The Alawites and the Future of Syria
print
tell a friend
Alawites Dance, circa 1880.
The Alawites are a small, historically oppressed people, whose political future will determine whether Syria remains united in some form or disintegrates into even smaller ethnic and religious entities.
As they will play such an important role, America, Israel, and other forces interested in the future of Syria might do well to get to know them, their concerns, and how others can best come to terms with them.
Syria’s non-Sunnis have historically lived in apprehension of what the Sunnis might do to them. Although Arab Sunnis are the largest religio-ethnic group in Syria, non-Sunni Arabs make up upwards of 40% of the population. Historically, until the end of Ottoman rule after World War I, the Sunnis assumed they were the region’s natural rulers, and by and large controlled the destinies of the large numbers of non-Sunnis who lived among them. The non-Sunnis seem to have “known their place” in Syrian society – second class citizens. The Sunnis determined the rules.
In the 19th century, Western concepts of nationalism and equality for all people began to appear in the Middle East. The idea that everyone – irrespective of ethnicity or religion – is equal before the law has seemed anathema to the Sunnis: such an idea would contradict the basic Islamic principle that non-Muslims – known as dhimmis, or second-class, barely-tolerated citizens – could live in an Islamic society only if they accepted their place as unequal and unworthy of political and social equality. However, even though all Sunnis might consider themselves equal, in reality, clans, tribes, or ethnic identities, not to mention gender, usually prevail.
After World War I, when the French ruled Syria, they tried to introduce the concept of equality of all people before the law – a principle that never took root. During French rule, the people today known as Alawites – and who today rule Syria – begged the French to allow them to set up their own state in their ancient homeland along the Mediterranean coast between today’s Lebanon and Turkey. One of those who most passionately supported this option was the grandfather of the ruler of Syria today: Suleyman al-Assad.
This is because Syrian Sunnis have historically referred to individual Alawites as “abid” (slave), and treated the Alawites as such. The Alawites were servants in Sunni households. Alawite tradition is filled with horror stories of Sunni abuse, both working in Sunni households and in other areas of as well.
The Alawites, an offshoot of Shiite Islam, were terribly discriminated against under Sunni rule. The Sunnis attitude towards the Alawites – and towards the other non-Muslims – was “noblesse oblige,” or an attitude of condescension, if not outright hostility.
According to Alawite religious beliefs, the Muslim prophet Muhammad’s cousin and son-in-law – Ali – was a deity. That a human could be a deity is anathema in Islam. Moreover, even though Christians are officially regarded as dhimmis, or second-class citizens, by the Muslims, many also refer to Christians as pagans: Christians deify Jesus who, in Muslim eyes, was a merely a prophet, born to a human mother and father.
Under the French and in the early years of Syrian independence after 1946, wealthy and respectable Sunnis did not want to have their sons serve in the military. Their Alawite servants, however, recognizing the military as a way to advance, persuaded their Sunni masters to sign recommendations to allow the children of their Alawite servants enter the military. Gradually, the Alawites rose in the ranks. Eventually in 1966, they overthrew the existing order, took over the country, and have dominated it since.
Many of these military officers, like their Christian counterparts, embraced Arab nationalism, perhaps hoping through nationalism to gain the equality that had eluded them in religion under the Sunni-dominated, society. These officers did their best to put their non-Sunni identities aside, and hoped – at times even demanded – that their Sunni fellow-Arabs do the same.
As the Alawites rose in the military, they also rose to senior positions in the Ba’ath Party, the basic tenant of which is militant Arab nationalism. But even as militant anti-Israeli Arab nationalists, these Alawites still feared that the majority-Sunnis would lie in wait, and pounce on the Alawites if the Alawites showed any weakness. The Alawites never allowed themselves forget that the Sunnis hated them; and that even though they controlled Syria, they had better come to an agreement with the leading Sunni families to provide them with stability and enable them to make money – in return for the Sunnis allowing the Alawites to control the country militarily and also make money.
tell a friendAbout the Author: Harold Rhode received in Ph.D. in Ottoman History and later served as the Turkish Desk Officer at the US Department of Defense. He is now a Senior Fellow at Gatestone Institute.
You might also be interested in:
You must log in to post a comment.
No Responses to “The Alawites and the Future of Syria”
2
Loading ...
Extremely inaccurate historical account. The writer forgets that two of the major nationalistic movements embraced by Syrians (ncluding the Ba'ath party) were created by Chrustians. Secularism has prevailed successfully in Syria for nearly a century. Better write history correctly. Very inaccurate and not worth reading.
Elightening, many ignore historical and factual aspects of distant cultures.
Extremely inaccurate historical account. The writer forgets that two of the major nationalistic movements embraced by Syrians (ncluding the Ba'ath party) were created by Chrustians. Secularism has prevailed successfully in Syria for nearly a century. Better write history correctly. Very inaccurate and not worth reading.
I agree 100% with 50% I of what he said. besides of the many wrong historical facts. The author two major areas. 1) the many historical examples of co-existence and traded with all including a very prosperous Jewish Syrians. 2) The speed of information and awareness which in the past has kept the silent majority uninformed. You get more information in a month what they use to get in a life time. Wouln' that bring new players and change your historical analysis?
Its good to see at least at attempt at fair reporting of the protagonists in Syria. All the western media has done in the past year has been the lionization of the FSA as if they are peaceful demarcates… I guess in the zeal of "get" Iran hysteria what is bad for Iran is somehow good for the world. I think the killing of our Ambassador in Libya has finally turn the tide of pro-Saudi and pro-salafi PR war against Iran and Assad to a more realistic view that neither Assad or the al-qaeda affiliated FSA is our "friend." Don't get me wrong this Article is flawed as it totally undermines the strength of Syrian nationalism and the long history of peaceful coexistence of Sunni, Shiite, Christians and Jews!
"the basic tenant of which is militant Arab nationalism".
It's "tenet".
Extremely inaccurate historical account. The writer forgets that two of the major nationalistic movements embraced by Syrians (ncluding the Ba’ath party) were created by Chrustians. Secularism has prevailed successfully in Syria for nearly a century. Better write history correctly. Very inaccurate and not worth reading.
I agree 100% with 50% I of what he said. besides of the many wrong historical facts. The author two major areas. 1) the many historical examples of co-existence and traded with all including a very prosperous Jewish Syrians. 2) The speed of information and awareness which in the past has kept the silent majority uninformed. You get more information in a month what they use to get in a life time. Wouln’ that bring new players and change your historical analysis?
Its good to see at least at attempt at fair reporting of the protagonists in Syria. All the western media has done in the past year has been the lionization of the FSA as if they are peaceful demarcates… I guess in the zeal of “get” Iran hysteria what is bad for Iran is somehow good for the world. I think the killing of our Ambassador in Libya has finally turn the tide of pro-Saudi and pro-salafi PR war against Iran and Assad to a more realistic view that neither Assad or the al-qaeda affiliated FSA is our “friend.” Don’t get me wrong this Article is flawed as it totally undermines the strength of Syrian nationalism and the long history of peaceful coexistence of Sunni, Shiite, Christians and Jews!
It is astonishing how much of historical “unfacts” u can gather in only one article!
“the basic tenant of which is militant Arab nationalism”.
It’s “tenet”.
elle est introuvable la page !!!
c bizarre, je viens de la lire!
mais t'inquiète, il est nul, tu n'a rien raté ..
tu as vérifié qu'elle est introuvable? et que ce n'est pas mon ordi qui me fait défaut…