History tells us that for a country emerging from the fires of war, the danger is not always in the ashes and embers buried beneath, but rather, the greatest danger lies in the wind—the wind of anger and the wind of justification.
Today, in our Syrian street, there are two voices: one that says all criticism is treason, and another that says all defense is naiveté. And both, if they intensify, serve only those who do not want this country to rise again.
The new liberated state—and the state, in its very essence, is not an idol to be blindly praised, nor is it a low wall in the path of our renaissance to be pelted with stones every morning out of ignorance. Rather, it is like a ship emerging from the fiercest storm, with a long way to go before reaching the harbor of safety and stability. Those who widen the holes in the hull today in the name of anger, seeking to draw attention to them, are drowning themselves before they drown the ship. And those who silence the warnings about the holes in the ship's hull in the name of loyalty—or who steer the ship without a compass in the name of obedience—are no less ignorant, for they are simply abandoning it to its inevitable fate of sinking or crashing against the rocks of oblivion.
No one is unaware of the Battle of Uhud. It was a painful military defeat, but the Quran transformed it into a political lesson in managing emotions and handling crises.
The ranks wavered, some deserted, a group retreated before the confrontation, the archers disobeyed orders, martyrs fell, and the battle was lost. However, the divine discourse was not one of gloating or vindictiveness, but rather a set of established principles for crisis management. Verses 120-180 of Surah Al Imran explain this:
1- He said: “So do not lose heart or grieve, for you will have the upper hand” (139). This prevented collective psychological collapse in both cases, by preventing denial of the event on the one hand, and preventing it from becoming a permanent complex on the other.
2- He said: “And such days We alternate among people” (140). This declared that alternation is a divine law; the alternation of circumstances, and the alternation of nations and people. Therefore, there is no discourse of “We are always victorious,” nor of “We are finished.” Defeat does not mean the loss of legitimacy, and victory does not mean infallibility. This applies to today as well. Neither the rhetoric of "the eternal leader" nor the rhetoric of "everyone is corrupt" is acceptable. An official is a servant of the people, and above all, he is a human being who makes mistakes and gets things right.
3- He said: {And He has already pardoned you} (152). He distinguished between error and loyalty. The archers erred; the error resulted in a serious exposure and cost a great deal. Yet, God and His Messenger pardoned them. They were not dismissed, they were not branded as traitors, and they did not become a "faction within the ranks." Therefore, the distinction here is crucial between: an error in decision-making due to circumstances—but not in moral values—and the severing of loyalty. A state that punishes those who err—but not traitors, of course—with political purges creates a destructive and permanent opposition.
4- He said: “Until you lose heart and dispute amongst yourselves and disobey” (152). He established clear criticism as the foundation for reform: three direct words: loss, dispute, disobedience. No justification, no burying of the problem. Sound policy is not based on covering up, but on an accurate description of the flaw.
5- He said: “And consult with them in the matter” (159). He established that consultation is a firm principle, not subject to circumstances. Consultation came after a setback. If the leadership had wanted to monopolize power, it would have said: “You have seen the result of your opinions.” But the text reinstates everyone in the decision-making process, because re-involving those who erred prevents a recurrence of division.
6- He said: “Those of you who turned back on the day the two armies met—it was Satan who caused them to slip” (155). Thus, we learn to control our emotions in the face of adversity; they were not stripped of their faith, nor were they expelled. It was said: a slip. Crisis management distinguishes between betrayal and a slip under pressure, and this is a crucial political distinction.
7- He said: “They say, ‘If we had any say in the matter, we would not have been killed here’” (154). This prevented the creation of an internal conspiracy theory: the discourse of “If we had been consulted, this would not have happened” began. The Quran did not suppress it, but rather addressed it with doctrinal analysis: “Say, ‘Even if you had been in your homes, those for whom death was decreed would have gone forth’” (3:17). That is, do not reduce the event to a narrow political interpretation that becomes inflated by exaggerating the “sole culprit theory.”
8- He said: “And do not think that those who were killed in the cause of Allah are dead” (169–171), thus abolishing the exploitation of martyrs for political gain. He reframed the loss within a broader and more noble context, for this is a tool of sound policy that does not allow bloodshed to become a commodity for emotional exploitation (gloating) or (one-upmanship).
Therefore, we say here that supporting the state means supporting it when it is right, just as we protect it from its mistakes. Criticizing it means wanting it to thrive, so we criticize it both positively and negatively, not becoming instruments of destruction and demolition. This is because loyalty is not mere applause, and freedom is not insult. And it is wise to do so. To speak the truth while fearing for the sake of the nation… not for its own benefit, nor against it. For the most dangerous threat to nations after their birth is not external enemies, but rather internal strife over the fate of their ship, causing it to sail against its sails. For it is then that criticism turns to gloating, and defense to denial, fracturing society. And there is always someone waiting for this moment of division to infiltrate.
The safety valve of this nation is not security alone, nor enthusiasm alone. Its safety valve is an awareness that distinguishes between those who reform and those who lie in wait or exploit the situation, between those who protect the state and those who seek refuge within it or plot against it.
We want a nation that does not fear its own people, nor hide behind slogans. We want a public that does not revel in destruction, nor sanctify error. A nation that listens grows, and a people that matures protects it, for between blind anger and blind loyalty, nations are lost.
We, the people of Syria today, must not be divided into two opposing camps, but rather a single fortress, its stones diverse yet united in protecting the homeland.
Yesterday, the world celebrated love—whether we agree with it or not—perhaps we Syrians should redefine it from our Syrian perspective.
For love is not a fleeting emotion, nor blind loyalty, nor defense without accountability. True love is protecting the one you love from their mistakes as much as from their enemies, safeguarding them from their whims as much as striving for their aspirations, and always speaking to them only the truth, even if it is bitter.
For if we truly love our homeland, we will not...Let our anger subside, and let us not surrender it to justify ourselves, for love that does not protect is not love, but rather a desire to possess.
Ayman Qasim al-Rifai - Zaman al-Wasl
Comments About This Article
Please fill the fields below.