An Interview with Abdel Nasser Al-Ayed
Source : Al-Jumhuriya
Just days before Operation al-Aqsa Flood and the subsequent outbreak of the war on Gaza, the Syrian Social Democratic Party was officially established in Paris, France. On social media, the party extended invitations to its members and allies for a founding conference. This event, held on September 23 last year, saw the successful election of the party’s leadership and the adoption of its foundational documents and bylaws.
The conference attracted well-known political and cultural figures from the Syrian opposition, such as Burhan Ghalioun, George Sabra, and Fares al-Helou, and introduced new, younger faces into the party’s elected ranks. It also showcased a significant female presence, including Nagham al-Aissami as Vice President and Fatima al-Hajji as Information Office Director. In contrast to other newly formed Syrian parties that primarily embrace a liberal democratic stance – a subject previously covered and analyzed by Aljumhuriya.net – the Syrian Social Democratic Party anchors itself in the principles of universal social democracy. This ideology, emphasizing both freedom and social justice, boasts a rich political heritage in Europe, particularly in Scandinavia.
Al-Jumhuriya conducted a detailed interview with Abdel-Nasser al-Ayed, member of the party’s political bureau, noted writer, and military and political analyst. The discussion which follows delves into the formation of the party, its stance on critical and foundational Syrian issues, and its objectives for the near future.
A few months back, you announced the formation of the Syrian Social Democratic Party. Could you tell us the backstory of its inception? How did the concept originate, and what has been its development trajectory thus far?
Firstly, I’d like to express my gratitude to Al-Jumhuriya for highlighting our journey. Since 2011, Syrians have been on a relentless quest for identity, purpose, and impact. The party was conceived of among refugees in Europe, particularly among former activists who felt disconnected from ongoing events and powerless to effect change, despite their deep engagement. The preference for a political party as the organizational framework likely stems from the exposure to European political culture, where parties play a pivotal role in the democratic process – a model the founders aspired to replicate in their homeland.
The concept evolved through numerous small to medium-sized discussions and gatherings among the initial group and the broader Syrian refugee community in Europe over two years. These ideas were further shaped and refined during an extensive meeting in a European city, agreed upon by the initiators, which lasted two days. We organized five such meetings across various European cities, functioning as preliminary conferences conducted away from the public eye. These included a variety of activities and sessions aimed at garnering insights. A notable feature of our gatherings was their insistence on physical attendance, deliberately avoiding reliance on virtual platforms for discussions or organizational tasks. This series of in-depth conversations culminated in the creation of our political manifesto, bylaws, and numerous organizational documents that guided our early steps and evolved based on our experiences.
In addition to our bylaws (which, in order to confirm their feasibility, we partially tested for a year prior to officially announcing our formation), we developed detailed protocols for our main activities. These ranged from conducting conferences to strategies for recruiting and integrating new members, as well as guidelines for financial and media management among other aspects.
Ultimately, we achieved a level of intellectual and organizational unity, enabling us to convene our founding conference through sheer personal effort and commitment. This marked the formal launch of our initiative, driven by a genuine and conscious collective will.
What foundational values does your party hold, and which intellectual traditions does it draw upon? Are there any historical instances of social democracy that you find particularly inspiring?
Our party is rooted in the universally recognized values of social democracy: social justice, equality, and solidarity. We have taken great care to clearly define each of these principles in our founding document. Prior to embracing these values, we conducted an in-depth review of various social democratic models across countries like Germany, France, and the United Kingdom. However, it was the Swedish model that left the most significant mark on us. The transformation of Sweden from being one of Europe’s poorest countries at the beginning of the twentieth century to achieving a prominent global standing by the 1970s deeply resonated with us. This turnaround story, though only broadly comparable to our situation, offered valuable lessons. To gain a deeper understanding, we organized a three-day workshop with two former leaders from the Swedish Social Democratic Party, who provided an extensive overview of the Swedish approach.
Historically, several Syrian parties with leftist origins have turned towards democratic principles, positioning them closer to social democracy, including the Syrian Democratic People’s Party and Arab Socialist Union Party, among others. How do you view these parties, and what sets your party apart from them?
Before diving into the specifics, I’d like to share our perspective on the current state of political life in Syria. From our viewpoint, the political landscape appears barren, almost desolate. What are often called political parties or organizations are, in reality, nothing more than brittle shells. Personally, I would have much preferred to join an existing party than to go through the effort of establishing a new one. The barrenness is not just theoretical; it’s also organizational and practical. Striking evidence of this is the noticeable disinterest among the youth in joining these parties, compounded by the parties’ apathy towards engaging with them. The real challenge isn’t about choosing one political ideology over another. Rather, it’s about genuinely engaging with the public’s everyday issues and actively participating in socio-political debates. Unfortunately, both the longstanding Syrian parties and the relatively newer ones seem to have withdrawn from active, on-the-ground political engagement. We aspire for our party to break free from this rigidity and infuse a sense of dynamism into our political practices, embodying what Hannah Arendt described as the essence of politics: “to see and be seen”.
The recent party elections have spotlighted several notable figures; could you introduce us to some of the key personalities who were successful, and share their backgrounds? How widespread is your party, both geographically and in terms of membership? Do you maintain a presence within Syria? And is your focus primarily on issues at home and abroad, or do you accept your status as a political movement originating from the diaspora?
The individuals elected to leadership positions had no prior involvement in Syrian politics. Many of them, including Ahmed Bahri, the party leader, bring years of experience from participating in European political parties. A significant proportion of these leaders are from the younger generation, with half of the leadership body being under thirty-five, including some in their early twenties. These are refugees who fled to Europe soon after the Syrian revolution began, and they now live across France, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, and Norway.
As for our activities within Syria, our main objective over the next two years is to solidify our base in Europe while simultaneously establishing and launching our operations inside Syria. Given the current situation in Syria, we believe it isn’t feasible to build a political organization without external support. Thus, our party aims to provide this crucial support from outside to our endeavors within the country.
Today, numerous political ventures are emerging among Syrians, yet many of them struggle with enduring the prevalent division and fragmentation, while others persist without significant growth or impact. Why do you think this happens? How does the Social Democratic Party plan to avoid this fate?
I think the widespread failure you’re referring to can largely be attributed to the absence of a conducive political environment where parties can thrive. It’s not just about the freedom to establish parties; there are other critical factors, such as competition for legitimacy, audience, representation, and even intellectual and ideological rivalry. The lack of these elements has deprived Syrians of a “political marketplace” where parties can develop and flourish.
Additionally, there’s a notable shortage of human capital. The Syrian political landscape is facing a significant gap, particularly the absence of young politicians. Many of those qualified and willing to engage were snapped up by civil society organizations that emerged soon after the Syrian revolution, while another portion of this potential workforce migrated or sought asylum abroad. To restore normalcy, it’s imperative for several political organizations to surface and enter into competition, effectively creating a “political marketplace”. This process should encourage the younger generation to re-engage with political action. Without these developments, political efforts are likely to remain superficial and lack vitality.
Today, there are comprehensive frameworks for the opposition groups that came into being in the early years of the revolution, such as the National Coordination Committee for Democratic Change, the National Coalition of Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces, and the Syrian Negotiations Commission. Do you believe these groups have become obsolete, or are they still relevant? What’s your stance on these entities, particularly the Coalition? Do you plan to engage in the political process by taking part in negotiations, the Constitutional Committee, and similar activities?
Broad coalitions and alliances should encompass political forces that are actively influential; otherwise, they risk becoming mere nominal entities serving functional purposes without any real political substance or autonomy, meaning they lack sovereignty and independent political agency. We are indeed interested in the negotiation process and might engage in it, but from outside the existing organizations and frameworks. This is due to our negative view of these bodies, especially concerning their disregard for the independence of national decision-making.
What will be your main priorities in terms of activities and programs in the near future? Additionally, how do you plan to fund these endeavors?
Our primary goal is to broaden our foundation in Europe and establish a strong presence within the Syrian refugee community, which we estimate numbers around two million. We aim to forge connections with Western political forces, parties, institutions, and organizations that share our values, with the intent of enhancing our expertise and securing allies. Concurrently, we plan to initiate a structured program of activities within Syria, ensuring it’s linked with our efforts abroad. These dual efforts will be our central focus over the next two years. Regarding financing, we addressed this issue from the outset. Our operations are funded internally by our members, and this approach has sufficiently met our needs thus far, which have been significant.
In light of the recent normalization of relations with the Syrian regime by some Arab states and the absence of military means to alter the current situation, what’s your perspective on finding a solution in Syria? How can Syrians reclaim their political agency under these circumstances?
We approach the situation in Syria from a historical viewpoint, recognizing that our country is navigating a prolonged period of numerous events and shifts. We are convinced that this journey will culminate in widespread political, social, cultural, and economic transformations. Those who do not contribute to this process cannot expect to reap its benefits. From our standpoint, everything unfolds within the realm of politics, and for political action to be effective, it necessitates proper organization. Our participation is essential, and if I were to summarize our strategy succinctly, I would paraphrase Lenin: “Let us engage and see”. Regarding the restoration of political agency for Syrians, it involves a return to political action, which explicitly entails “gathering forces”.
How do you perceive secularism and the role of religion in a future Syrian state? How do you assess the relationship between Syrian democratic parties and figures, whether liberal or leftist, with political Islam?
Our party’s official documents do not explicitly tackle the subject of secularism. We hold the view that secularization manifests as activities, institutions, and ideas. For us, the interaction between religion and the state aligns with a principle common in democratic nations: beliefs are a facet of personal freedom that should not be infringed upon, except when they violate the law. Clergy should not participate in political activities, nor should politicians exploit religion for political gain.
Admittedly, this explanation simplifies a complex issue. Our party chooses not to entangle itself in debates or discussions centered around identity politics. We are a programmatic party, addressing the concerns of our constituents and striving to enhance their living conditions and prospects for the future. We believe that the rise of religious, sectarian, ethnic, and other sub- or super-national trends stems from the state’s failure to fulfill its roles. The influence of these trends will wane as the state, political institutions, and civil society organizations execute their responsibilities more effectively.
Regarding the historical interactions between democrats, secularists, and Islamists, I believe – on a personal note – that misunderstandings about secularism and Islam by adherents of both have diverted the political dialogue away from the strategic objective shared by both sides: the revitalization of our society and its return to history. To break free from this deadlock, we must focus on the future and address upcoming challenges, rather than dwell on past disputes or become ensnared in theoretical debates. This approach prioritizes active involvement in the ongoing social and political conflicts that are currently unfolding.
In your view, how can we address the divisions and mutual distrust between civil and sectarian groups in Syria? Do you believe the problem solely involves the regime and jihadist factions, or is there a deeper cultural and social rift that requires attention?
The divisions we are witnessing is a direct consequence of state failure, and the emergence of sectarian and civil groupings is a natural outcome of the lack of modern, inclusive political institutions and frameworks. Based on our experience as a party that brings together Syrians from diverse identity backgrounds, we’ve observed that promoting a national discourse and a vibrant, collective project can effectively neutralize identity-based disputes or discussions. This is not to say sub-identities will or should vanish with the establishment of a national state and the development of a robust civil society. These identities will and should continue to exist, but within a framework where national identity is prioritized.
Do you have founding Kurdish members within your party? How do you view the topic of ethnic diversity in Syria? Is it sufficient to discuss inclusive citizenship broadly, or is there a need for a federal approach that promotes decentralization within the country?
Our party does not select its members based on ethnic affiliations; we are all united as patriotic Syrians. In terms of governance, we advocate for decentralization, favoring a system where administrative units, from the smallest communities to the governorate level, are elected by the people.
Currently, there’s a worldwide feminist movement that all political factions are acknowledging. Moreover, conversations about queer issues are gaining traction in Arab discussions, alongside an increase in moral panic and hate speech. How does your party address these subjects? Do they find representation in your party’s publications?
Our party doesn’t directly address gender issues. Instead, we champion personal and public freedoms and are committed to women’s empowerment. We boast a significant women’s faction within our ranks, including individuals who have actively engaged in gender-focused initiatives, such as our vice president, Nagham al-Aissami. We believe addressing gender and queer issues falls within the scope of human rights and civil society organizations. Our role is to offer political support where possible, but these topics are not the centerpiece of our political agenda.
We’re aware of the ongoing debate within political and human rights circles about integrating feminism and queer issues into the agendas of political parties. This debate is especially active in the developed world and remains unresolved. As a nascent party, we’re keeping an eye on this discourse and plan to engage with the outcomes of these discussions when the time is right.
Since October 7, the world and the Arab region have turned their attention to Gaza, reigniting the Syrian and Arab political discourse around the Palestinian issue. Do members of your party share a consistent stance on this matter? What, in your view, constitutes a fair and comprehensive resolution to the Arab-Israeli and Palestinian-Israeli conflicts? Additionally, how do you perceive Hamas, both in terms of its Islamic identity and its military actions, including the distinction between combatants and civilians in Israel, as well as its regional alignments and connections with Iran?
Our party holds a clear stance on the Palestinian issue, viewing it as a moral concern before a political one. We believe that denying Palestinians the right to their land and an independent state is fundamentally unjust. However, within our party, there’s a strong differentiation between the cause itself and its manipulation. As Syrians, we’ve experienced firsthand how our regime has exploited the Palestinian cause to justify dictatorial rule, suppress our aspirations, and strip us of our basic rights, a tactic we recognize as not unique to us but employed by several Arab regimes. Today, we approach with caution and concern the way Iran leverages the Palestinian rights issue to extend its influence and control over regional countries under this pretext.
Recently, you released a notable statement suggesting the existence of a semi-comprehensive plan by Russian, Arab, Turkish, and Israeli forces to create regional governments with semi-autonomous military units. The goal appears to be to sideline Iranian influence and gradually weaken Assad’s hold on power by restricting him to Damascus. Could you share with the Syrian public the basis of your information regarding this development? Are we talking about insights from diplomatic sources or your own analysis?
As for the source of our information, we choose to keep it confidential at this point. However, we assure you that our party accesses information through reputable channels due to our active engagement in the political arena, and gathers data from relevant political entities. The statement we issued is based on a thorough evaluation and cross-referencing of these insights. Our assessment is centered around determining whether to share this information with the public for their awareness or to use it strategically in our political activities.
Beyond what was disclosed in the statement, the only additional detail I can provide is of a personal nature: one of the key figures driving this initiative is a well-known Syrian opposition artist who, according to our sources, is being positioned by Russia as a potential successor to Bashar al-Assad as the president of the republic following Assad’s removal.