What About Federalism?

A Reading on Syrian Events: What About Federalism?
Ambassador Dr. Hisham Hamdan

Syria is currently experiencing a concerning situation following the historic victory of Syrian opposition forces over the iron-fisted regime of Hafez al-Assad and his descendants.

Groups from Druze and Alawite religious minorities in areas where these minorities are concentrated have moved against the new regime. This stance adds to the ongoing tense reality between the authorities in Damascus and Kurdish groups. Israel intervened on the side of the Druze, adding to ongoing Iranian, Turkish, Russian, and American interventions. This has raised numerous concerns about potential plans to divide Syria.

It is noteworthy that reactions in Lebanon regarding interventions in Syria’s internal affairs had not been as intense until the recent stance taken by the former leader of the Progressive Socialist Party against Druze leaders in Syria and Israel. We believe that the driving force behind such a stance is the renewed talk about old plans to establish a Druze state and an Alawite state.
Partition Plans

In Lebanon, we have every right to feel concerned about this situation and the potential scenarios being discussed. The idea of establishing an Alawite state and a Druze state is not new; it has long been associated with European colonial projects and Zionist expansion plans in the region. However, in the current phase, such a plan would undoubtedly mean another partition project for Lebanon — a scenario we warned about when discussing the potential outcomes of the reckless support war conducted by what is called the “Resistance.”

The Druze state would not be complete without displacing the Shia majority from parts or all of the south toward the Beqaa region, where the Shia majority resides. This would facilitate the establishment of the Alawite state, which would also require annexing the northeastern Beqaa region of Lebanon, where the vast majority of the Shia population lives. Both projects anticipated violent Druze-Shia clashes, signs of which have begun to emerge in disputes between some mountain residents and displaced Shia populations there.

The idea of establishing an Alawite state and a Druze state is not new; it has long been associated with European colonial projects and Zionist expansion plans in the region.

A ceasefire was declared, and displaced Shia residents began returning to their villages and lands. That shadow of partition disappeared. Thus, we believe that partition objectives in Syria are unlikely. On one hand, the region’s inhabitants have developed sufficient resilience to reject this division; on the other hand, regional and international powers no longer view partition as necessary to achieve their interests.

We believe that what is happening in Syria is a Syrian internal affair. Israel’s stance, as recently seen in the conflict between the Syrian government and certain Druze factions, does not mean that the Druze in Syria wish to separate from their homeland. Instead, this stance should be understood within the context of international power dynamics. We believe that Israel is exerting pressure on the Syrian regime, using Druze concerns as a tool for that pressure. Therefore, rather than assigning accusations of betrayal or offering political advice, it is preferable to defuse the issue through dialogue among the concerned parties.
Federalism as a Solution

Adopting federalism, as was done in Iraq, could help reduce the anxieties of minorities such as the Druze, Alawites, and Kurds regarding the Muslim Brotherhood-led regime in Damascus. The federal model remains the most realistic approach to addressing the situation. Failure to address minority concerns will sustain foreign interventions, potentially exacerbating them.

The Muslim Brotherhood system, whether in Syria or Turkey, has well-known religious dimensions. The Brotherhood emerged in Turkey within the framework of a secular democratic system with established national interests, as a NATO member and with vital agreements that limit the role of religious factors in Turkey’s daily political life. In Syria, however, the Brotherhood came to power after a dictatorial regime that once bombed Aleppo with chemical weapons. As a result, trust among Syria’s internal components is lacking.

Adopting federalism, as was done in Iraq, could help reduce the anxieties of minorities such as the Druze, Alawites, and Kurds regarding the Muslim Brotherhood-led regime in Damascus.

Federalism preserves all societal components within the Syrian state and under Syria’s legal system. Naturally, an agreement on this federal system can be reached without disrupting the political process of the new regime in the country.

There is no need to engage in debates about Israel’s role. Enough with the exploitation of so-called Arab nationalism and the exaggerated rhetoric about Druze defending the frontiers. We must move beyond inherited wooden language and outdated nationalist slogans. What Arab nationalism are we talking about? Most Arab states have established relations with Israel, and we expect that Syria itself will soon establish relations with it as well.