Syria: The Unwanted Political Alternative

Syrian Flag (Darkened) 

"When president Bashar al-Assad is either deposed or advised to relinquish his position; it is uncertain who will hold power and serve the interests of the Syrian people. It is also uncertain whether democracy - the initial demand of the Syrian protesters - will be the next political system in the country." (Cristina Caravaggio Giancchini in The Crisis in Syria & Possible Outcome)

The above words were written last February. Ten months have gone by and Bashar al-Assad has not been deposed nor has he followed the advice to step down. However, by looking at the present situation, I am forced to admit that, in terms of world security, it has been convenient to let him stay in "power" (despite his despicable behaviour towards his own people) since the "official" opposition forces weren't able to consolidate their position and their weakness allowed Radical Islamists to hijack the Syrian fight for democracy.

Better the devil we know than the Iblis we don't want to know... 
The ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant; an Al-Qaeda affiliate) and Al-Nusra have taken over Northern Syria where they have imposed the Shari'a Law. In "their territory" they imprison citizens (suspected of being either loyal to al-Assad or Kuffar), they torture them and, if needed be, they behead them in public.

In an article, written by Lina Sinjab, a father of four children (Mohammed) describes how he was taken into ISIS custody and charged with setting up "Sahwa against the state". Once in their base, he and others were whipped 70 times a day, during 33 days in a row, before he was released (two of his brothers died in prison).
Mohammed, in utter disappointment, recognises that his country has been occupied by foreigners who wish to impose their religious ideology upon Syrians; yet, he forms a very interesting conspiracy theory - he believes the jihadists are working for the government to "undermine the rebellion":

"[In Raqqa], they have occupied the governor's house and other former Baath Party buildings. But when the city comes under bombardment, only schools, hospitals and residential areas are hit, and not any ISIS-occupied locations,"

Although it is an interesting theory (since we have already suggested that Shiites and Sunnis do cooperate to achieve common goals, and because Jihadist groups seem to be doing al-Assad a favour by fighting against the Western-backed FSA), it could be said that Mohammed is in the right track but perhaps pointing the finger at the wrong government.

Iran has been waging proxy wars in Iraq (through Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq), in Syria (through Al-Assad's forces and Hezbollah) and in Gaza (through Hamas and the Islamic Jihad).
Saudi Arabia has been waging proxy wars in Iraq (through the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant [ISIS]), in Syria (through Al-Nusra Front and the ISIS) and in "Palestine" (through the various local terrorist groups).
These two countries have been fighting each other at the expense of the people of the nations they influence; therefore, when Mohammed said that ISIS is being protected by a government he should look towards Saudi Arabia, although the jihadists (for now) are rendering al-Assad's a service - hence the ISIS-occupied positions are not being hit by his forces.

We are in December: it remains uncertain whether democracy will be the next political system in Syria, or if the interests of the Syrian people will be served at all; especially when Jihadist groups seem to aim at replacing al-Assad. If Islamo-Fascists are allowed to get the Levant, they will think that only the sky is the limit.

For lack of a desirable alternative (and because the Western-backed opposition seems to be the weaker actor in the conflict) it seems to be more convenient, for the moment, to maintain the Status Quo...