Syria: After Talk of Strikes Subsides, Life Returns to “Normal”

Friday, 20 September, 2013

The link has been copied

Raheel Ibrahim

Nour, 38, is preparing to travel from her neighbourhood of Jaramana on the outskirts of Damascus to her home town, Tartous, for her daughter’s Duaa’s wedding. 

The wedding will finally take place at the end of September – it’s already been postponed twice, once in August, due to fighting between government forces and rebels in the province of Lattakia, and again when the United States threatened to attack Syria. The family was worried about staying at home in the event of US strikes – their home is in close proximity to security headquarters believed to belong to Air Force Intelligence, and to a checkpoint operated by the Popular Committees, a militia loyal to the regime.

Now that military strikes appear less likely, Nour says she feels reassured that the security situation has become “more stable”, and that her daughter and son-in-law can live near their family in Jaramana rather than moving to Tartous – their plan in case of a military intervention in Syria.

In Jaramana, as well as Damascus itself and its suburbs, many of those who left for coastal areas or Suweida fearing a military strike have returned. The many Iraqis who were living there have mostly returned to their own country.

Life seems to have returned to normal, according to the standards imposed by the state of war in Syria. The entrances to Jaramana are backed up with traffic due to checkpoints. Residents can be seen going about their business at the market, paying no attention to the gunfire that can be heard from nearby Shebaa, where clashes between the rebels and the army continue.

Jaramana saw some demonstrations against the regime in 2011, but has remained relatively safe despite several bombings carried out by unknown forces. It has received thousands of displaced Syrians from other areas affected by fighting.

Loyalists and opposition supporters continue to hold different opinions about a possible military strike.

Suad, a 34-year-old nurse working at a hospital in Damascus, says she is not only opposed to military strikes, but is “ready to join the ranks of the Syrian army in defence of Syria”.

“I fled with my paralysed father and my family from Sitt Zainab after the Free Syrian Army [FSA] killed my brother,” she says. “They broke in with their weapons, stole and vandalised everything, shot my brother in the head and left.”

“If Syria is hit, we will all be killed all at the hands of the FSA,” she continues. “I can see our end every day; I can imagine the scene because I’ve lived it.”

Issam, 45, a dentist, opposes President Bashar al-Assad and supports military action against the regime, but in the same breath he accuses the president of being a “fallen liar” for agreeing to hand over his chemical weapons.

“The regime is selling chemical weapons just as it sold the Golan,” said Issam. “I feel [Assad] has betrayed our national security and made us vulnerable. Just because someone supports the opposition doesn’t mean he is against national security. Syria’s chemical weapons are the only thing that levels the playing field with Israel.”

Khodr, who holds a degree in Arabic literature but works in an electronics shop, considers himself neither loyalist nor opposition. He does not trust either side, he says, but at the same time he does not support foreign military intervention, having lived among Iraqis and seen their suffering and heard their stories of how they lost their homes after the disintegration of the Iraqi army. Khodr says many Iraqis have been living in Syria for more than ten years and are still waiting to be granted asylum in the United States.

“America strikes us and then we ask for asylum in America!” he said, laughing sarcastically.

Khodr agrees with Issam that the loss of Syria’s chemical weapons is a blow, saying: “I felt better that the strike was cancelled, but at the same time I was disappointed. I am afraid that we have offered major concessions at the expense of our national security.

“Syria has been working on this programme for 30 years, and we decided in a moment to destroy everything we have built,” he continued. “Who can guarantee that the West will not come back to threaten us, as they did Iraq?”

Faihaa, 35, a counsellor, says that she opposes the Assad regime but that any foreign military action would be “aggression” that would serve the interests of America and Israel.

“We are against the tyranny that weakens our country, but we are also against any external aggression against the country,” she said.

Amer, 42, who was displaced from Aleppo and now lives in Jaramana, was disappointed that the military strikes were called off against “a criminal regime which used chemical weapons against its own people”.

“The world has failed the Syrians,” he said.

Amer denies that military strikes would make life worse for Syrians, believing that whatever negative impact they would have could not be worse than what government forces have done so far.

“In my opinion, there is no difference between being hit with Scud missiles or cruise missiles,” he says.

Amer blames President Assad for the continuing crisis, saying, “If I were the president of Syria and someone gave me a choice between stepping down and destroying the country, of course I would have stepped down.”

Raheel Ibrahim is the pseudonym of a journalist living in Syria.