When Rifat al-Assad was excluded in 1984, the Syrian regime said that the reasons behind this step were the vice president's sectarianism and excessive murders and corruption. And following the ousting of Prime Minister Mahmoud al-Zohbi, the official Syrian media outlets published long lists featuring the possessions and funds he took over in an illegal way before he “committed suicide". The other vice president, i.e. Abdul Halim Khaddam, who was the founding partner of Hafez al-Assad's regime and who remained in the close circle of the authority for more than thirty years, was the object of accusations to which the Syrian authorities had not paid attention until after his defection. These accusations revolved around his collaboration with Gulf States and the harm he caused - along with his family members - to the national economy and the regime, but were only made public after he seceded and headed to Paris. At this level, the dimensions of the conspiracy of Brigadier General Ghazi Kanaan, who insulted and humiliated the Lebanese and Palestinians residing in Lebanon in many ways upon the orders of the immortal president, were only exposed after he also “committed suicide" in his office at the Interior Ministry, whose portfolio he handled following his successes in Lebanon and in organizing the “resistance" in Iraq. Manaf Tlass' defection, according to spokesmen for the regime, “will not change anything." For his part, Syrian Ambassador to Baghdad Nawaf al-Fares was a mere “corrupt intelligence officer who stole historical artifacts from the city of Latakia." Accusations of treason and abuse of power were also directed by the Syrian authorities at former Deputy Oil Minister Abed Hussam al-Din and Colonel Hassan Merhi al-Hamade, who defected with his fighter jet to Jordan a few weeks ago. Now, the question which arises following the reviewing of the cleansing, exclusion and defection operations is the following: What is this regime composed of, knowing that its most sensitive administrative, security and political posts are occupied by thieves, bribe-takers and corrupt individuals who sold their souls for money and became rich at the expense of the Syrian people's poverty and suffering? If those who left their positions, whether dead or alive, are that bad, there is no doubt that the rest are angels and good rulers. This is what the regime wants the public opinion to believe. However, they could be as – if not more – corrupt and criminal than those who abandoned their countries and positions, which is a more logical conclusion. This logic can be detected in the abstinence of the ousted or the late defectors from presenting any kind of apology for what they have committed while carrying out their official missions, at a time when the testimonies and evidence are too numerous to count in regard to what some of the latter have done and which in some cases rise to the level of crimes. Moreover, many among them had enough courage to call on their colleagues to follow in their footsteps, thus placing themselves in the ranks of the leaders of the revolution and the revolutionaries. The press interviews which were conducted with senior defectors and tackled their past, witnessed a few shy confessions in regard to their violation of power. Nonetheless, these confessions also featured assurances regarding the fact that they abstained from committing worse evils. In any case, none of them announced his willingness to stand before a just and transparent court which would sentence them for what they had done. This arrogance is part of Baathist education which allows whoever receives it to always think he is always right, whether he is part of the regime or seeking a role in the opposition. It is useless to say that these lines do not fully cover the phenomenon of defection from the Syrian regime and are not enough to understand the various circumstances which made each individual decide to leave his post, join the revolution or simply go back home. However, it would be useful to say that the fates of the Syrian officials and especially those working in the apparatuses of oppression will be a complicated issue in the stage that will follow the collapse of the current regime. Dissent might whitewash some records, but it does not replace fair and balanced accountability.
