منذ استقلال سورية عام 1946،عانت أنظمة الحكم من حالتين أساسيتين رافقت الدولة طويلا؛ الحالة الأولى «العسكرتارية» التي سيطرت على البلاد حتى عام 2024، هذا النوع من التفكير على مدى عقود من الزمن همش السياسة، بل حولها إلى واجهة للعسكر، ورزحت سورية تحت هذا النمط من الحكم الذي بات مثاراً للمشاكل مع الجوار، ولعل الشواهد كثيرة لزعماء سورية الذين وزعوا المشاكسات الإقليمية وحتى التدخلات العسكرية على دول الجوار كان آخرها هيمنة الجيش السوري على لبنان، واستخدام المليشيات في حل القضايا السياسية كما كان الحال مع إسرائيل حين استخدم الأسد حزب الله وحركتي حماس والجهاد لفرض نفسه دائما على الطاولة الإسرائيلية.
أما الحالة الثانية التي عانت منها سورية وكانت حالة موازية مع العسكرتارية، فهي فرض الأيديولوجيا على السياسة الخارجية في معظم الأحيان، وأصبح العالم إلى حد قريب في السياسة الخارجية «من هو بعثي ليس منا»، فالبعث، على سبيل المثال، لم يتعامل مع سورية من منطلق الجغرافيا السياسية لهذا البلد، واحترام الجوار ونسج علاقات ذات بعد إستراتيجي مع الجوار، بل تم تهميش عمق ودور سورية الجيوسياسي لصالح الأيديولوجيا المعلبة، لذا فإن حالة العداء السوري- العراقي -على سبيل المثال- بين جناحي البعث اليميني واليساري كانت الأيديولوجيا هي المحرك الأساسي للعلاقة مع العراق وأحيانا الشخصنة بين الأسد وصدام، بل حتى العلاقة مع دول الخليج في كثير من الأحيان كانت مبنية على النظرية البعثية التقليدية الخشبية «الدول التقدمية والدول الرجعية».
ما بعد العسكرتارية والأيديولوجيا
وربما يسأل المراقبون السياسيون اليوم: ماذا عن سورية الجديدة وحقبة الرئيس أحمد الشرع الانتقالية التي تمتد إلى خمس سنوات، وما هو عمق سورية الإستراتيجية ومنطلقات السياسة الخارجية؟
وباعتبار سورية «رادار الشرق الأوسط» على حد وصف الكاتب الصحفي البريطاني الشهير باتريك سيل، صاحب كتاب «حافظ والشرق الأوسط»؛ فإن العديد من دوائر القرار السياسي ومراكز الأبحاث العربية والدولية بدأت تفكر منذ 8 ديسمبر عن محددات السياسة الخارجية السورية، في بلد شكل البعث وجهه الخارجي السياسي منذ 1963 إلى 2024. كان حديث الشرع في خطاب تعيينه رئيساً للمرحلة الانتقالية في 30 يناير، واضح الملامح في رؤية سورية الجديدة، التي ترتكز على البناء والتطوير ولم يتضمن الخطاب أية كلمة مواجهة أو مخاطر خارجية ما يعني أن الوجهة السورية الجديدة هي للداخل لتحويل مسار سورية من بلد مغلق إلى بلد منفتح اقتصادياً وهذا بطبيعة الحال يتطلب «صفر مشاكل».
في الخطاب الثاني الذي يعتبر أكثر أهمية بعد قرار الرئيس الأمريكي دونالد ترمب برفع العقوبات عن سورية، حينها استخدم الشرع عبارات تشكل مفاتيح السياسة الخارجية، حين قال «لن تكون سورية بعد اليوم ساحة لتقاسم النفوذ، وأن سورية نجحت في فتح أبواب كانت مغلقة، ومهدت الطريق لعلاقات إستراتيجية مع الدول العربية والغربية».
تشير مثل هذه التصريحات إلى أن سورية اليوم تختلف كلياً عن سورية السابقة، خصوصاً أن سورية ما بعد رفع العقوبات اتجهت نحو الرؤية الغربية في بناء الدولة، بعد أن بقيت سورية خارج الفلك الغربي واختارت المسار الاشتراكي حتى بعد انهيار الاتحاد السوفييتي، إذ طالما حافظ البعث على سرديات «ميتة» ظلت أداة من أدواتها الشعبوية في الحفاظ على السلطة.
نفض غبار الدولة المشاكسة
من الواضح تماماً أن مبدأ «تصفير المشاكل» لسورية هو المبدأ الذي يحكم السياسة الخارجية، وهذا يدل على أن سورية يمكن أن تكون دولة بناءة في جمع العلاقات العربية والإقليمية وأن تنفض غبار الدولة «المشاكسة» التي تتأرجح بين محاور الشر وبين بيت العرب دون أن تعرف نفسها على الخارطة الدولية.
لذا فإن إعادة تعريف دور سورية الإقليمي استناداً إلى السياسة الخارجية اليوم، أمر في غاية الأهمية حتى تتبلور الرؤية في إطار عربي وإقليمي، وهذا ما يحدد مسؤوليات سورية مستقبلا في صياغة الأمن العربي والإقليمي وحتى الدولي.
ولعل السعودية، ساهمت إلى حد كبير في تسليط الضوء الدولي على سورية، خصوصا بعد دورها المهم في رفع العقوبات، وعلى اعتبار أن السياسة لا تنفصل عن الاقتصاد، فإن التوجه إلى فتح أبواب الاستثمارات ما هو إلا امتداد للرؤية السياسية القائمة على تنوع العلاقات وفق المصالح المتبادلة.. وتبقى سورية اليوم تحت المجهر لفترة طويلة حتى تجد نفسها على الطريق الصحيح، دولة تشبه محيطها العربي والإقليمي لا دولة استثناء سلبي كما كانت على مدى عقود.
طي صفحة الخلافات مع الجوار
حتى مؤشر الشخصنة للرئيس الشرع من الناحية الواقعية كان لافتاً في العقل السياسي الخارجي لسورية الجديدة، وعلى الرغم من الحالة المتوترة بين العراق وسورية بعد سقوط نظام الأسد والكثير من التحريض ضد الإدارة الجديدة، إلا أن الشرع التقى مرتين مدير المخابرات العراقية العامة في دمشق حميد الشطري، في محاولة لطي صفحة الخلاف بين البلدين، والاتجاه إلى نوع جديد من العلاقة يقوم على المصالح المشتركة وعلى متطلبات أمن واقتصاد البلدين، خصوصاً أن الحدود العراقية السورية تصل إلى 600 كيلومتر، فضلا عن العلاقات الاجتماعية على حدود البلدين وحاجة سورية لنفط العراق واقتصاده، إضافة إلى حاجة العراق لبحر سورية المتوسط الذي يمكن العراق من إطلالة متوسطية طالما كان العراق بحاجة لها، بل ذهب الشرع إلى أكثر من ذلك بلقاء رئيس الوزراء محمد شياع السوداني في الدوحة 16 أبريل الماضي، ما يقود إلى اعتقاد مبدئي أن سورية اليوم ليست دولة «شخصنة» أو دولة عداء شخصي.
صحيح أن كل ما تريده الدولة السورية الجديدة هو مجرد توجه ورؤية حالمة في كثير من الأحيان، إلا أن النظرية السياسية اليوم لسورية تختلف عن ستة عقود من الزمن، لا عداوات ولا مواجهات «دونكشوتية» ولا مزايدات، بل إن خارطة تحركات الشرع في الأشهر الثلاثة الأولى من رئاسته الانتقالية، من السعودية إلى تركيا وباريس، تشير إلى تحول إستراتيجي في سورية يقوم على جعلها دولة تشاركية ونقطة وصل بين دول الإقليم لا ساحة صراع أو استقطاب.
كيف تخلصت سورية من إرث المحاور ؟
الشرع.. وسياسة «تصفير المشكلات»
6 يونيو 2025 - 02:08
|
آخر تحديث 6 يونيو 2025 - 02:08
الرئيس السوري أحمد الشرع
تابع قناة عكاظ على الواتساب
عبدالله الغضوي (دمشق) GhadawiAbdullah@
Since Syria's independence in 1946, the ruling regimes have suffered from two fundamental conditions that have long accompanied the state; the first condition is "militarism," which dominated the country until 2024. This type of thinking over decades marginalized politics, turning it into a facade for the military. Syria has endured this style of governance, which has become a source of problems with its neighbors. There are many examples of Syrian leaders who distributed regional provocations and even military interventions in neighboring countries, the latest being the Syrian army's dominance over Lebanon and the use of militias to resolve political issues, as was the case with Israel when Assad used Hezbollah and the movements of Hamas and Jihad to always impose himself at the Israeli table.
The second condition that Syria suffered from, which paralleled militarism, was the imposition of ideology on foreign policy most of the time. The world, until recently, viewed foreign policy as "whoever is Ba'athist is not one of us." The Ba'ath, for example, did not engage with Syria from the perspective of the geopolitical reality of this country, respecting its neighbors and weaving relationships with a strategic dimension. Instead, the depth and geopolitical role of Syria were marginalized in favor of packaged ideology. Thus, the Syrian-Iraqi animosity, for instance, between the right and left wings of the Ba'ath was primarily driven by ideology in its relationship with Iraq and sometimes by personal animosities between Assad and Saddam. Even the relationship with Gulf countries was often based on the traditional wooden Ba'athist theory of "progressive states and reactionary states."
Post-Militarism and Ideology
Political observers today might ask: What about the new Syria and the transitional era of President Ahmad al-Shara, which extends for five years? What is the depth of Syria's strategic position and the foundations of its foreign policy?
Considering Syria as the "radar of the Middle East," as described by the famous British journalist Patrick Seale, author of "Hafez and the Middle East," many political decision-making circles and Arab and international research centers have begun to think since December 8 about the determinants of Syrian foreign policy in a country where the Ba'ath has shaped its external political face from 1963 to 2024. Al-Shara's speech upon his appointment as president of the transitional phase on January 30 was clear in its vision for the new Syria, which focuses on construction and development, and the speech did not include any mention of confrontation or external dangers, indicating that the new Syrian direction is inward, aiming to transform Syria from a closed country to an open one economically, which naturally requires "zero problems."
In the second speech, which is considered more significant following U.S. President Donald Trump's decision to lift sanctions on Syria, al-Shara used phrases that form the keys to foreign policy when he said, "Syria will no longer be a battleground for the sharing of influence, and Syria has succeeded in opening doors that were closed, paving the way for strategic relations with Arab and Western countries."
Such statements indicate that Syria today is entirely different from the previous Syria, especially since post-sanctions Syria has moved towards a Western vision of state-building, after having remained outside the Western orbit and choosing the socialist path even after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The Ba'ath has long maintained "dead" narratives that remained tools of its populism in maintaining power.
Brushing Off the Dust of the Troublemaking State
It is clear that the principle of "zero problems" for Syria is the guiding principle of its foreign policy, indicating that Syria can be a constructive state in gathering Arab and regional relations and shake off the dust of the "troublesome" state that oscillates between axes of evil and the Arab home without knowing its place on the international map.
Therefore, redefining Syria's regional role based on today's foreign policy is of utmost importance for crystallizing the vision within an Arab and regional framework, which will determine Syria's future responsibilities in shaping Arab, regional, and even international security.
Saudi Arabia has significantly contributed to shedding international light on Syria, especially after its important role in lifting sanctions. Considering that politics is inseparable from economics, the approach to opening investment doors is merely an extension of the political vision based on diverse relationships according to mutual interests. Syria remains under scrutiny for a long time until it finds itself on the right path, a state resembling its Arab and regional surroundings, not a negative exception as it has been for decades.
Turning the Page on Disputes with Neighbors
Even the personalization index of President al-Shara, from a realistic perspective, was striking in the foreign political mindset of the new Syria. Despite the tense situation between Iraq and Syria following the fall of Assad's regime and much incitement against the new administration, al-Shara met twice with the head of the Iraqi General Intelligence in Damascus, Hamid al-Shatri, in an attempt to turn the page on the disputes between the two countries and move towards a new type of relationship based on mutual interests and the security and economic needs of both countries, especially since the Iraqi-Syrian border stretches for 600 kilometers, in addition to the social relations along the borders and Syria's need for Iraqi oil and its economy, as well as Iraq's need for Syria's Mediterranean Sea, which has long been essential for Iraq. Al-Shara even went further by meeting with Prime Minister Muhammad Shia al-Sudani in Doha on April 16, leading to a preliminary belief that Syria today is not a state of "personalization" or personal enmity.
It is true that all the new Syrian state wants is merely a direction and a dreamy vision at times, yet the political theory of Syria today differs from the past six decades; there are no enmities or "Don Quixote" confrontations or bidding wars. Rather, the map of al-Shara's movements in the first three months of his transitional presidency, from Saudi Arabia to Turkey and Paris, indicates a strategic transformation in Syria aimed at making it a participatory state and a connecting point between the countries of the region, not a battleground or a polarization site.
The second condition that Syria suffered from, which paralleled militarism, was the imposition of ideology on foreign policy most of the time. The world, until recently, viewed foreign policy as "whoever is Ba'athist is not one of us." The Ba'ath, for example, did not engage with Syria from the perspective of the geopolitical reality of this country, respecting its neighbors and weaving relationships with a strategic dimension. Instead, the depth and geopolitical role of Syria were marginalized in favor of packaged ideology. Thus, the Syrian-Iraqi animosity, for instance, between the right and left wings of the Ba'ath was primarily driven by ideology in its relationship with Iraq and sometimes by personal animosities between Assad and Saddam. Even the relationship with Gulf countries was often based on the traditional wooden Ba'athist theory of "progressive states and reactionary states."
Post-Militarism and Ideology
Political observers today might ask: What about the new Syria and the transitional era of President Ahmad al-Shara, which extends for five years? What is the depth of Syria's strategic position and the foundations of its foreign policy?
Considering Syria as the "radar of the Middle East," as described by the famous British journalist Patrick Seale, author of "Hafez and the Middle East," many political decision-making circles and Arab and international research centers have begun to think since December 8 about the determinants of Syrian foreign policy in a country where the Ba'ath has shaped its external political face from 1963 to 2024. Al-Shara's speech upon his appointment as president of the transitional phase on January 30 was clear in its vision for the new Syria, which focuses on construction and development, and the speech did not include any mention of confrontation or external dangers, indicating that the new Syrian direction is inward, aiming to transform Syria from a closed country to an open one economically, which naturally requires "zero problems."
In the second speech, which is considered more significant following U.S. President Donald Trump's decision to lift sanctions on Syria, al-Shara used phrases that form the keys to foreign policy when he said, "Syria will no longer be a battleground for the sharing of influence, and Syria has succeeded in opening doors that were closed, paving the way for strategic relations with Arab and Western countries."
Such statements indicate that Syria today is entirely different from the previous Syria, especially since post-sanctions Syria has moved towards a Western vision of state-building, after having remained outside the Western orbit and choosing the socialist path even after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The Ba'ath has long maintained "dead" narratives that remained tools of its populism in maintaining power.
Brushing Off the Dust of the Troublemaking State
It is clear that the principle of "zero problems" for Syria is the guiding principle of its foreign policy, indicating that Syria can be a constructive state in gathering Arab and regional relations and shake off the dust of the "troublesome" state that oscillates between axes of evil and the Arab home without knowing its place on the international map.
Therefore, redefining Syria's regional role based on today's foreign policy is of utmost importance for crystallizing the vision within an Arab and regional framework, which will determine Syria's future responsibilities in shaping Arab, regional, and even international security.
Saudi Arabia has significantly contributed to shedding international light on Syria, especially after its important role in lifting sanctions. Considering that politics is inseparable from economics, the approach to opening investment doors is merely an extension of the political vision based on diverse relationships according to mutual interests. Syria remains under scrutiny for a long time until it finds itself on the right path, a state resembling its Arab and regional surroundings, not a negative exception as it has been for decades.
Turning the Page on Disputes with Neighbors
Even the personalization index of President al-Shara, from a realistic perspective, was striking in the foreign political mindset of the new Syria. Despite the tense situation between Iraq and Syria following the fall of Assad's regime and much incitement against the new administration, al-Shara met twice with the head of the Iraqi General Intelligence in Damascus, Hamid al-Shatri, in an attempt to turn the page on the disputes between the two countries and move towards a new type of relationship based on mutual interests and the security and economic needs of both countries, especially since the Iraqi-Syrian border stretches for 600 kilometers, in addition to the social relations along the borders and Syria's need for Iraqi oil and its economy, as well as Iraq's need for Syria's Mediterranean Sea, which has long been essential for Iraq. Al-Shara even went further by meeting with Prime Minister Muhammad Shia al-Sudani in Doha on April 16, leading to a preliminary belief that Syria today is not a state of "personalization" or personal enmity.
It is true that all the new Syrian state wants is merely a direction and a dreamy vision at times, yet the political theory of Syria today differs from the past six decades; there are no enmities or "Don Quixote" confrontations or bidding wars. Rather, the map of al-Shara's movements in the first three months of his transitional presidency, from Saudi Arabia to Turkey and Paris, indicates a strategic transformation in Syria aimed at making it a participatory state and a connecting point between the countries of the region, not a battleground or a polarization site.