It’s not long ago that the idea of nation-states seemed odd and undesirable to many Arab countries, and when European countries like France and Britain drew up the somewhat artificial borders in the Middle East region after World War II, the larger Arab empire was a much preferred alternative. However, countries have come to existence with names such as Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan and Syria. And although the pan-Arab sentiment has far but disappeared, a sense of nationalism has also emerged.
Anno 2010 everybody will agree that there is a certain creature called the Syrian citizen, a term coming with connotations, perceptions and prejudgments. Ironically, the process of building national identity in Syria has been followed up by a new trend of opening up to other nations; that of globalization. The need to open up towards other nations, share with other nations, influence and be influenced and communicate with other people from all over the world is irrevocable if governments want to catch up with the high-speed development of countries around the world, so is being claimed.
But, the globalization process is also feared. Not only in Syria do people envision a future world wherein no unique culture remains; where a mix of ideas, beliefs, products and traditions results in a blurred and collective culture uncritical of itself. Though, some say that the opposite will happen: as a result of the confrontation with other cultures, people will put more effort into defining oneself as being part of a nation, marking what is theirs and emphasizing this in order not to lose it.
Syria is very well aware of both the need to open up towards the world market and the effects this may have on their sense of Syrian nationalism. The matter has put the Syrian government in a difficult position. One the one hand, it needs to meet demands of its citizens concerning economic and social security and, in order to do so, it needs a change of policy. The last couple of years and the current 11th Five Year Plan have been characterized by privatization of the market and attracting foreign investment, and a number of agreements have been signed with the incentive of boosting cooperation with international players.
On the other hand, the government does not like to move away from its original ideology of being a state with a purely Arab identity outside the zone of influence of the capitalistic western countries, as it is this ideology that lays the foundations of the single-ruling Baa’th party. Selling this ideology to the economic reform process would basically mean a challenge to the very basics, or pillars of the ruling establishment.
Considering the above it does not come as a surprise that much of the recent efforts of the Syrian leadership have been directed towards the fabrication of a sustaining sense of Syrian nationhood. These efforts have been twofold; on the one hand through positioning Syria on the international stage, and on the other by creating consensus among Syrian citizens. Although agreements are frequently being signed between Syria and European, Asian, South American and even North American countries, the Syrian government tends to focus its attention towards boosting foreign relations with other, brotherly Arab nations, this in resonance with its pan-Arab ideology of preventing a dominating western influence in the Arab region in general and in Syria in particular.
This ideology is shared by states such as Iran, Turkey and recently Iraq. Therefore, consolidating ties with these states is considered a beneficial policy, forming a bloc of Syria-friendly states willing to take up matters outside the zone of influence of the west and prioritizing progress in the region. Syria does not only take part in these negotiations, it has also taken up a leadership role in doing so.
Whereas Syria used to be a state with little strategic importance in the region, the last decade it has developed itself into a respected negotiation partner for many states. Political issues such as the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the US presence in Iraq or the Lebanese political crisis cannot be discussed without considering Syria on the negotiation table. Thus, Syria’s efforts to engage in deepening inter-Arab relations have as a result a stronger position of the state among other Arab states. This is a shift from the traditional pan-Arab ideology employed by Syria, that once led to the union of Egypt and Syria into the United Arab Republic. Focus of this pan-Arabism was not the sovereign state, but rather union of the Arab states, which were equal in nature and meant to merge into one political entity eventually.
Nowadays, such rhetoric is no longer pronounced by the Syrian government, and the concept of pan-Arabism is employed with the aim of creating a united regional strategic force outside the influence zone of the west, but with adherence to the national interests of each country. Similarly, the notion of the importance of Syria has been promoted domestically. In the current Five Year Plan, one of the spearheads is the involvement of civil society. In a conference held by the Syrian Trust for Development, chaired by First Lady Asma al-Assad, the latter emphasized that development could not be achieved without the participation of an active civil society. Therefore, private initiatives are encouraged and education is supposed to undergo some improvements that should increase the level of potential in Syria.
All this is to boost the capacity of Syria as a country, carried by its citizens. It seems to catch on. A much heard statement nowadays is that Syrians should move away from blind imitation and start looking at its own capabilities. The skills and talents of the Syrians are a popular subject among the media and academia alike and it seems that a new kind of identity is in the make, involving more awareness than ever before of who the Syrians really are. Interestingly, this takes place at a time when all eyes are on Syria. The message is clear; Syria is there. While an economic reform process is in transition, a new sense of nationalism is too, and it is not towards a more blurred, collective and uncritical one. Instead; the contours are becoming clearer now it is exposed to more eyes.
