Tuesday, November 4, 2014

A Prophet is One Who Reads History Books

[from Frank Salameh – Syria: the history of a name]

BEGIN.

…modern Syria – as a concept, as a name and as a geographic entity – is the outcome of European fancy, European geography and European conceptions of the Eastern Mediterranean. Isabel Burton, wife of famed British explorer Sir Richard Francis Burton, summed up the ethnic conundrum of Damascus (in her times an Ottoman vilayet, and not the capital of today’s Syria) as “various religions and sects [living] together more or less, and [practicing] their conflicting worships in close proximity.”

Burton noted that, “Outwardly, you do not see much, but in their hearts [the inhabitant of the State of Damascus] hate one another. The Sunnites excommunicate the Shiahs, and both hate the Druse; all detest the Ansariyyehs [Alawites]; the Maronites do not love anybody but themselves, and are duly abhorred by all; the Greek Orthodox abominate the Greek Catholics and the Latins; all despise the Jews.”

Writing along those same lines in 1907, another British traveler, Gertrude Bell, noted that Syria was “merely a geographical term corresponding to no national sentiment.” This view was echoed by many Levantine contemporaries of Bell, most of whom maintain that there has never been a distinct Syrian society historically speaking; that what Europeans referred to as Syria had always been a bevy of disparate groups and loose geographic entities brought together by conquest and ruled forcibly through terror and tyranny; in sum, “a society based on a despotism of brutal force modeled on that of the ruler.”

Only “Europeanized Syrians” – that is to say Arabic-speaking urban Christians and Jews – who were familiar with the languages and concepts of Europe, began describing the lands of their birth collectively as Syria, and began viewing themselves as Syrians, to be distinguished from Turks, Arabs or Ottomans.

STILL, THIS European concept of Syria is similar to the way one may refer to something approximating “the Balkans,” or “the Alps,” or “the Mediterranean.” Eyebrows would be raised in discontent should analysts in our time venture to write about the Alps as some concrete, coherent political entity. Yet, this is the kind of discourse dominating the debate on Syria, the finality of Syria and the uniformity of Syria.


END.

**

Amazing to read such an article. It’s almost the same country as ours:

[…but in their hearts [the inhabitant of the State of Damascus] hate one another…]
Khartoum was built as a small outpost in the 1820’s, by the Egyptian occupier, and for the Egyptian occupier, to administer properly the middle third of their 19th century empire that is today North Sudan. It took in Egyptian and Turkish officials, businessmen from Egypt and the Levant, sheikhs and scholars taught in al-Azhar University – mostly native Jallaba, Sephardic Jews coming from all over the Arab world, and a few soldiers also drawn from the native Jallaba. It was partially destroyed by the Mahdi’s soldiers in 1885, but those who settled in Khartoum, no matter where they originated from, stayed put in their place. General Kitchener took back Khartoum from the 19th century Taliban rulers in 1898, and the people of Khartoum lived to see better times.

Then, Gordon College (today the University of Khartoum) was opened, and the Jallaba sent their children to study there. And the graduates set up their different professions in Khartoum. By then, Khartoum began to have a significant Jallaba population. And post-independence in 1956, the city expanded and grew larger, soon overwhelming the multi-ethnic make-up and becoming a Jallabi city. Southerners, the peoples of Darfur, the Nuba, the Bejas and the Berta and Kuka were conspicuously absent from the populace. But they would soon come as refugees of war and famine, and their numbers would overwhelm the Jallaba.

Refugees from Darfur have been settling here from the 1980s, and many had children here. And the children grew up here and had children of their own. They are Khartoumites, speaking a slang of Sudanese Arabic – that developed in the 1990s from the accents and speaking manner of the Fur and Zaghawa – that has come to symbolize Khartoum’s people. From time to time they visit their hometowns in Darfur, and that is all they know of their native land. They speak their native language at home, and Arabic to one another. These are the older refugees, and the more recent refugees from 2003 onwards are one generation behind the trend.

What once used to be squatter camps are now entire satellite towns with multiple neighborhoods. I’ve seen them so many times. They are miserable and sordid, and the people in it are just as miserable. The architecture is distinctly Darfurese, but there is no development beyond the neighborhood’s own contributions, notwithstanding a few clinics and markets. Some of the youths have spent their entire lives there, and have never tasted dignity. They are desperate for a better tomorrow, perhaps at any cost.

Khartoum is a multi-ethnic and multi-religious city that now holds 5 million people, and it is a ticking time bomb. The different peoples do not get along, the Coptic Christians are withdrawn and are always suspicious of a Jallabi talking to them, the Nuba keep to themselves, the Fur keep to themselves, the descendants of Egyptians and Levantines – known as the Halab – keep to themselves and hold a strong contempt for the Jallaba, as I have consistently seen from them. The Turkish community keep to themselves – and after being around them for a few instances, I now understand why the Slavs of Eastern Europe and the Kurds hate them as they do. The foreigners coming as refugees from South Sudan, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, the Central African Republic and Ethiopia keep to themselves. All interactions are kept to a minimum beyond incidental friendship. There is a seething resentment, a desire for revenge and a need for change from everybody – but the Jallaba.

You can see it, you can hear it when you care to hear. Every one of every ethnic group laughs at and mocks the Jallaba, when they do not resent them deeply. They know that the Jallaba do not fight back and submit to any power that rules over them. They know that the Jallaba are extremely lazy and the Jallaba get upset when they hear that. They know that the Jallaba have extremely bad habits that make them primitive and ignorant, and that they are sensitive to every word spoken. They see the Jallabi bow down and kiss the feet of any Arab leader and any Arab people, and they resent it like fire on their bellies. They know that the Jallaba are the first and the last to check any progress or positive development, perhaps because they want everyone to be as worthless and as absolutely pathetic and as devoid of any honor or pride as they are.

Everyone who is not Jallabi hates the Jallabi with a consuming rage. And given the opportunity to exact their revenge, they will. In the event of a US occupation (which is very likely), or a coup that brings a non-Jallabi to power, everyone knows what to expect. Gang members, criminals and psychopaths will come of their homes, with axes and machetes, looking for Jallaba to kill. In the span of a few days, a few thousand Jallabis will be killed if nothing is done about it. What the current regime inflicted on Darfur, the Nuba Mountains and the South, for daring to rebel against their rule, has remained in their hearts as an open wound. At the very first instance of the Jallaba’s weakness, they will turn their suffering back on the Jallaba, perhaps in the same coin, knowing full well that the Jallaba are cowards of the highest caliber and are quick to fold to any display of courage.

**

[…merely a geographical term corresponding to no national sentiment:]
[…brought together by conquest:]
In 1821, an ambitious ruler in Egypt, Mohammed Ali Pasha, sought to build an empire, by expanding southwards. He conquered the Funj sultanate, the independent Shayqi state, the Beja sheikhdoms, Kordofan and the Kingdom of Darfur, the Kingdom of Bahr-al-Ghazal, the Dinka and Nuer and Shilluk lands and the lands of the Fertit and Azande and Murle and Toposa between 1823 and 1876, having a glorious empire to extract wealth and summon brave African soldiers from. In 1882, amidst oppressive taxes and brutal rule, a certain Mohammed Ahmed abdul-Rahman, teaming up with Abdullah al-Ta3ayshi, proclaimed himself to be the Mahdi and led a revolt against the Egyptian rulers. Khartoum, the capitol of its region was taken in 1885, and the Sudanese Caliphate was declared. He took 4/5ths of that empire under his own rule. The Caliphate’s borders were exactly that of post-1956 Sudan.

When Haykal, the Egyptian political analyst, said that Sudan is nothing more than a stretch of geography, he was right. But the Jallaba were upset on hearing this, as the truth to them is something they can never handle.

There are so many nations enclosed by the common border of Sudan, who are so different from one another and cover altogether so vast a region, that this country could not have been sustained without being an empire, much like Napoleon’s or ancient Rome. To make it a republic that idealizes democracy and secular law, and then give it to confused Arabized Nubians who idealize the caliphate, rule by sheikhs and imams, and Shariah law, was perhaps the biggest mistake ever done in this part of Africa.

**

[…ruled forcibly through terror and tyranny:]

1956 – 1958        (2y)   First Republic, weak and plagued by sectarianism.
ABBOUD’S COUP
1958 – 1964        (6y)   Abboud’s rule, not as brutal as successors but imprisoned politicians.
OCTOBER REVOLUTION
1965 – 1969        (4y)   Second Republic, strong and effective under al-Azhari, but overthrown.
MAY COUP
1969 – 1985        (26y) May Regime, socialist and secular, brutal and corrupt to the bone.
APRIL INTIFADA
1986 – 1989        (3y)   Third Republic, weak and failed.
JUNE 30 COUP

1989 – Now         (25y) June 30 regime, Islamist, the worst regime to have ruled Sudan, short of the Mahdi Caliphate.

**

Shout-out to Lebanoniznogood.

No comments:

Post a Comment