Originally published on the CGS blog on February 22, 2012.
On February 13, Syria’s Representative to the United Nations, Bashar Ja’afari, spoke at the U.N. General Assembly to emphasize the irrationality of international engagement with protestors in Syria. “We in Syria would not imagine sending soldiers to defend Occupy Wall Street protesters,” argued Ja’afari. But can the analogy by Ja’afari be justified?
The Occupy Wall Street “people-powered” movement began September 17, 2011, months after the initial uprisings in Arab nations. This is not to say that Occupy lacked mass support because, as people have seen, thousands of people around the world demonstrated against corporations and in some cities continue to camp out in financial districts. The Occupiers are the 1% taking a stand, which is fundamentally similar to the Syrian opposition. Many Syrians are also taking a stand against random killings, tyranny, and civilian torture. So yes, the Occupy and Syrian movement have found ways to physically demonstrate their disapproval of each society. Both Occupy and the Syrian uprising reveal the strength of the masses in making the rest of the world aware of their movements and taking action.
With that being said, both movements also face a similar weakness. The fact that Occupy is a leaderless movement has kindled debates about the likelihood for impact and results based on their principles. Many Americans have openly expressed their annoyance or distaste for the Occupy encampments. Criticism from minority groups and the upper class shrouds the Syrian protests as well. Still, the Syrian opposition attempted to fill the shortcoming by announcing the formation of the Syrian National Council (SNC) last November. The SNC struggles to communicate with the Free Syrian Army (FSA) and other protesters that prefer more forceful strategies to overcome Assad.
“This isn’t peaceful demonstration- this is violence,” Ja’afari has also stated regarding the protests in Syria. Yes, violence has occurred because FSA aims to fight until Assad steps down and demonstrators will not surrender to a repressive government. However, the government is also sending military forces into the cities of Syria. Activists have shared that 1,000 have died in the last three weeks due to government assaults in the city of Homs. Others have reported that military forces use human shields to prevent retaliation against them. The cities are under heavy military fire, aimed at the Syrian people, their homes, and their hospitals.
Police have confronted demonstrators of the Occupy movement citing failure to follow the guidelines and decreasing sanitary conditions in their camps. The American government and the Syrian government employ different tactics. President Obama will not send tanks to McPherson Square, but police officers have disrupted and disassembled camps. Bystanders are simply encouraging them to leave their camps. Occupiers can, however, peacefully protests until their hearts content without fearing for their lives. The bottom line is that government-led violence is not and will not occur, unlike the situation in Syria.
Ja’afari’s argument to the General Assembly holds no ground. The nations of the world will not intervene in the Occupy protest because Americans continue to protest and camp without the threat of destruction to their homes and torture for their families.
As inappropriate a Ja’afari’s analogy was, it is difficult to properly compare the two movements. The Syrians aspire to have the freedoms Occupy protesters already have. In fact, Syrians are dying every day to enjoy the right to protest without fear of violent retaliation.
