The Powder Keg of the Levant--How Sectarian Power Structures Guarantee Perpetual Instability

The Powder Keg of the Levant--How Sectarian Power Structures Guarantee Perpetual Instability

    Tuesday, September 02, 2025   No comments

In the ancient lands of the Levant, where history is measured in millennia, a modern curse condemns nations to a purgatory of weakness. This is not a curse of geography or resources, but one of design—a political architecture built not on the bedrock of principled compromise and shared national vision, but on the shifting sands of sectarian appeasement. The fates of Lebanon and Syria stand as stark, bloody testaments to a brutal truth: a government forged in the fire of sectarian civil war is destined to be weak, illegitimate, and a prelude to the next conflict.

One would think that healing and reconciliation should follow three decades of peace. Yet Lebanon, whose 15-year civil war ended 35 years ago, is a nation frozen in time, a ghost haunting its own corpse. It is not a healed nation but a palimpsest of its former conflicts, its power structures meticulously drawn along the very sectarian lines that once tore it apart.

This is a country still ruled, in effect, by unelected leaders. The current president was appointed after years of vacuum, his ascent only possible by twisting the constitution to bypass a rule prohibiting active military officers from political office. The prime minister, a respected former international judge, was less elected than selected, installed through backroom compromise and heavy-handed pressure from foreign capitals like Washington, Paris, and Riyadh. Even the speakership, held by an elected MP, is shackled to a sectarian quota, its legitimacy perpetually questioned.

This patched-together entity now dares to act as a legitimate government, attempting to change the very practices its own flawed existence perpetuates. But a house divided against itself cannot stand, and a government built on sectarian compromise cannot govern. It will either fracture under the weight of its own contradictions or push ahead with its agenda, inevitably alienating one faction or another and risking a return to the civil war days it was designed to prevent. In Lebanon, the peace is the war, continued by other means.

This tragic model is not unique. Libya, shattered since 2011, is a mosaic of rival fiefdoms. A weak, internationally recognized government controls the capital, while the rest of the country answers to another regime in Benghazi or to autonomous tribal forces. There is no central authority, only a precarious and violent stalemate.

But it is Syria that presents the most chilling and recent case study. After a decade of brutal war exacerbated by a proxy conflict involving regional and global powers, the Baathist regime finally collapsed nearly a year ago. The rebels, aided by Turkey and Qatar and spearheaded by factions with extremist ideologies, seized their moment amidst the regional instability sparked by the war in Gaza.

Their victory, however, was merely the prelude to the next chapter of failure. The new Damascus regime, finding its authority challenged, has already resorted to the same tactics of its predecessor: massacres in Alawite and Druze regions, sowing fear among all ethnic and religious minorities. This has not consolidated power; it has shattered it further. The powerful Kurds, along with other groups, are now arming themselves for survival, refusing to hand their weapons to a central government they see as just another sectarian predator.

The outcome is inevitable. Syria is rapidly descending into the Lebanese and Libyan model—a central government that lacks both the legitimacy to command respect and the power to enforce its will. It rules not by consent but by fear, and fear is a fuel that quickly burns out, leaving only the ash of resentment.

When you add Iran to the mix, a country that was destabilized by US invasion and governed through a power-sharing arrangement still, the entire Levant thus becomes a powder keg, its nations condemned to cycles of violence by a refusal to transcend sectarian and tribal identities. The power of the gun, mistaken for political power, creates only a brutal illusion of control. True legitimacy is not seized through the barrel of a rifle or assigned by religious quota; it is earned through the principled compromise of a social contract that serves all citizens equally.

Without this fundamental transformation—without building states for all citizens rather than fiefdoms for sects—the next ten years will not bring peace. They will bring more transformative, and likely armed, events. The civilians of this ancient region will be lucky to witness change that is not delivered by a bullet. For now, their destiny remains held hostage by the very structures claiming to save them, guaranteeing that instability is not a phase, but a permanent condition.

Media review: How Democracies Fail to Confront Corruption

Media review: How Democracies Fail to Confront Corruption

    Tuesday, July 01, 2025   No comments

 At the Edge of Accountability 

Recently, U.S. President Donald Trump, who himself has faced 88 criminal and civil indictments and was nonetheless elected to a second term, issued a public demand that Israel’s judicial system drop all charges against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Trump called the trial a “travesty of justice,” labeling the Israeli legal proceedings a “witch hunt,” and implied that U.S. aid to Israel might be contingent on ending Netanyahu’s prosecution. This unprecedented intervention—an indicted American leader defending an indicted Israeli leader, who is also facing war crimes charges at the International Criminal Court—raises a profound question: How does democracy, if it is to be taken seriously as a system of values and not merely of process, guard against corruption and the rise of authoritarian figures cloaked in democratic legitimacy? This moment is not just politically volatile; it exposes uncomfortable contradictions within how democracies perceive themselves and others.

The indictment of elected leaders in democracies such as Israel and the United States raises difficult and urgent questions about the integrity of democratic systems. When prime ministers or presidents face criminal charges—whether for corruption, abuse of power, or other serious offenses—it is natural to wonder whether democracy has failed to produce ethical and responsible leadership. But while such developments highlight vulnerabilities in democratic practice, they also reveal certain institutional strengths. Democracy does not guarantee virtuous leadership; it guarantees the opportunity for accountability. Whether that opportunity is seized—or manipulated—depends on the strength of institutions and the moral commitment of both leaders and citizens.

One of the core principles of a functioning democracy is that no one, however powerful, is above the law. The fact that legal institutions in places like the United States or Israel can bring charges against sitting or former leaders speaks to the resilience of the rule of law. In authoritarian systems, leaders often operate with impunity; in democracies, they may still face scrutiny and legal consequences. In this respect, the indictment of a head of state can be viewed not as a failure of democracy, but as evidence that democratic institutions are, at least in part, doing their job.

However, this view becomes more complicated when we consider how democracies respond to similar situations in different parts of the world. When elections in the Global South produce leaders with questionable records or populist agendas, Western democracies are quick to dismiss those outcomes as the result of “sham elections” or “corrupt processes.” Yet when similarly compromised figures rise to power within the West—figures under indictment, or credibly accused of serious misconduct—those same governments often insist that the outcome must be respected as the will of the people. They demand deference to the democratic process at home, while undermining or delegitimizing it abroad. This double standard reveals a deeper truth: in many cases, democracy is treated less as a value system than as a political instrument—embraced when convenient, disregarded when not.

Such inconsistencies are damaging not only to international credibility, but to democracy itself. If democratic legitimacy is defined not by values—such as accountability, justice, and equal representation—but by outcomes that serve particular interests, then democracy becomes hollow. The insistence that democracy must be respected when it produces indicted or corrupt leaders in Western nations, while being denied that legitimacy elsewhere, exposes the erosion of democratic ethics. It becomes clear that the principle of democracy is sometimes wielded more as a shield for power than as a reflection of shared values.

Moreover, in deeply polarized societies, even the mechanisms of accountability begin to fracture. Voters may see legal indictments not as a signal of wrongdoing, but as a partisan attack. In such an environment, democratic institutions remain formally intact, but their moral authority is weakened. Leaders who are under investigation—or even convicted—may be rewarded with public support rather than rejection. Far from being disqualified, their defiance becomes a badge of honor. This speaks not only to the failings of political elites, but to a broader cultural crisis in democratic societies: the erosion of civic norms, the rise of partisan loyalty over public ethics, and the loss of a shared commitment to the common good.

While the indictment of elected leaders does not necessarily prove that democracy is broken, it does serve as a warning. It reveals the tension between democratic form and democratic substance—between holding elections and cultivating a culture of accountability and ethical governance. The fact that such tensions are more readily condemned in the Global South than confronted at home suggests that democracy, in the hands of powerful nations, is often invoked more as a geopolitical tool than as a universal standard.

Ultimately, the health of democracy cannot be judged solely by whether elections occur, or whether leaders are indicted. It must be measured by the integrity of institutions, the honesty of public discourse, and the degree to which citizens demand responsibility and justice from those who govern them. Democracy may still provide the tools to hold leaders accountable, but those tools are only effective if people are willing to use them—not selectively, not cynically, but consistently, and in defense of the values democracy is supposed to serve.

Turkey in Crisis: The Arrest of Ekrem Imamoglu and Its Far-Reaching Consequences

Turkey in Crisis: The Arrest of Ekrem Imamoglu and Its Far-Reaching Consequences

    Wednesday, March 19, 2025   No comments

Turkey is facing a period of heightened political and social unrest following the arrest of Istanbul’s mayor, Ekrem Imamoglu. This event has ignited massive protests, deepened tensions between the government and the opposition, and drawn international scrutiny over the state of democracy and rule of law in Turkey.

Mass Protests and Public Outrage

Thousands of Turkish citizens have taken to the streets in major cities, including Istanbul, Ankara, Trabzon, and Izmir, protesting Imamoglu’s arrest on charges of corruption and alleged connections to terrorist groups. The opposition Republican People's Party (CHP) has condemned the arrest as politically motivated, urging its supporters to mobilize nationwide in defense of democracy. The government, meanwhile, has cracked down on demonstrations, deploying riot police who have used tear gas and rubber bullets to disperse crowds.

A Politically Charged Arrest

Imamoglu, a prominent opposition leader and a key challenger to President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in the upcoming 2028 elections, was detained following an early morning raid on his home in Istanbul. His arrest coincided with the cancellation of his university degree by Istanbul University, an act perceived by many as part of a broader campaign to discredit him.

Alongside Imamoglu, Turkish authorities have issued arrest warrants for 105 other municipal officials linked to the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality. The charges against them include corruption, fraud, and alleged ties to the Kurdistan Communities Union (KCK), an organization affiliated with the outlawed Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK). Critics argue that these accusations are baseless and reflect the government’s increasing use of the judiciary as a tool to silence political opponents.

Government Restrictions and Crackdown on Freedoms

In response to the growing unrest, Turkish authorities have imposed stringent measures, including a four-day ban on protests and public gatherings in Istanbul. Internet access and social media platforms have been restricted, while metro and transportation routes leading to key protest sites, such as Taksim Square, have been shut down. Despite these efforts, demonstrations have persisted, with students and faculty from universities like Boğaziçi, Istanbul Technical University, and Yıldız Technical University joining the movement.

Impact on Turkey’s Economy and International Relations

The arrest of Imamoglu has triggered severe economic consequences, with the Turkish lira losing 12% of its value against the U.S. dollar. The Istanbul stock exchange also experienced a sharp decline, prompting a temporary suspension of trading. Economic analysts warn that these developments could further destabilize an already fragile economy and deter foreign investment.

Internationally, the European Union and other Western allies have voiced concern over Imamoglu’s detention. The Council of Europe issued a strong condemnation, describing the arrest as a move against the will of the Turkish people. European lawmakers and human rights organizations have called on Turkey to uphold democratic principles and the independence of its judiciary.

A Pattern of Political Repression?

Imamoglu’s arrest is the latest in a series of crackdowns against opposition figures, journalists, and activists. The recent imprisonment of Ümit Özdağ, leader of the nationalist Victory Party, further underscores Turkey’s deteriorating human rights record. Many fear that Erdoğan’s government is intensifying its efforts to suppress dissent and consolidate power ahead of the next elections.

An Uncertain Future for Turkey

The arrest of Ekrem Imamoglu marks a pivotal moment in Turkish politics. While the government maintains that the charges against him are legitimate, widespread public outrage and international condemnation suggest otherwise. With increasing economic turmoil, growing discontent, and the erosion of democratic norms, Turkey stands at a crossroads—one that could determine its future as either a democracy or an authoritarian state.

As the situation continues to unfold, all eyes remain on Turkey, watching whether its institutions will uphold justice or succumb further to political influence.

Current Events: What should the world think when a majority of the people in a country support a Genocidal regime?

Current Events: What should the world think when a majority of the people in a country support a Genocidal regime?

    Saturday, May 04, 2024   No comments

How should a nation whose majority support extremists be treated?

It depends.

If such a country is a non-Western nation-state, then that will make the entire country a terrorist country and genociding them by a “civilized” state will be acceptable.

If such a country is a “Western” nation-state, the will of the majority is sacred. That is what seems to be the implication of the extraordinary admission by head of the US State Department, Anthony Blinken.

US State Secretary Anthony Blinken said on 4 May that the genocidal actions undertaken by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Gaza are "a reflection of where a large majority of Israelis are in this moment.”

“This is a complicated government. It’s a balancing act when you have a coalition. And if you’re just looking at the politics of it, that’s something that he has to factor in,” Blinken said at an event in Arizona.

"What’s important to understand is that much of what [Netanyahu is] doing is not simply a reflection of his politics or his policies; it’s actually a reflection of where a large majority of Israelis are in this moment,” the top US diplomat said.

Last month, a survey conducted by the Israel Democracy Institute revealed that three-quarters of Jewish Israelis support Netanyahu's much-anticipated ground invasion of Gaza’s southernmost city, Rafah, where about 1.3 million Palestinians are sheltering after being violently displaced from their homes.

Surveys conducted over recent months have shown a similar trend despite growing pressure to see Netanyahu removed from office.

In January, opinion polls showed that Israelis overwhelmingly agreed that “the best way” to obtain the release of captives held inside Gaza was “military pressure” against Hamas, falling in line with the same rhetoric Netanyahu and his war chief have been repeating daily since 7 October.

Polls have also shown a stern objection to delivering humanitarian aid to Gaza, even if the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) is “replaced.”

The problem of seeing a majority electing demonstrably authoritarian, supremacist bigots is the true test of the limits and flaws of democracy. In the past, when such processes happened in non-Western  nation-states, it is often blamed on corruption and processes being flawed. Turkey, for example, over 4 decades voted for a conservative party and a conservative leader. The West dismissed these elections, because they simply thought of all Turkish people as backward, incapable of embracing "true democracy". 

However, with rise of extremist politicians through democratic processes, the West is now facing a moment of truth about democracy. In the past, when democracy did not represent any problems at home, Western leaders used it abroad as a political instrument to intimidate and subjugate other nations.

Anti-Genocide student protests go global

Anti-Genocide student protests go global

    Saturday, May 04, 2024   No comments

By mid-April, students attending wealthy private universities that have tens of billions of dollars in endowments invested in all forms of economic activities wanted their universities to be selective in their investments and divest from companies that produce anything tied to the Gaza Genocide. This happened after the International Court of Justice found that Israel is committing a plausible genocide and ordered it to take specificactions to stop the genocide. Since then protests spread to almost all Western countries, and there are signs that it will spread to poor countries though universities in such countries have no large investments in weapon manufacturing enterprises.

 Universities in France, Canada, Switzerland, Australia and Mexico are witnessing sit-ins and movements demanding an end to the war that broke out seven months ago on the besieged Gaza Strip. In America, the police, who attended in large numbers, broke up the camps set up by pro-Palestinian students at various universities, the most recent of which was the University of California - Los Angeles, where dozens were arrested.

 As the uprising of American university students continues to escalate in intensity, student mobilization is expanding in a number of countries in solidarity with the Gaza Strip, the day after US President Joe Biden called for order to prevail in American universities, while the French police evacuated the building of the Institute of Political Sciences in Paris of unarmed demonstrators. accidents.

 

On April 18, students who rejected the Israeli war on the Gaza Strip began a sit-in on the campus of Columbia University in New York, demanding that its administration stop its academic cooperation with Israeli universities and withdraw its investments in companies that support the occupation of Palestinian territories.

 With the intervention of police forces and the arrest of dozens of students, the state of anger expanded, and the demonstrations extended to dozens of American universities, including leading universities such as Harvard, George Washington, New York, Yale, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and North Carolina.

 Later, the unprecedented student movement in support of Palestine in the United States expanded to universities in countries such as France, Britain, Germany, Canada and India, all of which witnessed demonstrations in support of their American counterparts and demands to stop the war on Gaza and boycott the companies that supply weapons to Israel.

 CNN reported that the administration of the University of California, Riverside reached an agreement with its students to ensure the end of their sit-in camp, after the university pledged transparency and disclosure of investments and academic cooperation programs with external institutions.

 CNN reported that the faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences at Emory University in Georgia will vote in favor of no confidence in the university president, against the backdrop of his calling the police against the protesting students.

 The administration of the University of Chicago in the United States said that there was information “about the presence of physical altercations” on campus, indicating in a statement that in the absence of an agreement with the protesters, the time had come to disperse the crowd.

Students seem to know the consequences of their actions but act, why?

A report in the Times newspaper reviewed the story of Jewish student Iris Hsiang, who was among more than 100 people arrested, in television scenes that credited her with inspiring similar acts of protests on college campuses across the United States.

Hsiang was arrested along with dozens of students at Columbia University for refusing to leave the campus during protests in support of the Palestinians and rejecting the Israeli war on the besieged Gaza Strip.

The student who was suspended from her studies and did not know whether the university would allow her to continue her studies - explained to the newspaper, in a report written by Josie Ensor - the reason for her participation in the pro-Palestinian demonstrations and what prompted her to do so. She said that she was arrested, her hands were tied with ties, and she was placed in a detention cell at the police headquarters all night. .

Hsiang - according to the British newspaper - is now standing outside the gates of the Columbia University campus during the afternoon, because she was prevented from attending classes and accessing the library, dining halls and any other buildings on campus, and was only allowed to remain in her residence as part of the terms of her suspension.

Hsiang has been charged by Columbia University, based on a police indictment, with trespassing, vandalism and “disruptive behavior.” The climate science and human rights student has been suspended from her studies, but she asks indignantly, “How can I trespass on my property at my university?”

Hsiang, who wears a black-and-white keffiyeh as a symbol of solidarity with the Palestinian cause, faces a court hearing later this month and is awaiting the university's decision on whether she will be allowed to continue her studies.

She says that her parents (the mother is Jewish and the father is Asian) are worried about her like all parents, and they support her. She adds, “I grew up in a house where we stood up to injustice, so I formulated the matter to them as follows: What do we want people to do if we were in Gaza and this happened?” Happening to us?

However, the threat of a criminal record and permanent expulsion worries the outstanding student, especially since tuition fees at Columbia University cost $66,000 annually, and she will have to pay another year’s fees if she is forced to repeat her studies after missing crucial classes and exams during the demonstration.

Although a number of professors have reached out to students to offer their support, particularly criticizing the university's handling of the demonstrations, and at least 10 faculty members wearing orange jackets standing hugging each other in Central Park on Monday when the evacuation order was issued, Hsiang is disappointed. “I can't believe it has come to this.”

The newspaper reported that New York City officials ran out of patience due to the protests, and its Mayor Eric Adams called on the parents of the students who entered Hamilton Hall to “come pick up their children” and said that the campus must be a safe place for all students.

But Hsiang rejected the idea that Columbia had become an unsafe place for Jewish students. “I am Jewish and I am afraid to enter campus, but for a different reason. I was arrested for my peaceful protest,” she said. “There is a history of using Jewish identity as a weapon. Because I am Jewish, I support the Palestinians against persecution.” .

The newspaper concluded that Hsiang, even if she was not expelled, would have to repeat the academic year because she missed most of her final exams, although it is up to the individual professor to accept or reject the course work of the arrested protesting students, according to the university.

Hsiang concluded her interview with the newspaper by saying, “I am thinking about my future, but at the same time I am thinking about the students of Gaza, as there are no longer established universities. This will definitely change the course of my life, but I went into it knowing that it was a possibility. If Columbia University continues in this situation "There's not much this university can teach me."

Journalism: The protests in solidarity with Palestine revealed the flaw in Washington’s policy

Journalism: The protests in solidarity with Palestine revealed the flaw in Washington’s policy

    Sunday, April 28, 2024   No comments

The American magazine Foreign Policy published an article by Howard French, the magazine’s main writer and professor of journalism at the Graduate School of Columbia University, in which he says: “The revolution of universities in solidarity with Palestine revealed that the flaw is not in the students, but in the foreign policy of the United States of America towards Israel and the Middle East.” 

The writer in "Foreign Policy" describes the protests in Columbia and other universities as "extremely important," adding: "They in turn inspired a growing series of reactions by university administrators, politicians, and American law enforcement officials, respectively, who sought to reduce the student demonstrations." Or prevent, condemn or, in many cases, violently suppress it.” He added, "What this moment revealed most clearly to me is not the crisis of student culture or higher education in the United States, as some have claimed, but rather a crisis in US foreign policy, and specifically its long-term relationship with Israel." 

"What I have seen inside the university’s gates has generally been a picture of exemplary civility. For nine days now, there has been an orderly encampment of students, most of them chatting relaxedly, some of them with tents, occupying an expanse of lawn in front of Butler Library, the biggest of Columbia’s libraries."  ~ Howard French, Professor of Journalism, Columbia University.

Protesting students teach American society and the world about democracy and citizenship. The writer says that through peaceful protest, students at Columbia University and in an increasing number of other universities are teaching American society, and indeed the entire world, about true democracy and citizenship. This came to mind in conversations I had with students from China and other countries, who marveled at the ability of Columbia students to respond through protest. In the midst of atrocities, they say enough is enough, and they always do so peacefully. 

They say that confronting terror requires more urgency than letter-writing campaigns to members of Congress or waiting patiently to vote in the next election. He adds that Gaza is not the only horror in the world at all, and we can all benefit from the moral urgency and civility of these students. They put pressure where they can on the institutions they belong to, and as students, they are the bedrock of communities. If they cannot convince the US government to do something to stop the war in Gaza and in the West Bank, which is largely ignored, they can at least convince their universities to stop supporting it. 

This is what the divestment demand means: stopping institutional support and investments in the Israeli war effort. Many critics object that this demand is unrealistic and can never succeed. But what is the appropriate response for a citizen? Sitting and folding your hands, for example? 

The writer concludes that the threat facing Zionism in the world today does not come from the students demonstrating in American universities and elsewhere. Rather, he claims that the greatest threat to Zionism does not even come from Hamas. The greatest threat stems from the blurring of any dividing line between Zionism and the crushing of Palestinian lives and hope for the future, says the American writer and academic.