On the fall of the ‘Alawite state’ option in Syria

What will happen after the fall of the ‘Alawite state’ option, called ‘Plan B’ in Syria? The latest developments proved that the popular Revolution in this important Arab country can not be stopped. We cannot ask a year and half after the beginning of the revolution whether the Syrians will defeat the regime which humiliated them for more than four decades or not. The Syrian people will definitely win despite the Iranian and Russian support to the regime. However, the question should be: how will Syrian people survive the confrontation with a ruthless torturer who thinks that the victory over Lebanon is an alternative over Israel or at least the restoration of Golan. This torturer is not shameful to continue his attempts to win over Syria and Syrians as long as it is a step towards the wanted goal. The wanted goal is to keep Syria under the control of the ruling family and its branches on one hand and turning the country gradually into an Iranian colony on the other hand. This explains the adoption of the military solution from the very beginning, in order to cancel the other, the other means the Syrian people in case they insist on their dignity and freedom. Eighteen months after the beginning of the Syrian revolution and in the light of the latest clashes, we can say that the regime has chosen the third solution, after the failure of plan A and Plan B. Before explaining the third choice, It should be noted that plan A was based on spreading terror all over Syria. The regime would constantly remind the events in Hamah in 1982 and would repeat that the fall of the regime means the fall of Syria. We find that the tools of the Syrian regime is attaching the fate of Syria with the Assad regime, as if the regime - which does not have any legitimacy -  was the founder of the current Syrian entity. Plan A failed and the Syrians overcame their fear and the regime of terror. They are ready to pay the price to get rid off the regime which has transformed a rich country into a deserted land, which has turned its creative people into slaves whose only interest is to make a living while millions are being stolen by the regime. Plan B stated the restoration to the Alawite pocket, an area on the Syrian coast. This pocket could have the heart of an independent Alawite state. This state could have been used as an alternative for the regime to control cities with Sunni majority such as Damascus, Aleppo, Homs, Hama, Idleb, Daraa and Dier Zor. However, Plan B collapsed when clashes in Homs started to occur. Moreover, at least 60 per cent of the population of Latakia is Sunni. Latakia, the most important city on the Syrian coast, remains so far the first option to be capital for the Alawite state. Can Homs and Latakia be wiped off the map to pave the way for the implementation of the ‘Alawite State’?  According to these facts which were not taken into account by the Assad regime, who went for plan A and B instead, the third choice is the most likely one especially for those who support the current regime: Iran and Russia...  and perhaps Israel which is taking a “confusing” position towards the situation, according to a description by an Arab senior official who watches its actions closely. The third choice aims at lengthening the conflict in Syria as much as possible to increase sectarian and religious division in order to hinder a transitional period. This transitional period is the only way to organise a democratic nation in Syria.  The civil regime shall restore Syria to the Arab arena, away from resistance and opposition that only serve Israel. This regime has two enemies: Iran first, then Russia. Consequently, we fear Iran’s essential role in this third option. Iran fears a renaissance of the Syrian Arab identity.  In an Arabic Syria, the country is reconciled with itself and its surroundings, away from extortion and intimidation policies. There is no space for a power with territorial ambitions such as Iran.  May God protect Syria from the third option, which is the only choice for Iran to maintain its powers in Syria, even if it means supporting a deadly civil war. --- The views expressed by the author do not necessarily represent or reflect the editorial policy of Arabstoday.