-
Response to "Vision" by Moaz al-Khatib and his approach to the Syrian crisis
I read the points raised by Sheikh Moaz al-Khatib regarding "Syrian unity" and what Syrians should hold onto. However, what he wrote raises fundamental questions before it can be considered a national program.
First: It is unfortunate that those who speak of "the homeland" and "Syrian unity" deliberately overlook one of the most complex and important issues in Syria: the Kurdish question. It is as if the millions of Kurds in Syria do not exist, or they are simply margins that can be removed from the narrative! Isn’t this the same mentality practiced by successive regimes from independence until today?
Second: The Sheikh talks about "decentralized administration," but he dares not acknowledge the need for a genuine democratic solution to the national question, nor recognize the existence of ethnic, religious, and sectarian diversity in Syria. How can a just state be built on a narrow, one-dimensional definition of Arabism and Islam?
Third: The Sheikh’s speech—at its core—does not differ from the speeches of the regimes that ruled us: everyone dispensing advice about unity while suppressing diversity and denying the Other. Invoking unity without a clear recognition of the rights of the Kurds and other components is nothing but a new recipe for tyranny and dictatorship.
Fourth: When he states "we reject carrying any flag other than the Syrian flag," he re-produces the same Baathist logic: one flag, one identity, one party. But what kind of homeland is this that is reduced to a top-down flag imposed by one side, neglecting the symbols, rights, and identities of others?
Fifth: Yes, Syria is threatened by division and collapse. But the reason is not the "components" or "diversity," but rather the denial of this diversity and the imposition of religious or ethnic tutelage over it. The neglect that Sheikh demonstrated in his text towards the Kurds is the same as what successive regimes did: erasing the Other in the name of unity.
Sixth: There is no future for Syria except through genuine democracy and a new constitution that explicitly recognizes the Kurds as an original people with their national rights, alongside other components. Any talk of Syrian unity without this recognition is nothing but a tragic repetition of Baathist slogans.
The project of Sheikh Khatib is no different from previous projects that failed because they ignored a fundamental truth: Syria is not owned by a sect, ethnicity, or religious trend. Syria is a homeland for all, and it will only stand firm through mutual recognition and equitable partnership—not through guardianship or denial.
Dr. Rizwan Badini
