|
The
New York Times Magazine -
Encounter
A Liberal in Damascus
By LEE SMITH
February 13, 2005
When I first met Ammar Abdulhamid in Washington in the fall, the
38-year-old Syrian novelist, poet and liberal dissident had Damascus on
his mind. He had received word from his wife back in Syria that the
political situation at home was becoming more precarious for rights
activists like himself. As a fellow at the Brookings Institution, he'd
been meeting with leading figures in the Bush administration and writing
articles in the Arab and Western presses that were sharply critical of
the Syrian government; he simply didn't know what to expect on his
return. Now, sitting here in a Damascus coffeehouse in late January a
week after his return, he is telling me that he had found reason for
optimism about the country's future in the least likely of places.
''When I arrived at the airport,'' Abdulhamid says, ''I was told I
had to go to political security. It took me some time to find out
exactly which security apparatus wanted to speak to me, but then I met
with them for two days in a row. I was very up front about my activities
and even talked about things they didn't know yet, like an article I had
co-written with an Israeli. One of my interrogators told me that what I
was doing would have been unthinkable a few years ago, and he's right. I
got the sense from even some of the security police that they see there
has to be a new way of doing things in Syria.''
For the last half-century, the Islamist movement and Arab regimes
themselves have pushed Arab liberals to the sidelines. As a result, the
Arab world's democracy activists and intellectuals do not enjoy the same
advantages their Central and Eastern European counterparts did back in
the 80's: whereas the generation of Havel and Walesa was backed by the
Catholic Church and its Polish-born pope, Arab activists enjoy no such
solidarity with any established Muslim institutions. Indeed, while
militant Islamist leaders have called for elections in Saudi Arabia and
elsewhere, they typically see liberal, secular reformers like Abdulhamid
as a threat to the traditional foundations of their authority.
Even so, the liberals seem to be gathering a little momentum.
Recently, intellectuals from Iraq, Jordan and Tunisia petitioned the
United Nations for a tribunal to prosecute both terrorists and the
religious figures who incite violence. In Egypt, two new publications,
Nahdet Misr and Al Masry Al Youm, fault the region's leaders and clerics
alike for keeping Arabs from joining the modern world. The Iraqi
election posed a stark challenge to regional autocrats. While Abdulhamid
harbors mixed feelings about the United States' decision to invade Iraq,
he says he believes that the American presence in the region is vital to
the prospects for reform. ''We are an important part of the world,'' he
says, ''and our inability to produce change on our own terms invites
people in. The world is not going to wait for us.''
Political engagement is unfamiliar territory for a writer who grew up
in an artistic milieu (his mother is one of the country's most popular
actresses) and describes himself as a reluctant activist. ''I got
politicized in spite of myself,'' Abdulhamid says. After the publication
of his first novel, ''Menstruation,'' a sometimes-surreal depiction of
the sexual and intellectual mores of young Syrians, the foreign
diplomatic community in Damascus identified him as one of the important
voices articulating the rising generation's disenchantment. ''The novel
made it so that many embassies wanted to hear my take on things,'' he
explains.''I was frank before, but no one was asking.''
Abdulhamid's outspokenness helped win him invitations to conferences
abroad and grant money from European foundations, which he used to start
the Tharwa Project, a Damascus-based group with a Web site monitoring
the status of Middle Eastern minorities. Tharwa is a bold initiative in
a country that's sensitive about its minority issues, especially those
involving the historically marginalized Kurdish population. Still, the
ruling Assad family -- which is itself drawn from the minority Alawite
population -- has looked kindly on Tharwa. ''We met with the president's
wife,'' Abdulhamid says. ''She was interested and complimentary, but
confused. She wanted to know if we were Kurds.''
Abdulhamid is actually a member of the country's Sunni Muslim Arab
majority. Indeed, he went through a brief fundamentalist phase, which
ended with his disgust at the fatwa against Salman Rushdie. ''Without
that period in my life,'' he told me, ''I never would've been assertive.
As a fundamentalist, it was my responsibility to preach and teach, and
so I had to live up to this idea I invested in myself. It's why I'm as
inquisitive and self-inquisitive as I am today.''
In embracing first Islamism and then liberalism, Abdulhamid has
played a part in the two main opposition forces in Arab politics. If
today the two movements have little in common, they each did issue from
the same 19th-century Muslim reform movement that emphasized how far the
lands of Islam had fallen behind the West. In the early 20th century,
liberal democracy appeared to be the future of Arab politics, especially
in Egypt, where the country's popular revolution won Egyptians their
first modern constitution. But liberalism failed to take hold in the
rapidly growing middle class. Religion was the language they knew, and
organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood responded by dressing their
criticism of the existing political order in Islam's traditional message
of social justice.
Even as Arab liberals look ambivalently to Washington for support,
many American analysts warn against placing bets on them. ''We hail the
liberals as authentic voices for change in the Middle East,'' says Jon
Alterman of the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International
Studies. ''But what we don't hear is that many of these people have
accents when they speak Arabic as well.'' In other words, the liberals
are too Westernized to make an impact on the Arab masses. ''They won't
get anything done by talking to people like me,'' Alterman says. ''They
need to be at street rallies in the Arab world.''
Abdulhamid agrees. ''We need to go grass roots, and show some
bravery,'' he says. ''We need to build a constituency, and create
alliances, because without a strong opposition there is no change that's
going to come at the top.'' A key question, of course, is whether
liberals would be wise to build alliances with the more popular
Islamists. Would the victory of such a coalition bring liberals to
power, or hasten their demise?
Right now, such questions are largely academic in tightly controlled
Syria, where elections are not on anyone's calendar. Abdulhamid himself
says he hopes to spend the next year explaining the American viewpoint
to anyone in Damascus who will listen.
''A lot of people are waiting to see if Ammar is going to get into
trouble,'' says Joshua Landis, a Syria specialist at the University of
Oklahoma who is spending the year in Damascus. ''Some want to see if
this means they can advance their own agendas and stick their necks out.
But there's a lot of resentment as well. People here have spent their
careers observing all the red lines and playing by the rules, and if
Ammar gets away with it, they're going to feel like fools.''
Lee Smith, who has written for Slate and
Wired, is working on a book about Arab culture.
|