Subscription 790/year or 190/quarter

Meanwhile, in Syria, Libya, Bosnia

In Bosnia, peace created the ethnic divide no general, no army, no genocide would achieve. Will the same thing happen in Syria?




(THIS ARTICLE IS MACHINE TRANSLATED by Google from Norwegian)

In its latest report, Amnesty International writes about war crimes "to an epic extent". It is not about Yemen, nor about Libya or Iraq – it is about Syria. Since May there has been a ceasefire in the country. Following scud missiles, gas attacks and cluster bombs, Syria has now received a new weapon: peace. The war is not over – not at all. Over three million Syrians, one-fifth of the current population, are still living under siege or in difficult-to-reach areas. A decrease of 50 percent from May, true enough – but this only because IS has fallen and IS-controlled areas have been released.

UN advisor on humanitarian issues Jan Egeland points this out. But there is also more: the war is taking place in Damascus city center, where the Christmas lights are shining again these days and the reconstruction of the city has increased. Despite warnings that the reconstruction work could cost close to 350 million dollars and last for 30 years, Assad does not seem particularly concerned. On the contrary: "Yes, we lost our best youth, but in return we now have a healthier and more harmonious society," he said in August.

The rebels' loss. Rather than a reconstruction is what is currently taking place transformation of Syria, quite openly with a different country as a goal. Many of the sites currently in ruins were built relatively recently, often illegally and without planning, experts say. So why rebuild them the way they were, in every way fragile? Decree 66, introduced in 2012, is a crucial document in this context. It is about new development of informal buildings, which before the war – when one-third of the population lived below starvation and another third lived near it – housed about 40 percent of the Syrians.

Decree 66 [see photo] was hotly debated right from the start – and in fact one of the sparks that ignited the revolution. It represented one of these ultra-liberal reforms that make the rich get richer at the expense of an ever-growing majority of poor people, because it allowed local for-profit makers to replace old, dilapidated houses with luxurious skyscrapers – new, elegant apartments that the original people never wanted could afford. In short, it is about the gentrification process that is going on all over the world. In Syria today, after seven years of war and 500 dead, the development is happening even more smoothly since many property registers have been destroyed. And a large number of Syrians who have neither died nor emigrated are unable to prove that property is yours. The map of the first areas affected – Basateen al-Razi in Damascus, Baba Amr in Hams, Eastern Aleppo – says it all. These places are at the heart of the revolution. Those who lose everything are those who set out against Assad. Decree 000 does not kill, it is true. But when it comes down to it, it has the same effect as the jets constantly hammering at those who still dare not surrender.

With the help of the UN. On the other hand: What happens to the returning Syrians? Fadi Ahmad Ismail is the government's representative for reconciliation in Aleppo. Anyone who has fought or just criticized Assad comes in contact with him. These must commit to never again act against the state, otherwise they will be imprisoned. But this is not necessarily enough. "No matter what the government does," General Issam Zahreddin said in the Republican Garden in October, before he was killed, "we will not forget. We will not forgive. "

Through the appointment of officials such as Fadi Ahmad Ismail and the implementation of laws such as Decree 66 as well as countless other apparent technical measures, Assad is trying to tailor a new Syria. And again, the UN is its best ally, since the UN in Syria is not blocked by Russia. UN operations in the country started as humanitarian aid: Not only did the UN buy millions of dollars of goods and services from blacklisted businessmen such as Assad's cousin and baker for some of Assad's bloodiest militias Rami Makhlouf; The UN decided to trade only with the internationally recognized government in Damascus; they also never checked their convoys or examined where and with whom their food, fuel and medicines ended up. This is how the UN helped Assad maintain a facade of normality; to provide for the Syrians in Assad-controlled areas and starve all the others. In this way, the dictator emerged as a guarantor of order and stability.

We Europeans are never simply French or Germans, which is why, although it seemed unrealistic, we achieved peace 70 years ago.

Divide and Conquer. The subsequent negotiations in Geneva followed the same line. Instead of seeking a general, nationally negotiated agreement, the UN advocated a series of ceasefire agreements at the local level. This was a choice, or perhaps a necessity, given the fragmentation of armed groups, but surely every ceasefire came about through population exchanges between rebels and loyalists, Sunnis and Shias; through sectarian and confessional deliberations – where the rebels, step by step, were gathered in areas where they could be bombed for submission or annihilation. Today's so-called reconstruction is just another tool for this demographic metamorphosis of Syria. UN Development Program UNDP seems unable to manage and monitor the implementation of the projects it is funding – which, on the contrary, is run by a government ranked 173 out of 176 on the world's corruption index.

This is not the reconstruction of the state, but the regime. And for many analysts, this is the best solution – a strengthening of what they in French call "Syrian Utile": Damascus, Homs, Aleppo and Latakia – the most advanced and modern cities in the country – while everyone else is cut out, as if they are not was nothing but a diffuse necrosis of jihadists and poverty. Rather than an appropriate Syria, what is now taking shape is a tamed Syria. A Syria divided between Sunnis and Shi'ites – regardless of the Arab Spring of 2011 asking for freedom and dignity, that activists quoted Naomi Klein more often than the Qur'an. As in Iraq, and before that, in Lebanon, the solution for us is always to divide countries into ethnic, confessional and even politically homogeneous zones. The old divide-and-rule, after all. Because in this way it is easy to control the Middle East and the oil there.

More than one identity. But if it's so easy to split – why not steer instead? Who is the master and master? Few countries today are more divided than Libya, which no longer has a central government, just a number of competing centers of power. And no matter who you talk to in Libya – minister, mayor or gunman – everyone has their own demands to make to Europe. Especially to Italy. "To stop the migrants," you hear, "we want this and that." Everyone in Libya is looking for the highest bidder. So who exploits who?

We can quickly outline Libya as Tripolitania towards Kyrenaika, as east to west. As yet another country that does not actually exist, created by Italy the way Iraq was created by the British, Lebanon by the French. We read everything against a backdrop of fateful divisions: Sunni and Shi'ite, Islam and secularism, Serbs and Croats, Arabs and Jews – though all we meet turns out to have far more diverse, complex and layered identities. It is precisely Israelis and Palestinians – those we perceive as the most irreconcilable enemies of all – who truly resemble each other and are united rather than divided through a game of mirrors: united through what at the same time divides them. They are never simply Arabs and Jews. Like we Europeans are never simply French or Germans – which is why, although it seemed unrealistic, we achieved peace 70 years ago. Today, it is war that seems unrealistic.

In Mostar, Serbian and Croatian students are taught in different classrooms, with different teaching arrangements and curriculum, by different teachers. This is what we impose on them.

The fate of Bosnia. Nevertheless, the role model is still Bosnia. Dayton Agreement. The one who in 1995 reorganized the country into a federation and republic, plus a three-part presidency, with three governments and three parliaments, 136 ministers and 127 political parties. All this to achieve 43 percent unemployment, 63 percent among young people – the world's highest. The symbol of reconstruction is the bridge in Mostar, a city where Serbian and Croatian students are taught in different classrooms, with different teaching arrangements and curriculum, by different teachers. This is what we imposed upon them, believing that the students would otherwise loosen each other with a knife. Instead, they protest: They want to be together.

After 24 years, 161 prosecutions and 2,5 million print pages, the International Court of Former Yugoslavia finally shut down its business on December 21, 2017. For Bosnia, the time has come for item counts. And as Ed Vulliamy, a reporter who covered the war from the front lines, noted with bitterness in The Guardian: In Bosnia, peace has clearly created the ethnic divide that no general, no army, no genocide would achieve. For among the most unscrupulous criminals, we are often confirmed that the most victorious commanders are, as Sun Tzu would say, those who win the war without fighting.

Francesca Borri
Francesca Borri
Borri is a war correspondent and writes regularly for Ny Tid.

You may also like