Although the American press stopped covering Syria in past months, revolutions are at their peak and continue to affect Americans

By Hana Jaber

Last spring when the Arab Spring began, American news covered the ongoing protests from all of the revolting countries. The news had day-to-day features of the military advances, the organized protests, and even the death tolls. But after a couple months, the stories weren’t featured on the news anymore. Sure, every once and a while they would feature a story on the leader fleeing or the effect it had on the U.S., but it wasn’t of importance anymore. People almost forgot these things were happening there, and thought it was “over”.

But the Arab Spring isn’t over. Recently, the main action has been concentrated in Syria, a small country near Iraq and Jordan. Although most of us didn’t know it, Syrians have had it pretty bad for awhile. Something happened to cause this particular revolution, which caused the death of 1,600 people, sent 10,000 fleeing to Turkey, and tens of thousands more to be injured or arrested.

After Syria saw Egypt and Tunisia succeed in their revolutions, they began in March 2011 with calls for freedom on the southern border. Security forces opened fire on the crowd, killing several people. The revolutions continued, and became massive. The fire in their hearts spread throughout southern Syria, and it got serious. The president sent in the military prepared to restore the peace. President Bashar al-Assad blamed gangs for the unrest. Some towns were surrounded by troops for days. Hundreds were killed, the electricity was cut off, and men were lined up routinely.

Soon the protests were in every part of Syria, covering the small country in a complete revolution. Then in the town of Jisr al-Shughour the government claimed that about 120 military personnel were killed. Fearing that the government would slaughter the citizens, thousands of the rebels fled to Turkey to refugee camps.

The protesters, which haven’t appeared in the capital Damascus or Aleppo, just want simple rights. They haven’t used violence once during the months of revolution. They literally rebel with nothing but the clothes on their backs. Yet, Assad calls the revolution violent. Assad is actually the only one who has used violence. His oppressive regime allows the violence. The killing squad hired by Assad are extremely sneaky. They dress like the common people and stand next to the military when they come out to snipe and beat people. The Syrians call this group of secret police the “Ghosts”. The Ghosts are also known for driving into neighborhoods at any given moment to shoot at homes, killing innocent Syrians. This situation is almost identical to Iraq’s ongoing problem with secret police.

For months the Syrians have been begging for freedom and democracy in the most repressive country of the Middle East. The President has promised some reform, but the protesters say that as long as people are dying, his promises mean nothing. The protesters asked for the fall of the regime, Assad basically stated that it will never happen. They want an end to the emergency law, he revoked the law, and yet 1,300 protesters have died and 10,000 have been arrested. They want an end to the judicial killings, he increased them. They want a release of political prisoners, he imprisoned more. They say they want democracy, and he hasn’t once mentioned the word. They want free media and compensation for political deaths and prisoners, he hasn’t even addressed it.

So how does all this relate on the worldwide scale? Well, most importantly, thousands of innocent people are dying. But also, Syria is a major influence in the Middle East. The chaos here will definitely lead to a chain reaction throughout the region. The Arab League has called for an end to the violence, but has mainly remained neutral on the revolution. Russia who has has effective economic and military relations with Syria, refused to back a Western-drafted UN Security Council resolution condemning the violence. The UN and the U.S. have clearly shown their opinions on the revolution.

Mr. Bock said, “Change is great, but you may not always get the change you want.” This means that although the protesters may have good intents, the new government – if they get rid of the Assad – could be worse. But what’s worse than the government the Syrians are under?

For a Syrian national stance taking a chance on the political system after the revolution is key for several reasons. The corrupted individuals (Ba’ath Party) will be gone, allowing the Syrians to take charge of their own country and to have democracy. Having a new change would mean there would be less immigration out of Syria, and they would have control over the national revenue. With that, the Syrian economy will improve, and allow for trading with many other countries, possibly even the U.S.

There is no guarantee of a good government, but for the people who have lived under such a harsh oppression, any chance is worth taking.

What is the real chance for democracy in a country where the President refuses to say the word? Well, to answer that, just look at Egypt or Tunisia for insight.