The idea is designed section of difficult state Syria is increasingly heard in American and European press. Some of the peoples inhabiting the Republic, really passionately want such, and to imagine their appearance in the UN new Nations. But in practice the partition of Syria will turn to crime even more bloody and terrible than the current war.
Indeed, Syria is a country patchwork ethnic and religious. In this “overlapping” of the most diverse origin and religious preference of the peoples, tribes, sects sometimes even one of the causes of the present conflict. It is the complexity of the internal structure of the Syrian people has allowed him for a short time to overthrow the system of state power, considered one of the strongest in the middle East.
“London’s emissaries have done much to preserve the tribal system, intermittently feeding the chiefs of the tribes and pitting them against each other”
But, on the other hand, same-ethnicity and multi-religious way of life were originally laid in the basis of the Syrian state. And non-religious and neticesi the ideology of “Arab socialism” of the Baath party for a long time cemented this outwardly fragile structure.
Such birth injuries can be detected in almost all the States formed after the fall of the colonial system. If in Europe the collapse of the empires after the First world war because of the “historicity” of the process was a national character, to the colonial ruins of the written and unwritten rules no one followed. Specifically in relation to the Arabs, the British authorities not followed the principle of “historicity” and not even the principle of “expediency”, and the principle of military control as it was easier to control, and performed border.
It concerns not only the Arabs. A classic example is the “Radcliffe line”, in which London lawyer Cyril Radcliffe who had never visited India split British India in 1947 into two dominion – India or Pakistan. Radcliffe was invited to “the partition” of India because nothing about her knew, and, by a perverted logic of the Viceroy Luis Mountbatten, would be “objective”. The Radcliffe put a hard limit – two months, but had complete freedom of action (the Viceroy procured to themselves the right not to consult in all his Affairs with London). British lawyer quickly became entangled in one of the most ethnically diverse regions of the world, realized that two months is not enough all this economy to go around, and eventually made a few basic mistakes, confusing the territory with different religious and ethnic composition.
It all ended in a terrible massacre, the migration of millions of people and eventually formed a festering conflict in which both sides occasionally praise nuclear weapons, and more than half of the whole border line of Pakistan are not defined so far (“tribal zone”, “the Durand line”, the desert of the Baloch people and the like).
The same textbook the British and French held the borders and the Arab lands, paying no attention to ethnic or religious features. We can rightly say that this has shaped some of the conflicts that periodically erupted with varying degrees of intensity. What is the state of Iraq in its original understanding? The state of the Arabs? Shia? The Sunnis? If the Sunnis, the Shiites will automatically become the persecuted minority on the planet, in addition to ethnically alien to the Arabs of Iran. And why, in the end, the Kurds?
Similar questions can be asked in many of the States that produced the Anglo-Saxons on the results of the collapse of the Empire. But to call Lee now to a new section of these largely artificial States – a very controversial issue.
First, this will finally destroy the fragile system of international relations and international law in the form in which it is still alive. Secondly, no one can even tentatively peek into the upcoming chaos that will cover us all: never any multi-component or multi-ethnic state had collapsed painlessly (Czechoslovakia – not the case, it could even though the village councils to divide, nothing would have happened). Third, really do not understand, by what criteria to carry out this section? Fourth, but not least – who are the judges? Another London lawyer, which showed the country on the map and gave two months for the project?
Moreover, no centralized state, even in a state of civil war “all against all”, it is impossible to persuade him to commit suicide without the use of force. Failed to even dismember Lebanon, for decades living in the state of universal inter-communal war. In the end, I had to create a unique and strange system of government (the President a Maronite, Prime Minister a Sunni, the speaker a Shiite plus quotas), which still works intermittently. Even more confusing state device invented for the former Yugoslav Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and now nobody can understand how from this unsustainable model to get by without a new war.
As for Syria, if to a purely theoretical conversation about this method of “exit” from the civil war, then immediately the question arises of the criteria. If ideally, the criterion of “section”. To announce the determination of the Kurds on ethnic grounds and Arabs to divide within themselves not religious. Unfair. Besides, the Kurds are also very different: they still maintained the tribal system, some tribes each other strongly dislike, and the Kurdish language is divided into two dialects (Kurmanji and Sorani), which vary so much that some experts are talking about two different “Kurdish peoples”. But there is also the factor of the Yezidis, with whom it is absolutely unclear how to do that. To declare a separate nation, as was trying to do, for example, in Armenia and Georgia? But yazidism is a religion, albeit a religion of ethnicity like Judaism. Yezidi Kurd equal, though not equal to Kurd Yezidi.
The problem of Kurdistan is clearly entail a new war. At the time, the British all the forces opposed to the creation of a unified Kurdish state on the ethnic principle, for he truly feared him, because of the number of Kurds, the importance of the territories that they occupy, and of the peculiarities of the national character. So London’s emissaries have done much to preserve the tribal system, intermittently feeding the chiefs of the tribes and pitting them against each other, if only to prevent the formation of a unified Kurdish national thinking. The autonomy of Kurdistan in Iraq is an invention of Saddam, who needed the Kurds to the seemingly endless war with Iran. But if to speak about further self-determination in Syria, we can get the state without a Central government, without a national identity and even without a common language. So you can spawn another monster.
A section of the Arabs on religious grounds altogether hopeless project. “Overlapping” of the population, the complexity of the organization vnutrisnih some sects, orders and tariqas will quickly put this idea into such a corner where the sun don’t Shine. Now, all attention is drawn only to alawites, this is because the ruling group to which the Assad family. But what to do with the Shia-dvunadesyatye (there are), the Ismailis, the assassins? And Druze – they are? Sect? The nation? If sect, Muslim or is it syncretic? Considering the exceptional importance of the Druze not only for Syria but also for Lebanon with Israel, lack of participation can bury the entire structure of the region. The importance of the transfer of the Golan heights drutam first have to prove tel Aviv, and the messenger learns a lot about themselves.
There are still very artificial for the Middle East inclusion: the Circassian population, descendants of immigrants from the North Caucasus Muhajirs. Yes, they speak Arabic, they are Sunni Muslims (usually included in the medieval mystical orders, like Mapleview), but they have a special identity, not Arab. In this case, as Druze, Circassians are the elite military of several countries of the region.
Unfixable and the problem of the Christian population. Despite the common interests of interfaith harmony within the community are unable to achieve even under pressure of the horrors of civil war. Catholics are kept separately from the Orthodox, and the Armenians are conducting their own war for survival. Them to come up with a “separate state entity”, to put it mildly, is not correct. Yes and Syrian Christians live in major cities, not to resettle in their now famous Malulu. Well this is a whole new Exodus will succeed, and on an epic scale and content – with the imminent advent of new prophets.
Therefore, we repeat: in the current environment attempts to redraw the map of the Middle East that contradict each other, is absolutely useless. Of course, there are situations in which it is better to adjust a little legacy of the British Empire in the name of world peace. So, for example, happened in the Sudan, where black and mostly Christian South could not physically be part ethnically Arab and devout Muslim state. Sooner or later this history will be repeated and with the same oasis Sudanese Darfur. But perversely trying to dismember quite a current state of the system, though very complex, is a crime. Moreover, the only motive for such “dismemberment” in Europe and the US was the inability to cope with the crisis that they themselves created.