Few symbols in Baathist Syria were as revealing of its totalitarian nature as the ballot box. Elections were little more than a malevolent demonstration of power, designed to cower and coerce the population into an absurd act of theatre. On 5 October, the first parliamentary vote since the fall of Bashar Al-Assad will take place.
Although outwardly it would appear less democratic than even the pantomime elections of the former regime, there are hopes its low-key nature means it is considered to be a work in progress and not the conclusion to a hard-fought 13-year revolution. Yet with little information from the government on further elections, the future of politics in Syria remains opaque.
Rather than the Syrian population directly electing MPs, government-appointed committees and electoral colleges will be responsible for selecting two-thirds of the parliament, while the remaining third will be hand-picked by interim President Ahmed Al-Sharaa himself. This naturally raises fears of state capture by Sharaa, creating a legislature filled with government loyalists, serving to rubber-stamp his vision of a new Syria.
“They chose this hybrid model in order to give the appearance that it is semi-representative, but again there are so many concerns about the process that people are sceptical that it will lead to an assembly with much authority, due to the president’s role in this and a committee selected by him to manipulate the process,” Haid Haid, Senior Non-Resident Fellow and the Arab Reform Initiative, told The New Arab.
“If the president has enough influence over one-third of the assembly, then he can do anything he wants. The assembly can’t draft laws, it can only veto or challenge them if they have the agreement of two-thirds of the members. So this is where the composition of the members and their loyalty to the president is essential.”
The interim government has justified both the absence of a direct democratic process and the involvement of political parties as being due to the millions of displaced Syrians who lack the necessary documentation to prove their eligibility to vote.
Inside Syria, the country is still obliterated from over a decade of war, with fuel in short supply, countless homes destroyed, and electricity scarce, meaning a popular vote under such conditions would be unrealistic. The exclusion of Suweida and Syrian Democratic Forces-controlled areas from the vote has been put down to the precarious security situation in these regions, adding further scepticism to the exercise.
For those who fought for a free and democratic Syria, this convoluted and centralised process is an underwhelming outcome to decades of struggle against dictatorship, with Syrians even denied the chance to vote for a cast of government-appointed candidates.
Still, few would deny it is a marked improvement on the previous situation, where the Assad regime afforded this opportunity to citizens, but ticking the wrong box could ultimately mark one down as a dissident.
While the government has said the interim election is a constitutional formality needed to make the state semi-functional, the question is, what changes will be made between the parentheses of next month’s election and any future popular vote?
“The danger of the system being monopolised by a segment loyal to [Sharaa], allowing the president to do whatever he likes, is high, and the only thing standing in the way would be the refusal of committee members to take advantage of what is a weak process,” said Haid.
“[Sharaa] will need a new legislature to start changing the old laws and regulations, so there is no question of there being a new legislative body, otherwise, the system would be missing a major component to operate.”
The election has already been pushed back from its original planned date of 15-20 September to October, highlighting a number of bureaucratic challenges faced by the organisers, along with attempts to grant some legitimacy to the procedure on a local level by allowing more people to submit their applications. For many in Syria, the process still appears to be rushed, with little involvement of political factions outside the government and thousands of candidates still to vet.
The past ten months, since the fall of the Assad regime, have not been quiet ones for Syria, which makes the upcoming vote, albeit with its democratic flaws and delays, still a remarkable achievement. [Getty]
“It is hard to call this an election. Elections cannot be organised in the current situation, so this process needed more consultation to devise a better representative approach. Unfortunately, these consultations never happened, so we ended up with a model that is more of appointments and selections,” said Bassam Kuwatli, President of Ahrar – The Syrian Liberal Party.
“The process is not ideal, and in the absence of proper national dialogue, it makes the situation even worse. So there are worries among the population that this will be used as a mechanism to push certain agendas.”
The Syrian Liberal Party has members who are running as independents, without the official backing of the movement, but their influence will be drowned out by the huge number of government loyalists that will eventually fill the assembly.
“Organising proper elections is very important to the future of Syria, it will take time, but it will be the only indication of whether we have real democracy. Unfortunately, the government is not using the term democracy yet, and it has not properly explained what kind of elections Syria will have in the future,” said Kuwatli.
“There has been no law on political parties, yet, and there are worries that when it transpires, it will be similar to the Baath Party law, which would make it very difficult for parties to operate.”
The past ten months, since the fall of the Assad regime, have not been quiet ones for Syria, which makes the upcoming vote, albeit with its democratic flaws and delays, still a remarkable achievement. Rime Allaf, author of the upcoming book ‘It Started in Damascus’, said that despite valid concerns about the process, the election should be viewed as a necessary step in the dismantling of the architecture of the Baathist state.
“It cannot be worse than what we had before. Everyone understands that at present, normal elections are very difficult, even at the legislative level. Syria has not had any semblance of a democratic parliament for 60 years, so nobody expects much,” Allaf told The New Arab.
“From my perspective, Sharaa is trying to show that we, the authorities, are attempting to establish a normal state again, and it is going to take time. The election has nothing to do with democracy, but it doesn’t matter right now and, in fact, it is the least of Syria’s problems.”
The vote will take place after a flurry of diplomatic activity by Syria’s interim president and foreign minister, including a visit to the UN in New York this week. This saw a series of high-profile meetings with US officials and world leaders, designed to bolster the legitimacy of the Sharaa government, overturn sanctions, and end outside meddling.
The country stands at a precipice, where poverty is widespread, state institutions are weak, security is poor, and a medley of actors orbit a weakened prey, waiting for the feast, so there is some need to gain international support, but many appear wary of deals being hatched without consultation with the people, such as any agreement with Israel.
“The people who are supporting Sharaa and want to see Syria stable are not just the US and Europe, but you now see Turkey on the same side as Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the Emirates, Qatar, and this is a big deal,” said Allef.
“What I hear very often is that Syria is like a tanker heading in one direction, and now Sharaa wants to change the direction of the ship. It is very difficult and it will take time, but I believe it can be done, and this is Sharaa’s goal.”
Ultimately, it is in cities such as Washington and Riyadh, not October’s vote, where support will be critical to help Syria repair and rebuild, and eventually create the environment for free and popular elections, many in the political community believe. Activists still fear that even if Sharaa’s motivations are benevolent, a Faustian bargain could be hatched behind closed doors that sacrifices democracy for the sake of Syria’s stability and prosperity.
With the People’s Assembly of Syria set to resemble more the Jordanian parliament than a proper representative body, there appears to be something in these suspicions, although political scientists have noted that excessive idealism combined with poor governance can be a dangerous mix in post-conflict countries.
“Even if these elections were perfectly democratic, which they are not, and even if there were the proper infrastructure in place, it would still not happen. Not because of Ahmed Al-Sharaa, even if Thomas Jefferson landed on us, it is impossible to have such an election under such circumstances,” said Allef.
“The bigger picture is that it is ok, for now. Let’s have people to whom the Syrians can go with grievances and complaints, because they are, say, the MP for Homs, and from there we begin. These are the cards we were dealt with, and we have to go from there, even if these are selections and not an election.”
Paul McLoughlin is the Head of News at The New Arab
Follow him on Twitter: @PaullMcLoughlin