EDITORIAL – JAN 2024 – Flaws exposed in autocratic vision
Dancing with many partners
What now, with Syria and the 21st century world order?
The collapse of the Assad dictatorship has delivered a cold, harsh truth to those autocratic powers propping up the regime, while victory by an Islamist militia group brings a new, measured reality to the West.
We should note that Western governments have stepped away from their usual refrain of urging early elections and democracy. Finally, there is a realisation that such a path does not work.
Instead, America and Europe have begun forging a working relationship with the victorious Islamist Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), whose roots lie in Al-Qaeda, the terror organisation which directly attacked the United States in 2001.
Syria has been a final lesson that the West’s mission to embed democracy in swathes of alien cultures has failed.
Meanwhile, the autocracies have learned they are still decades away from having the money, experience and wherewithal to mould the new world order they so desperately crave.
At the heart of this new global situation sits China.
Over Syria’s years of conflict, China appeared to stand shoulder to shoulder with Assad, particularly in the United Nations Security Council where it used its power of veto eight times to stop resolutions against his regime.
China has only ever used its veto sixteen times. Half were to support the Syrian regime.
In September 2023, Assad signed a strategic partnership during a visit to Beijing in which China vowed wide support for Syria, including ‘safeguarding national independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity’.
But all that became empty rhetoric when the chips were down. Syria has taught Beijing the messiness of global leadership, raising questions as to how far China really wants to involve itself in the hard work needed to rule the world.
As Professor Kerry Brown argued in last month’s Democracy Forum debate, ‘China is an opportunist power that seeks opportunities but also likes to avoid responsibilities.’
The weakening of Russia and Iran worsen China’s conundrum.
Syria has exposed the limits of the Russian military, already diminished by Ukraine. Iranian power projected through proxy militias like Hezbollah has already been badly weakened by Israel.
In this front-line test case, Syria quickly fell apart, exposing flaws and weaknesses in the autocratic vision.
The United States has suffered similar defeats, most recently in Afghanistan and, earlier, in Vietnam. But it has had long experience in foreign conflicts, beginning with winning the First Barbary War against North African states in 1805, and America’s involvement in the First and Second World Wars propelled it into super-power status.
The US understands the importance of networks, coalitions and alliances which have only strengthened in the years of increased autocratic aggression. NATO has two substantive new members and members of Asia’s Quadrilateral Dialogue now sit in on NATO meetings.
The autocracies have yet to learn this art which requires patience, compromise and vision.
Middle East and European governments are looking towards US leadership in building stability after Ukraine, Syria and Israel-Gaza. Very few are looking towards China, Iran and Russia.
It is here that China needs to ask itself questions about the partnerships it has with weak and exposed Iran and Russia. How can these relationships be more in Beijing’s national interest than those with America and Europe, which are the source and origin of its current wealth?
More than half of China’s oil and gas comes from the Middle East, where Iran has been trying to create a protracted, wider war. The US has been working to stabilise the region.
China has been supporting Russia’s Ukraine operation by sending electronics and dual-use military products. Yet Russia is threatening upheaval in Europe, which is a critical market for Beijing’s economic growth.
One red flag that Syria has waved high and clear is that autocracies can fall very quickly and without warning.
Why, then, does China constantly threatens Taiwan, well knowing that any conflict there would be catastrophic for its economy and may end up risking the survival of the ruling Chinese Communist Party?
With Syria, there is an opportunity for both the US and China to bend their own rules.
Washington’s dealing with an Islamic terror group as the new government of Syria concedes mistakes it might have made over the past two decades of the War on Terror and admits that working with, rather than against, is the best way forward.
Beijing can quietly back-pedal from its entwinement with Iran and Russia, neither of which has ever shown the vision and aptitude that has propelled China forward so dramatically.
No hard autocratic power has created any brand to match Huawei or Alibaba. Not Russia. Not Iran. Not North Korea. Not Syria.
So why has China been siding with them?