For those of you who may be a bit confused about the fighting in the Tripoli, Lebanon Palestinian refugee camps in the last couple of weeks, a brief collection of the arguments for an against Syrian involvement with the new-ish al-Qaeda linked Fatah al-Islam. There’s more information at Josh Landis’ Syria Comment (http://joshualandis.com/blog/?s=Fatah+al+Islam).
LessThanExpert
Arguments in favor of Syrian support for Fatah al-Islam: (1) Syria is looking for a more pliable client who will cause chaos in Lebanon when Hizbullah is more concerned about fighting Israel and pursuing political power. (2) Syrians are trying to satisfy emerging Sunni Islamist elements with social and political power, this is a way to do that. (3) Elements within the Syrian government, perhaps without Bashar’s support, are supporting Fatah al-Islam.
Arguments against: (1) Why would
Syria risk further international opprobrium by supporting a group, like Fatah al-Islam, that has little prospect of achieving broad support or making profitable links with other political organizations. Party of Hizbullah’s appeal was their ability to make cross-communal political ties. (2)
Syria’s gambit risks angering their Iranian allies, the senior partner in the Iran-Syria coalition. Al Qaeda’s program is virulently anti-Shia. (3) Supporting Fatah al-Islam puts a wedge between Syria and both major militant groups in the West Bank and Gaza, neither Fatah/PLO nor Hamas support an al-Qaeda presence in the
Occupied
Territories. (4) Bashar appeared able to mobilize the security and other forces to crack down on the ‘Damascus Spring.’ If there are aggressive factions in
Damascus, why do we not see more evidence of it?
