"Two gangs. My people, be aware of both!"

Khaled Khalifa's novel, 'In praise of hatred' was originally published in Syria in 2006. It was subsequently banned in Syria by the regime and then republished in Lebanon a year later. In 2008, it was short-listed for the International Prize for Arabic Fiction. Since then, the book has been translated from Arabic into other languages. Throughout this post, I've referenced Leri Price's (2012) English translation of the novel.

The novel deals essentially with fundamentalism in a 1980's Aleppo. Both the secular regime and the Islamic organisation mentioned (although not acknowledged by name, the novel implies the Muslim Brotherhood and the Assad government) are portrayed as two sides of the same coin and hence portrayed as two fundamentalisms at war. Both of whom are engaged in a cycle of hatred and violence; both bring out the worst in each other and both display extremes in their behaviour. What's interesting, is that whilst the novel was a fictional portrayal of the events that occurred during the 1980's and published in 2006, it could easily describe the events taking place in Aleppo, and the wider country, over the past six years.

Continuing on from the idea of two fundamentalisms at war, it's interesting to note the narrator's own thoughts when she stated: "I used to think: if people die as martyrs for God, how do both the killers and killed enter paradise?" Both sides often claim superiority over the other (as the narrator does as the novel develops) and believe truth and right are on their side. The author's underlying message encapsulates the idea that violence would never really achieve much other than breeding a cycle of further violence, death and hatred. Consequently, only non-violence initiatives and dialogue will break the cycle and will bring about change and peace. In the novel, we don't see any dialogue between the "other sect", a reference to the Alawites who've dominated major positions within the government and army, and the majority Sunni population. Even between the secular and religious groups, little dialogue takes place. The little interactions we see between these groups in the novel illustrates the friction between them for example when the secular girls at the school mock those who wear the hijab by calling them the penguin club. They were even "frank about their hostility to us". The narrator continues to relate that "there was an unwritten pact between us and those girls. We openly exchanged spiteful glances and hatred as we sat in school like respectable classmates...we also concurred tacitly in our hatred of the Mukhabarat sympathisers". There is little respect and dialogue between the different groups and on the most part they all try to ignore each other, which can be illustrated the most when the narrator mentions that "the city was secret, the streets were secret, so were the stones and the people, houses, rooms, hearts...even laughter was secret in a city that celebrated secrecy ad where everything was enacted far from others' eyes. Recently I had started feeling that everyone was conspiring against everyone else." Even now, in reality, we can see how little the Assad regime wants to listen to the Syrian population with any dissent is met with imprisonment, bullets and barrel bombs. Or whether it's the Islamic State whose ideology is far from Islamic and a world away from representing the thoughts, wishes and demands of the typical Syrian yet they force their ideals by bullets or chemical weapons as well as hurling people off buildings and setting people on fire.

Sectarianism is prominent throughout the novel which portrays elements seen within Syrian society today. As previously mentioned, the novel refers to the Alawites as the "other sect" and describes how they dominate major positions across the country whether in government or in the army.

It's interesting how the author narrated the story through a female fundamentalist rather than through the eyes of a male "mujahid". Intriguingly, over the past few years we have heard of women leaving Western countries to join ISIS in Syria and Iraq. Obviously, the situations of the women and girls leaving to Syria are very different to the scenario painted in the novel but it's interesting to realise that women can be very much involved and impacted in fundamentalism when traditionally we only envision men being a part of. In the novel, the narrator is very much propelled into fundamentalism which she somewhat tries to use an escape from her home life and an attempt to find freedom and meaning. Furthermore, it was a way for her to show agency on her own merits but it only leads to further imprisonment within herself and society.

The novel highlights quite well that hatred is never inbuilt and it takes time to be cultivated. No one is born to hate and there's an inherent compassion within us all as shown with the narrator herself. The author proposes that the lack of dialogue and understanding between people are what causes us to hate each other. Furthermore, the regime, from its inception had built itself by force which further fuelled hatred as the regime wasn't built on Syrians' wishes or dreams nor did the regime wish to represent Syrians.

In Leri Price's translation of the novel, Robin Yassin-Kassab quotes Hassan al-Khayyer (an Alawi poet who was kidnapped and killed in 1980) in his foreword. The quote is incredibly powerful and summarises the extremes that has plagued Syrian history as well as current day-to-day life:

"There are two gangs: one is ruling in the name of patriotism but has none of it.

Another gang claims good faith; and religion forbids their sayings and acts.

Two gangs. My people, be aware of both! Both drink from the same evil waters."

Syrian Uprising...

For countless hours, I have spent keeping up with the news of the Syrian uprising. Back in March I had a university interview, after which I hoped to then spend 6 months lazing around in Syria, hanging out with the family, teaching English, improving my Arabic and enjoying the lovely weather and country that Syria beholds. Who wouldn't enjoy spending their time in numerous Syrian towns and cities? Though the week of my interview was when the Syrian Uprising began - 15th March 2011 (though to be fair there have been protests in Syria prior to the 15th March, but it really took steam from then onwards).

To start off with, protesters didn't demand or call for the removal of Assad or the Ba'ath party. Demands included the end of emergency laws, the release of political detainees and more political freedom. As time passed, we saw countless human rights abuses and very little reforms made. As a result, protesters began demanding that Bashar should leave "Yalla irhal ya Bashar" as well as demanding the fall of the regime "Sha3ab areed iskat al nizam" (translated appropriately to "The Syrian people demand the toppling of the regime"). 

Of course there are still genuine pro-regime supporters out there, mainly because they benefit from the regime being there and could also have a lot to lose if they left. Everyone involved with the regime could potentially face punishment if Assad were to fall. Many still claim that what Syria is facing is a conspiracy aimed to destabilise Syria first and then the whole region. They also claim that many of the protesters are armed and are causing all the violence, that the Syrian army is only protecting the Syrian people from "armed gangs" and Islamic extremists. The Syrian regime isn't the only one promoting these claims - Libyan and Bahrani governments use similar tactics to suppress their own protests and uprisings.

I counter these claims stating that so far, the majority of videos coming out from Syria are showing protesters to be peaceful. Protests in a number of regions since the start of the uprising has seen no violence by protesters which a number of videos give testimony to. Syrians, I know and completely trust, who are protesting on a regular basis in Syria are stating that they are peaceful and that are not armed. Many videos do show live fire used by mukhabarat against protesters in a number of places as well as showing graphic videos of dead Syrians at the hands of the mukhabarat, shabiha and army units. Of course there are times, when protesters do avenge the killings; we have seen videos whereby police officers have been beaten and killed in some instances but so far I've found these to be few and very rare. On the whole it is the Syrian regime causing all the violence, bloodshed, civilian casualities and deaths. Of course protesters involved in crimes, should be put to trial and tried justly, but the numbers involved in this category are a very small minority. I find it understandable that protesters would want to avenge the killings, since there's the saying "an eye for an eye, tooth for tooth", but I would rather the Syrian regime be tried in court and each one punished accordingly and I wouldn't want my fellow countrymen to steep down to the regime's level of atrocities. 

What the Syrian regime is doing is wrong. It cannot suppress protests with violence. It cannot torture its own civilians, whether men, women or children. It cannot kill its own civilians. How can Syrians justify such horrendous acts of violence against its own people? For this reason alone, Bashar and his regime should go. It doesn't matter whether Bashar al Assad has the full power of the country; the whole Ba'ath party should be dissolved. The Ba'ath party was responsible for many crimes throughout their rule, and will continue to be responsible for many more crimes if they continue to rule. Crimes such as the Hama massacre in 1982 where they took at least 10,000 lives (though numbers are more likely to be over 40,000 since many are still missing and not registered as dead), the Tadmor prison massacre, and the Jisr al-Shughour massacre. Since the Assads began rule, they have detained many Syrians for political reasons and have subjected many of them to torture. 

For me, this is the first time I live through and feel the pain of my fellow Syrians. Family members and friends have been through ordeals because of Rifaat and Hafiz al Assad (and now Bashar too); their stories alone send shocks down my spine. Hearing what Syrians currently are experiencing are sending more shivers and shocks down my spine again. 

I hope 50 years from now, we will look back in history and see how much we have moved forward; progress which we would never seen under the current party. We do have numerous obstacles along the way, but let's start by removing the Ba'ath party. We need to punish those responsible for crimes against humanity. We need to rid the country of corruption. Day after day, we will continue to make Syria a better country. Let not the excuse of chaos ruin what we could have, and not let chaos become a reality. We owe it to the martyrs. We it owe it every Syrian who risked their lives. We it owe it every Syrian who was detained and tortured just so we can be free from the Ba'ath party and Assad rule, so we see a better future.