The Syrian people were perfect in every way, according to the Baathist description. Indeed, on the whole, with the exception of traitors, foreign agents, conspirators and members of the Muslim Brotherhood, they belonged to the category of the model “hero” as envisioned by the Socialist Baath Party. They were resistant, defiant and opposed to the West, colonialism, imperialism, Zionism and their agents. And more importantly than all of this, according to the same description, they were in perfect harmony with their wise and firm leadership and supported it in thwarting conspiracies. Even a few days before the eruption of the protest movement in Syria, and on the background of regimes beginning to collapse in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya, this description still stood. Such a description did not arise from any kind of trust in the Syrian people, even if this people has had, since the country's independence and until the rise of the Baath Party to power, a heritage of national and democratic work and of defending freedoms. Its core and sole function had been to clear away any distance that might exist between aspirations of freedom and of democracy and the ruling regime. Such a function was based on the theory, adopted especially since the Corrective Movement, that the people have what food and drink is available, while politics and its benefits are reserved for the ruler and his entourage. And on such a basis, the constitution was drafted, laws were passed, elections were held and governments were formed. In other words, everything the ruler has done has been within the framework of his complete monopoly of politics and of it being forbidden to the people. And it is in this sense that can be understood the steps taken to undermine labor unions, which tried to object to the policies followed by the regime, the incarceration of opposition members and the displacement of others. Indeed, the monopoly of politics in itself involves coercion and violence, which appears in its bloodiest form when it shifts from an individual formula to a group one that could lead to fanaticism and a public for the opposition. The instruments used to prove this theory were coercion and violence. And it achieved its goals to such an extent that stability in Syria seemed eternal, according to the notion held by the regime, which assumed that it had eliminated anything that could represent a challenge at the domestic level – this after having tightened its control of the instruments of security and the economy. This is what President Bashar Al-Assad praised when he excluded any threat to this stability and declared sharing a special relationship with his people, in his famous interview. In other words, he was saying that it was not possible to challenge the regime in Syria, on the background of protest movements erupting in the Arab World. This theory gave rise to a parallel one about “armed gangs” and conspiracy the moment the protest movement erupted. And as demonstrations persisted, a change took place in the characterization of the protesters, who were part of the Syrian people, which now included a mixture of foreign agents and conspirators. Indeed, any other theory about social demands and demands of reform would have meant breaking the regime's monopoly on politics, and bringing political activity to the public sphere – which would mean negating the nature of the regime and the mechanism by which it controls the country. This is how can be understood this regime's media propaganda and its violent practices against protesters on the ground. Indeed, the function of the media war against “armed gangs”, religious fanatics and Al-Qaeda is precisely to deny any domestic political character to the protest movement. As for the military operations that involve hunting down protesters, arrests, killings and destruction, they are a punishment for the people who are no longer satisfied with their Baathist description, and who demand their right to participate in politics. And it is in this sense that one can understand that video where one of the Shabbiha (state-sponsored thugs) rains blows down on an arrested protester, scolding him for demanding “freedom” – one of the three slogans of the Baath Party. As for the deadly bombings that are becoming increasingly frequent and occurring in different places, regardless of who is actually responsible for them, they confirm that same theory about “terrorist groups”. Currently, this theory – with the presence of UN observers and the debate over their role and its nature, as well as how to move to the political aspect of Kofi Annan's plan – is in need of more violence on the ground, especially terrorist bombings.
