Has Benghazi harmed the Syrian revolution?

The attack against the US Consulate in Benghazi has set alarm bells ringing in many capitals of the world. During one week, Al-Qaeda resurfaced in Libya, Jihadists in Sinai and armed Salafists in Tunisia. It was as if all extremists had come out to destroy the world. One of the political analysts on “Russia Today” TV said with a sarcastic smile: “We have told them that what is happening in Libya and Syria is the work of terrorist Islamist groups and not popular revolutions. We made it clear to them that their support to these alleged revolutions would be disastrous to the West and the entire world. They have not listened to us. The killing of the American ambassador is the fruit of the US policy in Libya.”
This accusation is not new, but it has moved many after the shocking incidents in Benghazi and Tunisia. Expressing similar fears, some press reports hinted that US President Barack Obama was weighing many options. The reports said the US administration was reconsidering its stance vis-à-vis the Syrian revolution. This is a serious thing if it is true. It will be difficult for me to explain in brief the significance of the support of big powers to the Syrian people in their revolution or to any other uprising. Without the support of big powers, the Syrian revolutionary organizations would be classified as terrorists. They might be prevented to work from Turkey and Jordan. It would be impossible for these organizations to collect money and weapons from Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Qatar. These organizations would virtually die like the Kurdish armed movements that existed for decades but were being besieged and remain without any legitimacy.
Here I want to be realistic and admit that the Syrian revolution has problems that are not less than those faced in Libya. There are future risks that cannot be ignored when the regime of Bashar Assad is overthrown. But the West will be mistaken if it looks at the Syrian revolution only through the prism of its fears concerning extremist fundamentalism. Syria is not Egypt. Assad is not Mubarak. The failure of the Syrian revolution is more perilous than its success. Extremist groups will mushroom, because they thrive on the failure of governments, chaos and anarchy. They will also gather the defeated and frustrated people around them. After a year of armed confrontation, the Syrian opposition has been able to weaken the regime and its institutions. In order to regain its authority, the Assad regime would be more ferocious against its own people, the countries of the region, and Western interests. In this case, Western countries would be obliged to go to Syria for fighting the regime as they did in Iraq. They broke the backbone of Saddam’s regime during the war to liberate Kuwait in 1991 and came back again in 2003 to give it the final fatal blow. The result is the chaos that still exists in Iraq. The regime in Iraq is now gradually being swallowed by Iran.
The second aspect is that the toppling of the Assad regime is necessary for Syria, the region and the international community and that is more significant than the downfall of the regimes of Qaddafi in Libya and Saddam Hussein in Iraq. Bashar Assad is the long arm of Iran in the Arab region. He managed most terrorist groups for over 40 years against the countries of the region and the West. There is much evidence linking Al-Qaeda to the Syrian and Iranian regimes. The Syrian regime had its hand in most of the terrorist operations carried out in Iraq during the past eight years. I will not be surprised if it is found that the attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi, carried out by Al-Qaeda or any other terrorist organization, was the work of the Syrian regime or its allies. The attack against the American Consulate was designed to coincide with the anniversary of 9/11 and aimed at confusing and terrifying the US.
The third aspect is the popularity of the Syrian revolution in the region. I do not know of any cause, apart from the Palestinian issue, which has dominated Arab sentiments and hearts like the Syrian revolution. Support for the Syrian revolution in the region is huge. Part of this support has been due to the brutal crimes the regime is committing daily against its people, which the Arabs watch live on TV channels. Because of these brutal crimes, Arabs have turned against Russia and Iran. They are also angry with the West for its attitude.
Going back to the attack against the US Consulate in Benghazi, which raised the fears of the West, it is quite true that during the time of Qaddafi, the foreign diplomatic missions enjoyed complete safety and security. We should not, however, forget that Qaddafi, like Assad, was behind many terrorist operations around the world. The West should be aware that toppling of these criminal regimes would not be easy because they would carry out vindictive operations. Many other groups might surface to replace these regimes. Ultimately, the toppling of these bad regimes is for the welfare of the world.

[email protected]