Syria's Voices of Change

The United States has effectively ended engagement with the Syrian government, in part over what Washington contends are halfhearted Syrian efforts to prevent would-be insurgents from crossing its border with Iraq. Those charges have mounted during the past week, with a U.S. military official suggesting that Iraq's most-wanted militant met lieutenants inside Syria. Whether the United States aims to see Assad's government toppled remains the axis around which analysts say Syrian officials are debating foreign and domestic policy.

For many in Syria, the fear of what might follow lends the government de facto support among its people: It's either us or an Islamic government, us or civil war. The most pessimistic in Syria call Iraq the country's crystal ball.

"Chaos is most probably waiting for us," said Michel Kilo, another prominent activist in Damascus.

As in Iraq, the view of the United States is often nuanced, tied up in history, mistrust and grievances accumulated across four wars in five decades. Almost no one views the United States as working toward democracy in Syria. Rather, people see it securing its own interests -- more pliable Arab governments in a region dominated by Israel.

Dissidents mention President Bush's pledges for democratic change less frequently than U.S. reconciliation with authoritarian Libya after it dismantled its weapons of mass destruction programs. Few of the opposition leaders rule out a U.S. reconciliation with the Syrian government if it goes far enough to meet the Bush administration's demands.

The deep wariness aside, though, almost all opposition leaders say they still see U.S. pressure short of intervention as beneficial in itself, creating unprecedented space for them. The question they ask: Can it keep exerting pressure without going too far?

"Objectively speaking, Syrian democrats benefited from this pressure. This has no relation at all with American intentions," Saleh said. "We have a suppressive regime. When it suffers from heavy outside pressure, its hand will be shorter."

"The problem is that the Americans are in a hurry," he added. "Outside pressure is not good in itself. It's good when it encourages more and more people to participate in public affairs. You can't do this in two months."

Finding a New Path

There are slogans on a road in Damascus. Few are converted by them anymore.

"The Syrian armed forces are a school of martyrdom," says one. "We possess the will and determination to fight and win victory," says another. "Unity is our path to liberation," reads the last.

Abdel Nour's father, 75-year-old Ibrahim, came of age with slogans. A Christian born in Damascus's Old City, he joined the Baath Party as a 14-year-old idealist. Like many Christians, he saw in its Arab nationalism a unity between religious faiths. Like many Syrians, he saw in the Baathist slogan -- "Unity, freedom and socialism" -- a way to undo a colonial legacy of subjugation and whimsical borders. Like many Arabs, he saw in its promise a unified Arab state that would reclaim the glories of its medieval civilization.

"The terms have changed. They don't mean what they meant before," lamented Ibrahim, a gentle retired doctor. "The entire world is moving forward. We can't stop where we are. If we stop, the world will collapse over our heads."

"There's no problem with the principles if you modernize them and adapt them," said his son, Ayman, the party reformer.

To him, "unity" becomes a framework for an ever more integrated Arab world on a path toward a European-like system. "Freedom" ensures individual rights and liberties, he said, and "socialism" pledges the government to a policy of social justice.

"The problem is with the leaders, not the ideology," Abdel Nour said. "The problem is with the implementation."

Others see a bigger crisis unfolding, a government whose ideology can no longer justify its rule and whose prestige has withered. Does a new legitimacy come through the exercise of force, an elusive notion of citizenship, a consensus gathered through reform and reconciliation? In essence, both dissidents and reformers say the transition underway must answer that question.

"You have to come up with a new formula," said Nabil Sukkar, an influential businessman and former World Bank economist. "The party can no longer claim to be the guardian of state and society. It has to share power."