suggested.

A primer on the Hugo Chavez’s Venezuela:

To be sure, the entire continent of Latin America is currently experiencing a resurgence of populist leaders who are pushing for a heavy government hand in the economy. This grew out of opposition to U.S.-backed free trade proposals. Chavez and these leaders are trying to promote a world that is anti free trade and anti laissez-faire. In its place, they want to convince us that there is a new alternative, which Chavez dubbed “socialism of the 21st century.” His new brand of socialism works like this:

The central Government imposes strict price controls to protect the poor majority from “greedy capitalists” and “speculators.”

Any businesses that refuse to abide by these price controls and decide to shut down their plants (most can no longer make any money selling at such capped prices) will have their plants expropriated. These expropriated companies will be turned into government-financed operations, jointly by the state and worker cooperatives. The program was named “democratizing capital” which is the same expression our Anonymous Syrian poster used above. What this program involves is a backdoor attempt to lead the country down the path followed by Castro's Cuba, Mr. Chavez’s mentor. Once the companies have been taken over, the government will sell its stake to the workers of these companies.

Where does the money come from? In the case of oil rich Venezuela, the state simply embarks on a large-scale subsidy framework for weak companies financed with oil revenue. Whatever privately owned companies remain will be asked to share profits with employee cooperatives and give them seats on their boards, in exchange for working capital from the government. Where does the money come from? Oil revenues of course.

So let us recap again. The government will turn all cash strapped private sector companies into co-managed concerns in exchange for government funds. Private firms that decide to idle their land and plants will have them expropriated and confiscated. The government will also have the right to seize the assets of healthy private companies if it so chooses. Companies, which have been taken over, will be converted into co-managed entities. For the record, most private companies that have adopted co-management have yet to begin production. The first Company that was confiscated and that received government subsidy has already filed for bankruptcy.

Mr. Chavez continues to defend his “socialism of the 21st century” program of course. The self-declared socialist also continues to argue that the state has to play a larger role in the economy to protect the poor. His populist leftist political agenda has already wrecked havoc on his nation. As the world’s fifth largest oil exporter, Venezuela has used hoards of its new oil money to fund a philosophy that has resulted in product shortages and a thriving black market in this rich nation of 26 million people, where poverty is widespread.

Is this what we want for Syria?

Once everyone reads the above economic prescription, I hope that it will become obvious that Syria does not need more State intervention, but less. I also hope that people will agree that Syria does not need more price controls and subsidies but less. The Baath party brand of socialism has already damaged this country enough. The last thing that we need now is a new brand of socialism even when it has sexy titles such as “socialism for the 21st century”, “co-managed economy,” or “democratization of capital.” Such fancy titles do not obscure the fact that every country that flirted with socialism and Marxism has seen lower standards of living for the very same people that these philosophies were created to protect.

Let us now go back to my world of Adam Smith.

“The wealth of nations derives from the uniform, constant, and uninterrupted effort of every man to better his condition.” The basic principles of Adam Smith’s stress the importance of free trade, putting consumers before producers, allowing and encouraging competition, rolling back state regulation, and preventing politicians from trying to shape economic life in their own image. These are clearly the type of policies that Syria ought to embrace after years of flirting with the failures of socialism. People on this forum have asked for import and investment controls as well as a “self-sufficient Syria.” Allow me to quote the 36-year-old Scottish Adam Smith once again:
Very good grapes can be raised in Scotland, and very good wine can be made of them-at about thirty times the expense for which at least equally good wine can be brought from foreign countries. Would it be a reasonable law to prohibit the importation of all foreign wines, merely to encourage the making of Claret and Burgundy in Scotland?
Every country that has embraced the above principles has succeeded in increasing wealth for its people. Take Britain as an example. Before 1979, it was the ideas of Karl Marx and Keynes, which were influential; after 1979 it was the ideas of Adam Smith. Anyone that knows anything about Britain can tell you the difference. Prior to 1979, the state was taking over industries, union power was rising, and government was growing larger while the individual smaller. The country was in a steady decline. After 1979, free enterprise, individual choice, competition, less regulation, freer trade, and open markets all came together to reinvigorate that ailing economy.

Syria needs to follow in Britain's footsteps. Its future economic system needs to let its ordinary people be set free from the heavy hand of the government. It needs to introduce competition by giving people room to create and innovate. It needs to remove much of the protection of government. It needs to end subsidies and supports by placing industries under the competitive pressures of the private sector. One poster on this forum wanted economic reform and investments in Syria to provide Syrians with:
a “protected” living wage; National Health Care; K-12+4 free education; x number of weeks of vacation; a retirement plan and free rights to unionize and strike.
How about free coffee and breakfast to all employees in the morning? What is interesting about proponents of these programs is how they conveniently ignore how and who is going to pay for all of this?

Chavez of Venezuela has decided to squander his country’s oil revenues on his crazy philosophy. Can Syria afford such an experiment? Has the country not spent enough on subsidies and so–called free education, and haven’t the results been disastrous? Our anonymous writer wants to tell foreign investors to “go to hell.” Well, Syria has done that for the last 43 years with devastating effect. Foreign investors and owners of capital scour the world searching for a return on their investments. They look for places that would legally protect their investments and allow them to earn a healthy return.

No government entity can or should tell them which sector to choose. Governments can certainly have tax incentives to direct these investments if they so wish. Note that global competition for such capital is very intense. Wrong policies and ill-advised economic programs are quick to scare investors away. Rather than saying to foreign investors “go to hell,” Syria should craft policies that attract them to its industries. This would help create jobs and reduce its large pool of unemployed. Only when Syria embraces market economics will investors - whether foreign or Syrian - feel confident enough to invest in Syria rather than doing so in neighboring economies. Let us please stop this nonsense about copying the crazy policies of Chavez or the old tired socialist system of the Baath.

In conclusion, the heavy hand of government regulation has never proved to be a good agent when it comes to raising living standards. Programs that are designed with the noble purpose of helping the poor inevitably end up creating wasteful government bureaucracies; shrinking economies, lower productivity, high unemployment and lower standards of living. When you hear about a government program, always ask yourself the question of who is going to pay for it and where is the money going to come from. Syria’s Baath gave us their brand of Socialism and the results are for all to see. We do not need a new brand of socialism. Chavez can have his and leave our already damaged economy alone. There is no such thing as a “foreign investor’s policy.” What Syria needs is a dose of free market capitalism that unleashes the potential of this great nation. If we ever succeed at this, foreign investment will be the by-product of successful policies. What sectors they will invest in will be sorted out by the markets not by a government or party officials.

We need to be part of the global economy. It is going to be hard because we are late. Our education system is woefully inadequate. Our infrastructure is not up to the task. Our labor force does not have the needed skills. But start we must. It is not too late. Syria is on the cusp of being next door to an EU country in the next ten years. This will present enormous opportunities for increased revenues from transit, trade, and tourism. But the competition for capital is going to be intense. If foreign investors agree to invest in Syria, we should thank and receive them with open arms. Chavez may ask them to "go to hell.” Hopefully, the Syrian people are too smart to emulate him.

Sunday, February 19, 2006

Syrian Political Attitudes Poll by George Ajjan

Dear readers,
George Ajjan, a friend and Syrian American, has come up with this interesting poll. I hope many readers will be willing to take take the poll. It is anonymous. George has put a lot of work into this. He has made it himself and will publish the results of the poll on "Syria Comment" for all of us to consider and discuss. The poll is quite powerful and will allow us to determine percentages for how Syrians feel about stability, the present government, democracy, economic growth, the Golan Heights, the peace process, etc. Nothing has been done like this before. The more people who take it, the more representative it will be. His effort has not been sponsored, paid for, encouraged, shaped, or influenced by any government or intelligence agency - CIA, Mossad, Mukhabarat, MI6, French Foreign Legion, Danish Muhammad loving league, KGB, or al-Qa’ida cell. I urge you all to take it. It was created in the best tradition of providing open knowledge and will be 15 minutes well spent. Readers can take it in either English or Arabic. Very best, Joshua

Here is George's description of it.

A new web-based polling portal for Syrians, named syriapol, has been
launched – http://www.syriapol.com/.
Feedback can be sent to me directly: george@ajjan.com, or through my personal
website http://www.ajjan.com/.

The aim
is two-fold:

1) To offer Syrians of all viewpoints a place
to express, in quantitative terms, their attitudes toward the status quo, or
changes to it

2) To provide that information, gathered through an
unbiased mechanism, to anyone who will make decisions, set policy, or advocate a
course of action, whether inside or outside the Syrian Arab Republic, and from any political viewpoint, whether pro-regime or anti-regime

syriapol’s goal is merely to collect valuable information, and
encourage its exchange. The project is actively neutral – it does
not seek to advocate any particular point of view, only to collect information
from Syrians regarding their views, whether they are pro-regime,
pro-opposition, or anywhere in between.

Syria cannot move forward without the engagement of Syrian citizens. Accordingly, this poll seeks to offer Syrians a space in which to apply complex and multi-faceted thought to their country's future. And it will provide those who make decisions, set policies, or promote courses of action with quality public opinion data from the Syrian people themselves.

The Syrian people will continue to feel the effects of positions advocated by various parties on the political, democratic, economic, and diplomatic fronts. A better an understanding of what the Syrian people desire in any of these areas, what they prefer to see change or remain the same, and strongly they feel about it – will play a crucial role in determining the success of any group, party, or regime seeking to move Syria forward.

The poll itself does not pose direct questions. Instead, it asks participants to evaluate a series of hypothetical scenarios concerning government, politics, economy, democracy, and the peace process. It then uses complex regression analysis techniques to quantitatively determine preferences of the respondents. Finally, by correlating the results to a series of demographic questions that accompany the poll, we can analyze Syrian society segmented by geography, sect, age, education level, etc.

Individual replies will remain confidential. If the respondent so chooses, syriapol
will share by email an analysis of that individual’s replies to the poll. Additionally, a summary of composite results and abstract findings will be published publicly and widely distributed.

syriapol is absolutely independent. It is not funded by, affiliated with, or otherwise
connected in any way whatsoever to any government, political party, movement, or
organization, in any country.

I invite all Syrians, and indeed anyone interested in Syrian attitudes toward government, politics, economy, democracy, and the peace process, to visit http://syria.ajjan.com/.

Feedback can be sent to me directly:

george@ajjan.com, or through my personal website http://www.ajjan.com/.

Recent Articles of Interest (Feb. 20, 2006)

Sami Moubayed has written two excellent articles this week. In "Strengthening the line," he covers the the cabinet changes better than anyone else. In Men should unveil in Syria, he adds to the wonderful work he has been doing on the History of the Feminist Movement in Syria.

Andrew Tabler, a fellow with the Institute of Current World Affairs (ICWA) and consulting editor for Syria Today Magazine (see side bar under “useful links”), has written an excelent analysis of the protests outside the Danish embassy on February 4. The piece, “Blowing off steam”, argues that the protests should not just be viewed as “Muslims on a rampage”, but instead as “an excellent case study in how authoritarian states under external stress can use certain ‘safety-valves’ to let off very real internal pressures in ways that strengthen the regime’s hand.” It is full of interesting pictures of the protests, burnings, and sleepy policy officers watching the blaze. He gets some excellent interviews with Islamists, Imams, and protesters to give you the feel that you were at the scene.

Andrew outlines increased Islamic sentiments in Syria over the last few years (especially following the American invasion of Iraq in 2003), and the Syrian state’s increased tolerance of this trend as it struggles to carry out economic reforms in an era of decreased state capacity (due to falling oil exports) and heightened international pressure. He ends by asking the question “Are the West’s pressures on Syria really weakening the regime and spurring the country toward liberal democracy, or simply pushing Syrians with growing Islamic sentiments toward the Syrian state and strengthening its grip on power?”

The report is in pdf, so unfortunately I can’t post it. But if you are interested in the full story, write him at andrewjtabler@yahoo.co.uk. He will send copies to those interested. It is great stuff. I could kill him for not letting me steal it for my site.

Francis Fukuyama has an important article criticising the Neoconservatives and suggesting policy changes for the US. He accuses the neoconservatives of being "Leninists" because of their faith in US military power and utopian belief that the Washington vanguard can reshape societies and governments by military means, without regard for the actual wishes of the people and without doing the hard work of inculcating liberal culture, nurturing the rule of law and institutions which can protect it.

After Neoconservatism
By FRANCIS FUKUYAMA
Published: February 19, 2006

We need in the first instance to understand that promoting democracy and modernization in the Middle East is not a solution to the problem of jihadist terrorism; in all likelihood it will make the short-term problem worse, as we have seen in the case of the Palestinian election bringing Hamas to power. Radical Islamism is a byproduct of modernization itself, arising from the loss of identity that accompanies the transition to a modern, pluralist society. It is no accident that so many recent terrorists, from Sept. 11's Mohamed Atta to the murderer of the Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh to the London subway bombers, were radicalized in democratic Europe and intimately familiar with all of democracy's blessings. More democracy will mean more alienation, radicalization and — yes, unfortunately — terrorism....

But greater political participation by Islamist groups is very likely to occur whatever we do, and it will be the only way that the poison of radical Islamism can ultimately work its way through the body politic of Muslim communities around the world. The age is long since gone when friendly authoritarians could rule over passive populations and produce stability indefinitely. New social actors are mobilizing everywhere, from Bolivia and Venezuela to South Africa and the Persian Gulf. A durable Israeli-Palestinian peace could not be built upon a corrupt, illegitimate Fatah that constantly had to worry about Hamas challenging its authority. Peace might emerge, sometime down the road, from a Palestine run by a formerly radical terrorist group that had been forced to deal with the realities of governing.

If we are serious about the good governance agenda, we have to shift our focus to the reform, reorganization and proper financing of those institutions of the United States government that actually promote democracy, development and the rule of law around the world, organizations like the State Department, U.S.A.I.D., the National Endowment for Democracy and the like.

Neoconservatism, whatever its complex roots, has become indelibly associated with concepts like coercive regime change, unilateralism and American hegemony. What is needed now are new ideas, neither neoconservative nor realist, for how America is to relate to the rest of the world — ideas that retain the neoconservative belief in the universality of human rights, but without its illusions about the efficacy of American power and hegemony to bring these ends about.

My main criticism with Fukiyama's assumption here is his belief that terrorism is a natural reaction to modernization. Yes, modernization is tough, confusing, and creats a backlash, but it is not the only, or perhaps even main, engine of terrorism. If that were the case, we would all be terrorists because we are all suffering from modernization, all the time. I hate figuring out my new cell phone, satalite TV, etc., and would like to shoot the salesman. I don't.

Robert A. Pape, in "Dying to Win: Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism,” Random House, 2005, has another explanation, which is compelling.

As the head of the Chicago Project on Suicide Terrorism at the Univ of Chicago, … Pape is deeply skeptical about the notion that suicide bombers are the warriors in a “clash of civilizations” between Islam and the West. Papes’s survey reveals that there is nothing intrinsically “Islamic” about the suicide bomber. By his estimate, Islamist groups account for no more than 34.6 percent of the suicide terrorist attacks staged in the past twenty years. The real common denominator of the suicide terrorism campaigns, he argues, is that they are all, in one form or another, responses to occupation or foreign control of a national homeland. Religion, in his view, functions merely as an aggravating factor. The leaders who run the terror organizations are trying, above all, to drive out invaders. And terrorist leaders use the strategy because it is so often successful. Once they have attained their goals, the campaigns cease. It’s that simple.

From all this, Pape draws a conclusion that many will challenge. The best way to counter the threat of suicide terrorism, he says, is to eliminate the conditions of occupation that give rise to the phenomenon in the first place. … Recent suicide bombers, he stresses, tend to come overwhelmingly from countries that are either occupied or affected by the strong military presence of a foreign power. .. If the United States and its allies want to neutralize the threat of al-Qaeda, Pape argues, they should disengage from the Middle East – completely removing their forces from Iraq and other countries of the Persian Gulf that have disproportionately contributed cadres to the cause of suicide terror in recent years. (This quote is taken from Christian Caryl's review article in the New York Review of Books, "Why they do It,”
Of course there are many reasons for terrorism and no one explanation can hope to cover the waterfront. But Pape's explanation is important and has been ignored because it flys in the face of US policy and would be hard to impliment.

Secretary Condoleezza Rice: "Roundtable With Arab Print Journalists" (February 17, 2006) is well worth the read. Rice covers all the thorny problems raised by Hamas' win, Egyptian delay of elections, Iran going to the security council, and Syria's relationship with Hizbullah. She gives thoughtful answers to difficult questions. What she has to say about Hamas, the Palestinians and democracy is particularly revealing and well done, considering all the anxiety that the US might take vengence on the Palestinians.

"iraq's Jordanian Jihadis" By Nir Rosen


Iraq's Jordanian Jihadis
By NIR ROSEN in the New York Times Magazine
February 19, 2006

Jordan has long been thought of as the quiet country of the Middle East. People called it the Hashemite Kingdom of Boredom and went there for a rest. King Hussein and his son, King Abdullah II, who assumed the throne in February 1999, were friendly enough with the United States, respectful toward Israel and measured advocates of modernization. As for the Islamist stirrings that have roiled the region since the Iranian revolution of 1979, it was widely believed that the king's domestic security service, the Mukhabarat, had infiltrated every group that might think to stir unrest. But in truth Jordan had not been insulated from the radicalism that has engulfed the Mideast in our time: in 1970 and '71, Jordan's Palestinians, who then, as now, made up a majority of the country's population (today, 5.6 million), erupted, and their insurrection was brutally put down. And in the course of finding ways to sustain its political dominance, the Hashemite monarchy gave the Muslim Brotherhood — the local variant of an Islamist movement that began in Egypt in the 1920's — control of educational policy, which would hold dark implications.

Now we know that the quiet kingdom was producing the man thought to be spearheading the deadliest aspects of the Iraqi insurgency — and who brought the fight back to Jordan in three hotel bombings last December: Ahmed Fadeel Nazal al-Khalayleh, better known as Abu Musab al-Zarqawi after his hometown of Zarqa, a poor city an hour's drive north of Amman. How the quiet kingdom of Jordan could produce a man who has become known as the Sheik of the Slaughterers is a question at the heart of contemporary jihad. Zarqawi is exceptionally cruel, but he is otherwise not such an exception. Jordan is home to many jihadis, young men from much the same milieu that produced Zarqawi, and especially since the United States invaded Iraq nearly three years ago, Jordan has increasingly become a not-so-quiet place, a place where local Islamists cross easily into Iraq and back, a place where a jihadist underground can seem almost a normal part of a nation's life. And if such an underground can become normal in quiet Jordan, what is to keep it from becoming normal in any Muslim country?

'He sat there, where you are," Muhammad Wasfi said, pointing to the pillow I was resting on. Wasfi is a 42-year-old former jihadi who says he now devotes himself to teaching. We were talking in his chilly living room — it gets cold in Jordan in winter — in the town of Rusaifa, just south of Amman, as his older sons brought in sweet tea. Wasfi stroked a cat that wandered in. His small children screamed and fought in the next room. His youngest boy, Mudhafer, came in to ask him for some money. "Abu Musab had heard of me," Wasfi eventually continued, recalling his first meeting with Zarqawi in the summer of 1993. "He was a simple Muslim who wanted to serve Islam. He didn't stay long here, and the next day he came with another guy. We sat, and we spoke about our hopes and dreams and ambitions to establish the caliphate and raise the flag of jihad against the enemies of Islam everywhere. I disagreed with him on some strategic issues, like his view of Israel and Palestine. He didn't have an idea of making jihad against Jews and Israel. Abu Musab wanted to change Arab regimes."

In the 90's, Zarqawi's desire to wage jihad against the "near enemy" of so-called infidel Muslims was becoming more common in the Arab world. There were, by that point, many men like him in Amman and, even more so, in Jordan's heavily Palestinian cities of Zarqa and Irbid. Some had made it back from Afghanistan, where they successfully fought the Soviets, and were awaiting a next jihad; others had come up from Kuwait, part of a massive exodus of Palestinians from that country during the Iraqi invasion in 1990 and following the withdrawal of Iraqi forces in 1991. (Support among some Palestinians for Saddam Hussein's invasion had led Kuwait to throw out its Palestinians en masse once his forces had withdrawn.) Within this latter group were some committed radicals who had been deeply influenced by Egyptian clerics — firebrands of the Islamic Group, a radicalized, prison-based offshoot of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood, who had themselves been expelled by Egypt to Kuwait.

Many of these rootless and unwanted believers found a spiritual and political home in a type of Islam called Salafism. Not surprisingly, perhaps, Salafism emphasizes the rootlessness of faith. It despises local saints and mystical practices (like those of Sufism) and any other departures from the most rigid Sunnism. It despises Shiites. It commonly despises all other sects or practices that Salafis might consider "bida," or "innovation." Given this intense preoccupation with purity, Salafis are constantly trying to identify and expel the impure. This is called "takfir," often translated as "excommunication": an old, disused term that has found new life in Salafism, which permits, even encourages, the killing of Muslims whom Salafis have expelled through takfir. Perhaps the most ferocious embodiment of takfiri Salafism today is Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

Most western visitors to Jordan's capital don't stray far from the opulent neighborhood of west Amman. Once you leave there and head east or south, the homes tend to be of unpainted cinder block, rebar protrudes from unfinished rooftops, and the square houses seem scattered haphazardly across the hillsides, with steep alleyways shaded by hanging laundry. Empty lots become trash lots. Thin metal towers, topped with speakers for the call to prayer, jut up from the unadorned mosques — plain, cement-block squares, just like the homes. Through a maze of narrow treeless streets in Rusaifa, shopkeepers cover the heads of their female mannequins in the windows, and on the streets some women go completely veiled. The yellow and red hills and dunes of the desert appear stark against the gray winter sky. It was on one such hill that Muhammad Wasfi built his home, which is where I met with him in December. The house appeared unfinished yet already old, the yard strewn with garbage and children's toys, including a toy gun.

I met Wasfi through a Palestinian named Abu Saad, who is well acquainted with Jordan's jihadi Salafis. Abu Saad is a worried man with a nervous smile and a high-pitched voice; he dreams of becoming a journalist. He is also a Salafi. When Abu Saad was driving me around Amman and its poor suburbs, he liked to play Al Qaeda songs in his tape deck. These were a cappella chants, because Salafis don't believe in music; they told of jihadi adventures against infidels. In his personal computer, he has a collection of videos of jihadi attacks on Americans that he regularly and proudly watches.

While Wasfi and I spoke — in Arabic — Abu Saad left us to go work on his car, which had dropped some parts along the way to Rusaifa. Wasfi wore sweat pants and a matching blue sweatshirt. He has a strong thick body, with a belly that showed he was not as active as he used to be. His thick beard was unkempt, but his mustache was groomed short, Salafist style, and his hair was close-cropped.

He was born, he told me, on the West Bank in 1963. "I still remember the day I left Palestine," he said, "with all the pieces of the Palestinian people." His family moved first to Amman and then to Zarqa, north of the capital, where many military families were based. His father joined the Jordanian Army. Wasfi himself served two years before earning a degree in business management and working as a civil servant. "At that time, I generally began learning Islamic thought," he told me. He came to admire the radical Islamic Group of Egypt and hoped to establish a similar Jordanian movement. "As Palestinian people, we want to find a solution for our question," he told me. "Although I was young, I saw no solution for our problems other than Islam. So I wasn't affected by secular Palestinian movements. I wanted to do something for Islam and Muslims and help establish the Muslim state and make Palestine the capital of our new caliphate."

I asked him if he still thought this was possible.

"I believe it without any doubt," he said. "This has been proven by the prophet Muhammad in his words."

Like many Salafis, Wasfi is an autodidact, reading the works of Abdullah Azzam (a key figure in modern jihad and once a mentor to Osama bin Laden) and the Egyptian Omar Abdel Rahman (the blind cleric currently imprisoned in the United States for his role in a failed plot to bomb New York City landmarks). He read their books and listened to tapes of their sermons. He admired them for going to Afghanistan, and in 1989 he went himself, "to see the reality of Muslims and their movements, of the Islamic nation and jihad." He dreamed of starting a jihad in Sham — the lands of Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Palestine — and liberating his homeland.

Zarqawi, Wasfi and another jihadi — the cerebral, self-taught Palestinian cleric Abu Mohammed al-Maqdisi, who was among those who left Kuwait in 1991 — founded and led a group together in Jordan called Bayaat al Imam ("Allegiance to the Imam"). "We had no ability to make jihad," Wasfi admitted to me. "But despite the lack of ability, it didn't mean we should stop." According to Wasfi, Maqdisi brought seven grenades with him from Kuwait. "Maqdisi gave grenades to some brothers to make operations in Palestine to kill Israelis," Wasfi told me. His story was consistent with Jordanian media accounts I had read. "The brothers were arrested, and the Jordanians uncovered the organization and arrested the leaders, but before that we were fugitives for four months. We were arrested and tortured." Wasfi claims to have suffered "sleep deprivation, beatings, tearing off beards." As a result, he says, he has rheumatism and his knees often hurt.

But Jordan's prisons were not so much a barrier to jihad as a hothouse. Jihadi prisoners developed the hierarchies and loyalties typical of any prison gang. At the same time, according to those Jordanian journalists who report regularly on jihadis in newspapers like Al Ghad, the prisoners exerted an attraction on the less pious. Criminals converted to a strict Islam and brought to their new comrades skills that would be valuable in waging war. "Jail was very good for the movement," Wasfi told me. "Jail enhanced the personalities of prisoners and let them know how large was the cause they believed in. Inside jail is a good environment to get supporters and proselytize." Wasfi admitted that he and his comrades recruited from criminal ranks. "When you talk to them with Islam," he told me, "they see the difference between a system of punishment made by humans and a system made by God. This made them supporters of dawa" — the "call" to Islam — "and enemies of oppression."

Zarqawi was a criminal before he was a jihadi. He was a wild young man, according to all who knew him and have recounted his story in the Arab media. He had no interest in religion. A high-school dropout, he had a reputation for getting tattoos, drinking alcohol and getting into fights, and he ended up in jail in the 1980's. After being released, he went to Afghanistan, in 1989, where the successful jihad against the Soviets had turned into a war of one Afghan faction against another.

"Abu Musab was my friend," a former jihadist named Sheik Jawad al Faqih told me, recalling Zarqawi. I met Jawad in Abu Saad's home. He is a fearsome man with a thick beard and a clipped mustache, immense hands and a raspy voice. "He used to come to my house. We went to Afghanistan together." A Palestinian, Jawad said that his uncles had fought the British occupation of Palestine and that he had initially been influenced by secular nationalism. In 1982, though, he found "the correct way," abandoning his nationalist sentiments. "Abu Musab was a normal man, afraid of God, a very natural man," Jawad said pensively. "He didn't have a lot of religious knowledge." Jawad told me that Zarqawi gave two of his sisters as wives to Afghans in order to strengthen his relationship with his hosts. "Afghans took care of him, and he gained experience," he said.+

Jawad returned to Jordan and, like Zarqawi and many others back from Afghanistan, involved himself in minor actions in Jordan. He admitted to carrying out operations against "infidels" in Jordan: attacking a British target, trying to attack American marines. He said that he "killed a priest" and "exploded a Jew." He told me he established cells of fighters he called "families." Each family consisted of five fighters who did not know the identities of members of other families. Jawad claimed that in its few years of existence, his Army of Muhammad grew to include cells around the Arab world. Most were veterans of the Afghan jihad. But in 1991, he says, a disgruntled member of Jawad's army confessed the names of the organization's leaders to Jordanian intelligence. This kind of thing was not unusual and still isn't. Jawad claimed that of his 13 arrests, 9 could be attributed to Jordanians informing on him, which led him to dislike Jordanians.

Jawad got out of the jihad life. Today he is a car salesman in Zarqa. He remembers the Afghanistan jihad as being the best experience he ever had.

Zarqawi was not back in Jordan from Afghanistan for long before he was arrested, and he stayed in prison from 1993 until a general amnesty in 1999. His comrade from those years, Wasfi, told me that even while in prison, Zarqawi and the ideologue of their group, Maqdisi, reached outside audiences, influencing people in the various cities where they were imprisoned. Before entering prison in 1994, Maqdisi crisscrossed Jordan teaching from his book "The Creed of Abraham,² the most important single source of teachings for Jordanian Salafist jihadis. In it he speaks of infidels and tyrants, using the expansive definitions favored by Salafis. "Tyrants," on my reading of the book, could include idols made from stone, the sun, the moon, trees. They could also include graves, a reference to the Sufi and Shiite practice of visiting the graves of saints and imams. And "tyrants" could also include the laws made by men. It was the duty of the faithful to expose the infidelity of all these forms of worship and idolatry and manifest their hatred of them.

According to Maqdisi, democracy is a heretical religion and constitutes the rejection of Allah, monotheism and Islam. (He mounted a full-scale attack in his book "Democracy Is a Religion.") Democracy is an innovation, placing something above the word of God and ignoring the laws of Islam. It places the people (or the tyrant) above Islam, but in the Salafist view only God can make laws. Maqdisi held that the regimes that ruled Muslims were un-Islamic. Therefore, Muslims did not owe them obedience and should fight them to establish a true Islamic state.

Initially, Zarqawi was subordinate to Maqdisi. But in prison the awkward and solemn Zarqawi began to bloom — and to eclipse Maqdisi. "Zarqawi was charismatic," Wasfi recalled when we spoke, whereas "Maqdisi was calm and passive. We were dealing with prison authorities in a very aggressive way, and Zarqawi was tribal" a member of the prominent Bani Hassan tribe and, unlike Maqdisi and Wasfi, not a Palestinian — "so his tribal position gave him more power than a Palestinian. If your roots are pure Jordanian and you have a big tribe, then you have more power. Prisoners liked a strong representative like Zarqawi, and he fought with the guards. He was very harsh and strong when dealing with members of the organization. He prevented them from mixing with other organizations so they would not be influenced by other ideas, and he prevented them from moving around freely in the prison, even me. But I rebelled against him."

Zarqawi organized what amounted to a coup, forcing Maqdisi to hand over control of their group, Bayaat al Imam, and accept a more advisory, theological position. Zarqawi's aggressive personality attracted the tough young men imprisoned with him. Like Salafis outside of prison, the Salafist jihadis in jail were embroiled in declaring one another infidels. "In prison a disagreement of ideas led to problems," Wasfi told me, refusing to get into the details but adding that "Abu Musab had many wrong decisions that I did not accept, like enmity with other groups." Five months before his release, Wasfi abandoned the movement to focus on "personal dawa." (Officially forbidden to teach, he still does in secret.) "After Zarqawi was released, he asked me to work together with him, but I refused," Wasfi said.

Their time in prison was as important for the movement as their experiences in Afghanistan were, bonding the men who suffered together and giving them time to formulate their ideas. For some, it was educational as well. One experienced jihadi who knew Zarqawi in Afghanistan told me: "When I heard Zarqawi speak, I didn't believe this is the same Zarqawi. But six years in jail gave him a good chance to educate himself."

After his release in 1999, Zarqawi left for Pakistan, where he was arrested and detained briefly before making his way to Afghanistan along with his key followers. He found both Al Qaeda and the Taliban insufficiently extreme, according to Mohammed Abu Rumman, a journalist for Al Ghad. A critical dispute was over whom to attack: Zarqawi criticized Osama bin Laden for not calling Arab governments infidels and attacking them.

For Zarqawi, the "near enemy" was the priority, while for bin Laden the "far enemy" was. This has been perhaps the most critical dispute within violent, extremist Sunni Islam. Al Qaeda, at least in relative terms, has always been concerned with making connections among groups that might otherwise expend themselves fighting one another. By focusing on the far enemy — the United States, Israel, European states and Russia; whether on their own territories or against their citizens, embassies or interests in Muslim lands — Al Qaeda could assert some charismatic leadership over an otherwise quite diverse and fractious "movement." And by leaving the many near enemies alone (or forming alliances with them), Al Qaeda could acquire a little breathing space.

The zeal for purity has led Zarqawi and Salafis more generally to focus on their close surroundings. This urge might, of course, lead to withdrawal; in the 1970's, one Egyptian Salafi group tried physically and psychologically to remove itself from society altogether, forming something like a commune. But an impatience for changing the world and perhaps, in some, an appetite for violence has led many Salafis into vigorous engagement with the nearest enemies they could find, even when those enemies were extremists with ideas little different from theirs.

Zarqawi was such a strict Salafi that he criticized the Taliban — for insufficiently imposing Shariah, for one thing, and also for recognizing the United Nations, an infidel organization. And thus he criticized Al Qaeda as well for associating with the Taliban. Zarqawi established his own camp near the western Afghan city of Herat, close to the border with Iran. When the United States attacked Afghanistan, American intelligence officials have said Zarqawi made his way through Iran to autonomous Kurdistan in northern Iraq, where he may have linked up with the terrorist group Ansar al-Islam in a region outside of Saddam Hussein's reach. With Hussein removed from power in April 2003, Zarqawi had a new failed state to operate in. And the invasion of Iraq and the subsequent American occupation presented the perfect opportunity to heal the rift within Muslim extremism: the far enemy had made itself the near enemy as well.

Few people are in a better position to understand how the jihadist aspect of the Iraqi insurgency took shape than Huthaifa Azzam, because he, a Jordanian, helped start it. He is the son of Abdullah Azzam, who was born near Jenin, Palestine, in 1941, left for Jordan following the 1967 Six-Day War and became something like the father of jihad in Jordan. Abdullah Azzam ran that wing of the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood that was most influenced by the Egyptian writer Sayyid Qutb — the central figure in 20th-century jihadi thought.

Following the Russian invasion of Afghanistan, Abdullah Azzam moved to Pakistan, where he founded the Office of Mujahedeen Services, the main clearinghouse for arriving Arabs. Abdullah Azzam's books and sermons presented his thoughts on jihad, and he was to mentor bin Laden until 1987, when, according to Huthaifa Azzam, bin Laden decided to form his own camp for Arabs. Abdullah Azzam was not radical enough for him — he considered jihad purely defensive — and Ayman al-Zawahiri, the Egyptian doctor who was to become bin Laden's key deputy and ideologue, edged him aside.

Two years later, in November 1989, a car bomb killed Abdullah Azzam and two of his sons in Peshawar, Pakistan. In the car that followed sat Huthaifa, then 18, who had been waging jihad for five years and who had begun his training at 12. I met him in a cafe at the Royal Hotel in west Amman. Dressed in light blue jeans, a leather jacket and red polo shirt, fit and engaging with an easy smile and speaking excellent English, he did not look like a jihadi. Azzam was light-skinned like his father; his beard was clipped close. He ordered a hot chocolate and recounted his tale.

Azzam said that he had first trained in the Sada camp outside Peshawar and then, in 1984, in the Khaldan and Yaqubi camps in Afghanistan. He fought his first battle alongside his father and brothers in Jaji that year. It was an all-Arab unit, including Saudis, Moroccans and Algerians. When he was not fighting, Azzam studied at a school his father had established for the children of Arab mujahedeen. He got to know Ahmed Shah Massoud in 1985 and fought alongside the famed Afghan hero, taking Kabul with him in 1992. Azzam then followed a course of study at the International Islamic University in Islamabad, but for the next six years he also joined some Arab colleagues in trying to bring the warring parties in Afghanistan together, shuttling between Massoud's Northern Alliance and the Taliban's Mullah Omar. "We were the Arab mujahedeen respected by everyone," he told me and blamed the failure to reach an accord on the intervention of Pakistani intelligence.

In 1994 and 1995, Azzam says, he was in Bosnia, working to funnel money and supplies to the nascent country's beleaguered Muslims. He then tried to enter Chechnya but was forced to turn back. In 1996, on returning to Jordan, Azzam was arrested at the airport and held briefly. In 2000 Jordan returned his passport to him, and he was allowed to live freely, selling cars and nuts, importing and exporting and receiving a license to distribute mobile phones. (On his own phone that day at the cafe he showed me videos he had downloaded of Iraqi resistance attacks against the American military.) He has completed a master's degree in Islamic studies and Arabic and is now working on a doctorate, examining Arabic literature from classical Muslim Spain.

According to Azzam, his studies did not keep him from the occasional forays into jihadist activity. Three days after America's invasion of Iraq began, Azzam and other followers of his late father crossed over from Jordan into Iraq and established a base for themselves in Falluja. The only source for this is Azzam himself, but his telling the story at all involved some risk to him, and his command of the detail and of the personalities involved lent him credibility; it also matched up well with information I had gathered on earlier reporting trips to Falluja and Baghdad. "We were trying to convince Muslim scholars to begin the resistance," he said. "They had no plan. They were sleeping. For one month they did not agree. They said, 'Go back to your country."'

For Azzam, leaving Iraq alone to work out its own fate was not an option. He said he believed that resistance would start, and he wanted to shape the process as well as hurry it. "We were more than 30 or 40 Arabs, without weapons," he said. "We went from mosque to mosque, from school to school. People said, 'The U.S. brought us democracy!' They believed the lies of Bush that he will bring democracy and freedom."

Everything changed, he said, on April 28, 2003, when American soldiers killed 15 demonstrators in Falluja, then killed 2 more in a subsequent demonstration. (Iraqis said that the first demonstration had been to protest the Americans' using an elementary school as a military base.) After that, rumors spread of four American soldiers raping a 17-year-old girl, with pictures distributed on the Internet. (Those pictures may well have been fabricated.) "This story was the main cause of starting the resistance in Falluja," Azzam said. It "made them reconsider, but there was still no action. I was watching from afar — with a smile. In the beginning they had said, 'Go make jihad in your own country.' After the rape story, they said, 'O.K., we want to start now, or tomorrow we will find our mothers or daughters or sisters raped.' This story exploded the resistance in Falluja. They called us for a meeting and said, 'You were right.' We had told them from the first day that the Iraqi Army abandoned weapons that they should take, but they said this is stealing, haram, looting. You could buy an R.P.G. for three U.S. dollars in those days."

Azzam says he spent four months in Iraq imparting his knowledge of guerrilla warfare to the indigenous resistance. His background, he told me, gave him immediate currency. "I am the son of Abdullah Azzam," he said, "so everybody wanted to listen. And I have experience in three or four jihads in different countries, and a lot of the Iraqi resistance had no plan. We gave them our experience so they could start from where we stopped, so they don't start from zero. Jihad is an obligation as a Muslim. If you can't support jihad with fighting, you can support with ideas or teaching. So we tried, and we still do. Followers of Abdullah Azzam helped plan the resistance in all of Iraq, and we had hoped for a united resistance with Shias. We were aiming to bring unity be