Amid the devastation left by the Assad regime, and with the acceleration of discussions about the future of the state's administrative system, calls for decentralization loom on the horizon as a magic solution to resolve the impasse. However, what is often proposed is not administrative decentralization that leads to enhanced efficiency and justice, but rather a conditional and distorted decentralization, built on sectarian and ethnic foundations, and sown in a weakened geography, making it more like a project of fragmentation rather than reform.
Basing decentralization on considerations of identity and belonging, rather than on the requirements of development and good governance, transforms it from a means of strengthening the state into a tool for its destruction. In the Syrian case, where ethnicities and sects intertwine over a complex historical mosaic, sectarian or ethnic decentralization becomes a bad omen, not a lifeline.
From Diversity to Fragmentation
Syria is not a patch of land that can be divided into small, uniform homelands. Its diversity is not a flaw to be isolated, but a treasure to be preserved. When sects become borders and minorities become authorities, the neighbor becomes a stranger, and the city becomes an arena of constant conflict. When decentralization is built on fanaticism, it does not produce justice; rather, it creates local governments that reproduce injustice and replace central oppression—if it exists—with a miniature tyranny. Here, we have always spoken of the convergence of diverse elites to evaluate the work of the central government.
When groups are granted the right to self-administration on a sectarian or ethnic basis, the citizen is no longer part of a comprehensive national entity, but rather becomes a subordinate to an ethnic or sectarian unity. Loyalty is fragmented, and Syrian identity crumbles in the face of sub-identities fueled by narrow calculations, foreign interests, and the dependence and subservience of some. Decentralization, then, is nothing more than a soft prelude to actual partition, which may begin with administrative maps and end only with the raising of different flags over previously unified lands. Give me today a person who can freely raise the Syrian flag in Sweida or the northeast, and take away from me the central government and even the presidency.
It is no secret that some international powers are fueling this pattern of decentralization, driven by a desire to reduce the influence of the central state and empower its local allies. This is done under the guise of supporting "pluralism," while the real goal is to build fragile entities loyal to foreign powers, not the nation. Instead of decentralization serving as a lever for sovereignty, it becomes a loophole exploited to redraw geography according to transnational interests.
A State Not Summarized by Sects
Syria, with its rich history and creative diversity, cannot tolerate projects of dwarfism. What appears at first glance to facilitate administration and achieve justice can turn into a curse if it is based on narrow affiliations rather than a comprehensive national project. Syria can only survive with a strong civil state that embraces its people, regardless of their sectarian differences, and does not divide them into warring states. A secure future is not built by dividing ruins, but rather by unity that heals wounds.
Beware of living again on the land of our ancestors as tenth-class citizens.
Mohammed Rafi Abu Hawa - Zaman al-Wasl
Comments About This Article
Please fill the fields below.