Syria as it exists on a map today only dates back to the end of World War 1 and the breakup of the Ottoman Empire. Yet increasingly the “map version” of Syria is just a memory as the civil war is dividing the country into three distinct entities.
Fighting in Homs Province is chasing Sunni supporters of the rebels northward, into rebel-held areas, while rebel offensives in Latakia are driving the nation’s Alawite minority south, into the area around Damascus. Even as this fight escalates, the rebel north is seeing growing fighting with Kurdish militias, which are trying to carve out a third, Kurdish entity in the northeast.
In many ways this new era of three Syrias, all fighting one another, reflects divisions that existed 1,000 years ago in the area. At the time, the region around Damascus, which is now Assad government territory, was the northern extent of the Fatimid Caliphate, a Shi’ite empire.
The rest of modern Syria, at the time, had fallen under the sway of the Seljuq Sultanate, and was dominated by Sunnis. Though today’s third region, Syrian Kurdistan, did not exist entirely independently at the time, but the Marwanids, a Kurdish dynasty, where forever trying to carve out relative autonomy in the region.
That wasn’t exactly a period of stability either, with the three entities constantly fighting over territory, particularly Homs and Aleppo (as today), but the current war seems to be going to same way, with de facto three-way autonomy and ongoing clashes seemingly the direction that the stalemate is sending Syria toward.
Apart from Syrian Kurdistan whose inhabitants have been treated less brutally by the Baathist Government and better than their Kurdish cousins in Turkey or in Iraq, have been treated by their respective governments (though since the overthrow of Sadaam, Iraqi Kurdistan has been semi autonomous, but not because the federal government would have it so), I would not be so ready to concede the breakup of the rest of Syria. The stakes are high for Iran, Russia and China, and while this conflict was initiated by the US clandestinely and through proxies and the rebels are ultimately aided by the US and will continue to do damage as long as the US maintains its semi-clandestine commitment, I cannot see the U.S. have the staying power to commit more atrocities indefinitely, where, especially as time goes on, the US will be be identified more and more as the perpetrator as the world turns against you. You can lie so much until your own people and everyone else stop believing you- and with the American public that already appears to be the case with respect to Syria.
Good history, with real insights.
First, I'd add that those parts of Syria were not independent. They were then part of bigger things. A big difference today is that those who would break up Syria most desperately would not want the pieces to join with their like. This is meant to be divide and conquer, not to strengthen other Muslim national groupings.
Second, once there was a Syria, it was bigger than this Syria. Syria today is the shrunken remainder that has not (yet) been chopped up and passed out to others.
What hypocrisy: Antiwar enrolls as one of the first the new chapter of the long planned war of USA on Syria.
See the first two video here: http://08oo.wordpress.com/2012/05/30/key-reasons-…
The map of division of Syria and greater Israel exists since many years – a google picture search will bring it up.
US/Israel/Saudi will be happy as long as the proposed oil pipeline from Iran to the Syrian Mediterranean coast via Iraq is blocked.
Syria is the graveyard for the Saudis, UAE barbarians and all other terrorist groups from EU to elsewhere in this world. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" means that USA have no friend whereby such politics the enemy's that are regarded as friends now have become the real enemy of USA, where USA have to close its embassies.., such politics deserves such friends.
Another ditzy simplification!