Since the beginning of the uprising in Syria four and a half months ago, the Syrian regime's description of the events and the way it dealt with them ranged from talk about the “conspiracy” that the country is being subjected to because it is one of the pillars of “opposition” in the region on the one hand; and talk about the need for reform in order to respond to the demands of the protestors on the other. The promises for reform went to the extent of announcing the desire to come up with a new constitution and a pluralistic law for the parties, in addition to canceling Article 8 of the constitution, which gives the Baath party the right to “lead the state and the society.” After the latest massacre of Hama, it seems that this stagnation in describing and dealing with the events has been settled, and the Syrian regime has decided to adopt the option of confronting the so-called “conspiracy.” This raises questions about the extent of the seriousness of the “reform” promises and projects, the fate of the dialogue conferences and consultative meetings, and the capacity of the Syrian regime to regain a normal life with its people, similarly to the usual state of affairs between the rulers and the ruled, without being based on the method of oppression and fear alone, especially that this regime has opted for the road of the security solution. This conclusion is further consolidated by what the Syrian officials had said prior to the month of Ramadan on the fact that the crisis in Syria “has gone and will not be back, and the holy month of Ramadan will constitute the beginning of the end,” according to the Minister of Endowments, Mohammad Abdel-Sater al-Sayyed. This means that a decision has been taken on a high level to end the protests before the beginning of Ramadan. The regime's choice of the security solution is further enhanced through what can be concluded from the speech addressed by President Bashar al-Assad to the military men on the occasion of the Army Holiday, where he stressed on “the ability to overthrow this new chapter of the conspiracy.” He also indicated that the purpose [of the conspiracy] is to “dismantle Syria in order to dismantle the entire region into conflicting min-states at a later point.” So, there is a conspiracy and Syria is facing its “last chapter.” Therefore, the actions of the army in Hama and other Syrian cities is a necessary process in order to defend and protect the nation, according to the statements of the Director of the Political Department of the Army, Major General Riad Haddad. But if this is the state of affairs, then what is the meaning of the reform steps that the regime is reportedly planning on making? And what is the objective of the draft bills that the government of Adel Safar is working on? And should reform be offered as a gift to those who are described as “conspirers” against the country, and those who are carrying out plans of foreign projects against Syria? The blundering of the Syrian regime in the confrontation of the events since the start was nothing but a blundering in form, the aim of which was to give the impression that the regime has a reformative nature and that the “conspiracy” is preventing it from implementing its plans. But the truth is that the Syrian regime has used up all the justifications in order to block the road for the implementation of actual steps that would allow a move towards a pluralistic regime, and the expansion of the space of political freedom in response to the hopes of the opposition sides, the liberals, and the intellectuals. At the beginning, they said that the reason for the delay of the former reforms, and the factor that hindered the good “Damascus Spring” consisted of the “conspiracies” that Syria was subjected to and the threats that it received, including the second Palestinian intifada, the invasion of Iraq and the crisis faced in Lebanon following the assassination of Rafik al-Hariri. And now, they are saying that Syria is the “beating heart of the nation” and this is causing “an increase in the enemies' animosity against us” (according to the speech of the Syrian president). All this has placed Syrian citizens, in the eyes of their rulers, in the position of a tool that is the object of dispute by external greed and desires. Syrian citizens have no role in what is taking place on their land, except for the role of followers, either to the regime by being silent and submissive, or to the “external conspiracy,” by being a mere tool for its implementation. Limiting the status of Syrian citizens and their legitimate demands to these two formulas provides an idea about the value and the position held by the Syrian people in the eyes of the ruling regime.
