Their aspirations are important because the Obama administration has said it is refraining from arming the opposition, which has been pummeled by Syrian security forces for 18 months, in part out of fear of igniting sectarian violence and that weapons would reach Islamist radicals who would threaten allies in the region.

The survey by the International Republican Institute, which trains democracy activists around the world, found high support for a government that “respectfully acknowledges religion” and treats all religions equally. The second-most popular model of choice was for a constitution ...]]> Syrian Rebels Said To Seek Islamic Democracy

by Oren Dorell, USA TODAY

Syrian opposition members generally want a democratic government that protects the rights of minorities, though many also want a constitution based on Islam, according to a recent survey.

Their aspirations are important because the Obama administration has said it is refraining from arming the opposition, which has been pummeled by Syrian security forces for 18 months, in part out of fear of igniting sectarian violence and that weapons would reach Islamist radicals who would threaten allies in the region.

The survey by the International Republican Institute, which trains democracy activists around the world, found high support for a government that “respectfully acknowledges religion” and treats all religions equally. The second-most popular model of choice was for a constitution “based on Islam.”

“Most of the opposition is Sunni Muslims and they are democratically minded, but they want a government based on some kind of Islamic law or that follows Islamic guidelines,” says Elizabeth O’Bagy, an analyst at the Institute for the Study of War who helped the survey writers find contacts in the opposition movement.

The survey was conducted with help from Pechter Polls of Princeton, N.J., which used personal networks of opposition members to reach 1,168 participants via the Internet, including 315 opposition members in Syria from June 1 to July 2. It was released Friday. Respondents were asked to rank their support, on a scale of 1 to 7, of various statements about a future Syrian government.

A government styled on that of France, the United States and Turkey received the highest marks. A government styled on Iran or Iraq received the lowest marks.

They tended to agree that government should protect minorities, even members of President Bashar Assad’s Alawite sect, atheists and apostates.

They agreed that the government and constitution should mention religion but otherwise be secular. They also agreed, though not as much, with the statement that the constitution should be “based on Islam.”

O’Bagy says the findings confirm her own research. Many Syrian opposition members she has spoken to compared what they want to the United States. “People here are religious, and, yes, we have a secular constitution and government,” she says. “But a lot of decisions that are made are based on religious beliefs.”

Though that view is shared by the majority, religious extremists known as Salafis, who seek to rule according to an ultra-conservative version of Islam, are a small minority in the opposition that is growing in number and influence, says O’Bagy, who published her own report titled “Jihad in Syria” last week. They’re growing because of the rising desperation and violence inflicted by Assad’s regime and because they’re funded by Persian Gulf Arab nations, she says.

Amnesty International said this month that as Syrian security forces are forced to withdraw from villages, they have adopted a pattern of indiscriminate artillery attacks on civilian targets and that close to 200 non-combatants are dying each day.

O’Bagy estimates that Salafi Jihadis number from 800 to 1,000 among up to 60,000 armed fighters. The majority of the fighters are what she calls religious nationalists “fighting for democracy and nationalist principles but (for whom) religion plays a large role,” she says. Islamists akin to the Muslim Brotherhood, who want to achieve a religious state through democratic means, represent 20,000 to 30,000 fighters, “a significant portion of the opposition but still not a majority,” she says.

Though the United States has declined to supply weapons to rebels at war with the Assad regime, money for arms has been flowing from other countries, such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Kuwait, which tend to support hardcore Islamists, and Turkey, which supports the Muslim Brotherhood, O’Bagy says.

“More extremist elements are beginning to gain increasing popular support,” O’Bagy says. “The situation is getting so desperate. They may gain a foothold in the Syrian opposition to influence the outcome, or at the very least threaten the future stability of a post-Assad future.”

The United States should deliver “a much larger engagement to compete with this extremist power that is coming about as the situation becomes more desperate,” she says.

Edgar Vasquez, a spokesman for the State Department’s Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, says the rebels don’t need more guns. Instead, the State Department is focused on helping unarmed elements in the opposition develop a plan for how to rule once Assad is gone.

Syrian rebels, led by the Free Syrian Army, have liberated large portions of the country’s north, they’ve seized checkpoints on the border with Turkey and Iraq, and they have turned the tide on the Assad regime with the weapons they already have, Vasquez says.

“The opposition has done pretty well for themselves in the past few months,” he says. “They’ve fought (regime forces) to a stalemate in Aleppo, and in Damascus, the opposition has been able to bring the fight to Assad’s doorstep.”

He agrees that extremists are a concern.

“That’s why our principal focus has been to encourage the opposition to come up with a transition plan,” Vasquez says. “That’s something those elements within Syria are working on within Syria — with a cross section of Kurds, Sunnis and Alawites — to agree on a plan to lay the way forward. There’s no question that (Assad) will be gone.”

Syrian Rebels Said To Seek Islamic Democracy

Reporting about violence in the Middle East often focuses on Islamic extremists, and this is increasingly true for much of the coverage of Syria’s uprising. But in the Syrian political opposition, Islamic extremism is truly the exception that proves the rule. The vast majority of Syrian opposition activists, according to a new, systematic survey of more than 1,000 of them, express relatively moderate views about Islamic issues. They also voice support for many key democratic values — and most look to the West and other democracies for inspiration and protection. These findings offer support for the view that mainstream Syrian opposition fighters merit the increased aid that would enable ...]]>

David Pollock is the Kaufman Senior Fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and an adviser to Pechter Polls.

Reporting about violence in the Middle East often focuses on Islamic extremists, and this is increasingly true for much of the coverage of Syria’s uprising. But in the Syrian political opposition, Islamic extremism is truly the exception that proves the rule. The vast majority of Syrian opposition activists, according to a new, systematic survey of more than 1,000 of them, express relatively moderate views about Islamic issues. They also voice support for many key democratic values — and most look to the West and other democracies for inspiration and protection. These findings offer support for the view that mainstream Syrian opposition fighters merit the increased aid that would enable them to defend themselves, defeat Bashar al-Assad’s dictatorship and restrain any extremists infiltrating their movement.

The survey, completed in July, was commissioned by the nonprofit International Republican Institute, a nongovernmental organization, and conducted by Pechter Polls of Princeton, N.J., in consultation with Conrad Winn of Compas Research and Carleton University. Native Syrian interviewers conducted the poll, using secure Skype and online links in Arabic. To minimize regime interference or intimidation, the sampling employed a referral (or “snowball”) methodology, starting with five trusted opposition activists, men and women, from different locations and different ethnic, religious, political and socioeconomic backgrounds. They sampled their own networks of opposition contacts and other networks identified as the fieldwork proceeded.

The result was a representative (though not random) sample of 1,168 Syrian opposition activists. Demographically, the sample is a cross-section of that population. The activists are from across the country and around the world. Just more than half are 35 or younger; two-thirds have more education than a high school diploma. By ethnicity, 80 percent are Arab; 14 percent Kurdish; and 5 percent Assyrian, Turkmen, Circassian or other. By religion, 80 percent are Sunni Muslim, with the remainder identifying as not religious, Christian, Alawi, Druze or other. As for gender, 85 percent are male. Of the total, 315 reported that they still lived in Syria, while the rest were operating from exile.

Asked if the opposition leadership “should support the rights and freedoms of minorities,” the average response score was 6.36 out of 7, indicating very strong and widespread agreement. Among those inside Syria, this view was particularly intense, with 79 percent giving it the highest possible score; the comparable figure for opposition activists outside the country was 68 percent. Asked whether “religious minorities should have equal rights in all aspects of society,” responses were similarly positive. And equal rights even for “non-believers” were accorded the highest possible agreement score by 64 percent of opposition activists, whether inside or outside Syria. Fifty-nine percent, inside and outside the country, said they would vote for a qualified Alawite candidate — one from the Assad regime’s most favored and most loyal sect — in a free election, an impressive share given the bloodletting and sectarian polarization in Syria since the uprising began in March 2011.

Similarly, 80 percent gave at least mild support, with an average score of 5.2 out of 7, to this proposition: “Government processes, school curricula, and the constitution should mention religion respectfully, but otherwise be secular and not give priority to any specific religious viewpoint over another.” This does not, however, imply the prevalence of pure secularism; in fact, just one-third of respondents said they would support a constitution with no mention of religion at all.

On broader democratic values, there was virtual unanimity (with an average score of 6.8 out of 7) on the idea that “the president should have to obey the laws like everyone else.” And 84 percent, both inside and outside Syria, gave a score of 7 to this resounding democratic declaration: “The government majority in parliament needs to respect the right of the opposition minority to criticize vigorously and without fear whatever the government does.”

By contrast, the Syrian opposition appeared deeply divided on other issues. Asked about “a federal model” for post-Assad Syria, responses suggested one-third were in favor, one-third opposed and one-third “don’t know.” Asked about their institutional affiliation, responses were even more fragmented. The Free Syrian Army came in first, but with just 17 percent; the Syrian National Council and the Local Coordination Committees tied at 11 percent; all the rest split among a variety of other groups or no group at all.

Looking abroad for a political model, there is greater consensus. Three-quarters gave the United States and France positive ratings — with those Syrians who have found refuge in the West the most likely to rate the United States highly. Among other predominantly Muslim countries, the Islamist states Saudi Arabia and Egypt each received a favorable score on this question from just one-quarter of the Syrian opposition overall. Democratic Turkey rated three times as high, in league with Western models — but 45 percent of those surveyed also said Turkey had too much influence over the Syrian National Council, which is based in that country.

These rankings changed significantly when the question was about foreign “treatment of the Syrian opposition.” Here, France, Qatar, Turkey, Libya and Britain got the highest ratings (averaging 5.3 to 5.5 out of 7); the United States got 4.9, followed closely by Saudi Arabia (4.7) and Egypt (4.2). Even more significant were the exceedingly low scores — 1.5 or less — on this question for Iraq, China, Russia and Iran.

What does Syria’s opposition want from the outside world? Large majorities offered the strongest possible support for a no-fly zone, humanitarian safe zones, and “far greater armaments and training for the Free Syrian Army.” But fewer than half strongly supported “invading Syria to bring down the Assad government”; and 22 percent are opposed to any outside military intervention. Asked who should lead such intervention, Turkey got the most votes, followed fairly closely by France, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and NATO.

All in all, the data show that most Syrian opposition activists are far from being Islamic fanatics or extremists. They solidly support religious tolerance, legal equality, freedom of expression and a constitution that mentions religion respectfully but is otherwise secular. They look to Western or moderately Islamist Turkish political models, while rejecting those of Saudi Arabia and especially Iran. And they want Western help, while not requesting any boots on the ground. The argument that providing this help might result in trading Assad’s hostile secular dictatorship for a hostile Islamic one does not square with these facts.

By Jill Dougherty (Link to CNN article)

Members of the Syrian opposition support international armed intervention in their country, including establishing a “no-fly” zone, humanitarian corridors and training Free Syrian Army fighters, but they do not support an international presence on the ground, a survey showed.

The survey of the ...]]> The following article was written by Jill Dougherty, foreign correspondent for CNN and based on ground breaking research we undertook at the request of IRI with members of the Syrian opposition.  We thank all those involved in helping us get these insights from Syria (your wouldn’t believe how tough it was to get and how many people helped…), particularly IRI for their commitment to advancing democracy even in the most challenging of places. 

Survey: Syrian Opposition Want ‘no-fly’ Zone

Survey: Syrian Opposition Want ‘no-fly’ Zone

Fieldwork was conducted from June 1 – July 2, 2012, and was undertaken in cooperation with international survey research firm Pechter Polls of Princeton, NJ. 

Given security considerations, the survey was conducted electronically using a referral, or “snowball” method, rather than through strictly random selection of respondents, as would be done in a public opinion poll.  To achieve broader representation, key individuals (or channels) were used to initiate the referral chain, ultimately reaching a sample of 1,168 opposition members, approximately 315 of whom were ...]]> Survey Of Syrian Opposition

Washington, DC – IRI today released a survey of Syrian opposition  (PDF) (Right click and save as to download) and its analysis (PDF) (Right click and save as to download), the second Syria-related survey the Institute has released in the past month  

Fieldwork was conducted from June 1 – July 2, 2012, and was undertaken in cooperation with international survey research firm Pechter Polls of Princeton, NJ. 

Given security considerations, the survey was conducted electronically using a referral, or “snowball” method, rather than through strictly random selection of respondents, as would be done in a public opinion poll.  To achieve broader representation, key individuals (or channels) were used to initiate the referral chain, ultimately reaching a sample of 1,168 opposition members, approximately 315 of whom were inside Syria.  Margin of error is not strictly applicable to this survey because of the non-random selection of respondents.

Key findings:

• Respondents exhibited support for a range of international armed intervention measures, with the most support going to actions that would not involve an international presence on the ground.  Measures that would require only air power and air strike support scored the highest, including the imposition of a no-fly zone (average 6.35 on a scale of one to seven, seven being the strongest agreement), the establishment of humanitarian corridors (6.25 average) and armament training to the Free Syrian Army (6.25 average). 
• While a slim plurality of respondents (24 percent) gave the Syrian National Council (SNC) the highest possible mark for legitimacy (selecting seven on a one to seven scale), the survey indicated the SNC is struggling to generate broad appeal in the opposition as the responses averaged only 4.95.
• When asked what the most important post-Assad aims of the opposition would be, respondents scored establishing a strong judicial system and giving fair trials to suspected war criminals as two of the highest priorities with averages of 6.71 and 6.47, respectively.  At the same time, most placed a high premium on swift retribution: the idea of punishing war criminals without being delayed by judicial processes was also highly appealing to the opposition.
• Opposition views on transitional timelines for a post-Assad Syria favored transitional government leading to elections (40 percent) or the Tunisian model of electing a constitutional assembly leading to elections (36 percent).  A minority favored immediately holding presidential or parliamentary elections and respondents mostly balked at the Egyptian model of electing a parliament and then drafting a constitution.
• Respondents indicated a strong desire to live in a post-Assad Syria, with a total of 82 percent of those who are currently outside the country reporting they would return at least temporarily after Assad’s fall.

NOTE: Poll undertaken by Pechter Polls

(see: IRI Poll: Syrian Refugees in Lebanon Desire New Government, Democracy).

Survey Of Syrian Opposition

The survey of the Syrian opposition was conducted by the International Republican Institute (IRI), a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that supports democracy around the world.

It is funded by the U.S. Congress, the State Department and private donations. A quarter of the respondents gave the umbrella opposition organization, the Syrian National Council (SNC), high ratings for legitimacy. But the survey also showed that the council is struggling to consolidate its appeal to a broad section of Syrians who support the opposition movement.

Asked which country ...]]> From CNN.com’s Security Clearance blog by Jill Dougherty

Members of the Syrian opposition support international armed intervention in their country, including establishing a “no-fly” zone, humanitarian corridors and training Free Syrian Army fighters, but they do not support an international presence on the ground, a survey showed. 

The survey of the Syrian opposition was conducted by the International Republican Institute (IRI), a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that supports democracy around the world.

It is funded by the U.S. Congress, the State Department and private donations. A quarter of the respondents gave the umbrella opposition organization, the Syrian National Council (SNC), high ratings for legitimacy. But the survey also showed that the council is struggling to consolidate its appeal to a broad section of Syrians who support the opposition movement.

Asked which country treats the opposition best, the respondents cited France, Qatar and Turkey, followed by Britain, Libya, Germany, the United States, and Saudi Arabia. China, Russia and Iran were chosen as countries that treat the opposition the worst.

If an international alliance does intervene militarily in Syria, the respondents said it should be led by Turkey.

The respondents said they were 81% Sunni Arabs and 85% male, and educated. Two thirds said they had a university certificate or certificate of post graduate education.

IRI carried out the survey from June 1 to July 2 with the international survey research firm Pechter Polls of Princeton, N.J.

Because of security issues, IRI said the survey was conducted electronically and was not a random sample. Instead, it used “snowball” methodology, which the group described as “relying strictly on dissidents who were known to IRI.”

Key individuals were used to initiate the referral chain, IRI said, “ultimately reaching a sample of 1,168 opposition members, approximately 315 of whom were inside Syria.”

Asked to rate priorities for the opposition in a post-Assad Syria the respondents put establishing a strong judicial system and giving fair trials to suspected war criminals at the top of the list. But they also supported punishing war criminals without judicial process.

If Syrian President Bashar al-Assad eventually leaves office, 82% of Syrian respondents living outside the country said they would return at least temporarily.

The survey can be found at: http://www.iri.org/news-events-press-center/news/survey-syrian-opposition-reveals-desire-international-intervention

Survey: Syrian Opposition Want ‘no-fly’ Zone

Magnus Norell and David Pollock

It has been conventional wisdom that the Syrian opposition is deeply divided, making aid and support from the international community very difficult to send. The lack of “one address” with which to coordinate also makes any thoughts of a more robust military intervention even more unlikely. Add to that the continued refusal of Russia and China to support stronger UNSC resolutions and there is no wonder that the carnage in Syria has gone on for nearly 18 months with the world looking on and wringing its hands.

It may ...]]> EU Intervention In Syri

If Europe wishes to effect true democracy in the wake of the Assad regime, it must stop playing into the hands of the Muslim Brotherhood and start aiding the rebels on the ground militarily.

Magnus Norell and David Pollock

It has been conventional wisdom that the Syrian opposition is deeply divided, making aid and support from the international community very difficult to send. The lack of “one address” with which to coordinate also makes any thoughts of a more robust military intervention even more unlikely. Add to that the continued refusal of Russia and China to support stronger UNSC resolutions and there is no wonder that the carnage in Syria has gone on for nearly 18 months with the world looking on and wringing its hands.

It may be true that there are a multitude of organizations speaking for the opposition. And it’s equally true that several of these organizations and groups are at loggerheads with one another. It can sometimes be a trial trying to sort through the plethora of groups and assess who is a true democrat and who is only pretending to be one. That much became clear during a fact-finding trip to Turkey organized by the European Foundation for Democracy (EFD, an NGO based in Brussels) in early July. Five days of meetings with Syrian groups and individuals (in Antakya and Istanbul), encompassing the full ideological and political spectrum, revealed the divisions and splits within the opposition and to a large extent among the people active inside Syria.

But the trip also revealed something else, and far more important: The opposition may be divided to some extent, but it is not divided in the aim of getting rid of Assad. And it is not disorganized, but de-centralized. Discussions during five very intensive days also made it clear that the violence endured by the Syrian population (very few areas of the country have been spared the violence) could have been mitigated by more-robust support from the international community. It also became crystal clear that the oft-mentioned fear in the West of a growing Islamist presence in the opposition is due in no small measure to the fact that no one else is stepping up to the plate. The Islamists (groups aligned with or belonging to the Muslim Brotherhood [MB] and more radical Salafist groups) are following age-old tactics and taking advantage of this situation, and in the process managing to sidestep other organizations and groups with no, or very little, Islamist bent.

This trend is perhaps most vividly seen in what for many in the West has become synonymous with the Syrian opposition: the Syrian National Council or SNC. A vast majority of the people we met, regardless of ideological bent, said the same thing: The SNC is solidly infiltrated by the MB and dominated by the brothers. But this conflicts with information coming out of Syria for the past year, underlining the sometimes-deep divisions between the opposition inside Syria and the one organized and based outside, primarily in Turkey. According to our interlocutors, the MB has successfully presented the SNC as the “go-to” group through which to funnel what little aid there is. That this has been achieved under the noses of the EU is certainly due to the fact that the Union has found an address in the SNC, something the skilled operators in the MB have used to strengthen its position. The fact that the Turkish government is close to the MB has made this even easier, and the lack of support from other democratic countries in the West eases the process.

But Islamists are not dominating inside Syria. That much also became clear during our discussions. On the contrary, it was strongly brought home to us that the vast majority of the opposition much preferred the EU, whose democratic structures are the political ideal after Assad. But the lack of support from the West, and continued refusal to help militarily, gives the non-Islamist opposition precious little choice.

Chasing after “one address” has led the EU into to the arms of the MB, and by doing that, the Union has greatly complicated the goal of what a majority of the opposition says it wants, namely a genuinely democratic country with a political and legal structure that mirrors the EU. Instead of putting all the chips in the SNC basket, the international community should diversify and support the many smaller groups that are already doing heroic work in trying to help the Syrians, inside and outside Syria. A decentralized opposition makes for a decentralized response. And there are no problems with finding good people to work with here. Also, the fact that the opposition is decentralized is one very important reason it hasn’t been crushed. We in the West, and especially in the EU, should turn this to our advantage and, before it’s too late, work on the goodwill we still may retain. The amazing thing is that despite the pitiful support from the EU, the Union is still viewed as the role model for what may come in Syria. The longer we wait, however, the less chance that this will be enough to stop the Islamist trend in Syria and make a truly democratic Syria a possibility.

Fortunately, in the two weeks since we returned from meeting the Syrian opposition in Antakya and Istanbul, several encouraging developments have occurred. Each of these development also poses some new problems – but each of those problems can in turn be remedied, or at least greatly reduced, by judicious outside aid.

First, the EU and the US have stopped insisting — in their public statements, private meetings, and probably also in their emerging aid plans — that the SNC is the sole or even primary address for the Syrian opposition. This does not mean abandoning, but rather supplementing, the SNC, with additional, more diverse and hopefully more “inside Syria” groups and individuals.

The problem with this approach, of course, is that it risks further fragmenting an already fractured opposition. On one level, the results are already ironic, with new splinter factions and umbrella organizations sprouting up almost weekly, all in the name of “unifying” the opposition. The solution, however, is simple: Stop even trying to unify the opposition, and instead deal directly with different groups that merit different kinds of outside support. There will be time enough during the post-Assad transition to coordinate and eventually combine them into a functional new government.

Second, on a related front, the previously deeply divided Syrian Kurds have come together, at least for now, in opposition to Assad’s regime and in a promise not to support PKK violence against Turkey. Because Syria’s three million Kurds now control a highly strategic strip of territory along the border with Turkey, this helps open Aleppo and other key targets to the opposition, while mitigating Turkish security concerns so far.

The problem here, as we heard at some length on our trip, is that Syria’s majority Arab opposition and minority Kurds sharply disagree over “federalism” or some form of Kurdish autonomy in a post-Assad Syria. Yet, even this newly salient ethnic divide within the opposition offers an opportunity for creative outside mediation. The EU and the US should seize the opportunity by actively working with Turkey, the Kurdish Regional Government of Iraq, and others to broker a compromise political understanding between the mainstream Syrian opposition and the major Kurdish parties in that country. Not only will this hasten Assad’s fall, it will also help avoid serious ethnic conflict after his departure from the scene.

Third, and most sensationally, Assad’s regime has suffered major assassinations and defections in the past two weeks. And Kofi Annan has just resigned, removing the final fig leaf for diplomatic dithering. So far, so good.

The problem here, however, is doubly ironic. So dramatic have these events been that some commentators, and probably some EU and US policymakers, have now hastened to call Assad’s demise imminent, or at least inevitable – even without any further foreign intervention. So, for example, the latest leak about increased US aid to the opposition apparently refers to an intelligence “finding” that is actually several months old, that does not include any “lethal” aid, and that therefore seems more like another excuse for inaction than a genuine policy improvement. Yet, in the absence of real, stepped-up outside support for the opposition, the fall of the regime will certainly take much more time, cost many more lives, and produce a considerably less moderate, stable, or democratic outcome than would otherwise be the case.

The solution to this problem is the simplest of all: use recent gains by the Syrian opposition as an opportunity to end this crisis, not as a rationale for prolonging it. In other words, move urgently and decisively to ramp up humanitarian, political, and yes, military aid to the opposition. That means especially the “lethal” but defensive anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons they want and need in order to resist the regime’s last desperate murderous onslaughts.

The logic of this position leads to one final, perhaps more counterintuitive, point. Outside Syria, everyone has been waiting for the US to take the lead on this issue, particularly on more advanced arms supplies. But inside Syria, as our own systematic surveys and extensive personal conversations have made clear, the Syrian people themselves are looking first and foremost to European countries, like France or Turkey, to save them. Why, then, don’t European countries take this initiative, leaving the US to “lead from behind?” It worked in Libya, last spring. Why not in Syria, right now?

___

Magnus Norell is an adjunct scholar at The Washington Institute. David Pollock is a senior fellow at The Washington Institute, focusing on regional political dynamics and related issues.

EU Intervention In Syri

Image source: http://www.csmonitor.com/World…

Without a peace to monitor, U.N. peacekeepers ...]]>

With the conflict in Syria escalating on a daily basis, we see a country slipping into the abyss of complete civil war. Where ever you are sitting when you read this, know that even if you are not in Syria, the conflict has wider implications than the human rights abuses and death we’ll experience via CNN breaking news bulletins. Whoever prevails in Syria will have an impact on the broader geographic theatre – especially as Iran and militant groups uses this instability to gain closer ties with different factions inside of Syria. This is not just a civil war, terrible as it will become for the families of Syria – there is more to follow…. What is your view?

Image source: http://www.csmonitor.com/World…

Without a peace to monitor, U.N. peacekeepers will leave Syria by August 24. Diplomats will meet at the United Nations in New York on Friday to discuss next steps.

Continue Reading

Source: Rss

May 30, 2012, 6:03 p.m. ET

What Does the Syrian Opposition Believe?

A confidential survey of activists inside the country shows limited

support for Islamists but high admiration for the U.S. and Turkey

There are increasing calls for international intervention in Syria after this weekend’s massacre in Houla, where Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s forces murdered more than 100 civilians. Obstacles to intervention remain, however, especially concern that the opposition to Assad’s regime is dominated by religious fundamentalists. Until recently, for example, the Syrian National Council, a group of exiled opponents of the regime, was led by Burhan Ghalioun, whose unwillingness to counter the Muslim Brotherhood was widely viewed in the West as a troubling sign of Islamist influence.

But ...]]> WALL STREET JOURNAL ARTICLE: By Pechter Polls Consultant

May 30, 2012, 6:03 p.m. ET

What Does the Syrian Opposition Believe?

A confidential survey of activists inside the country shows limited

support for Islamists but high admiration for the U.S. and Turkey

By DAVID POLLOCK

There are increasing calls for international intervention in Syria after this weekend’s massacre in Houla, where Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s forces murdered more than 100 civilians. Obstacles to intervention remain, however, especially concern that the opposition to Assad’s regime is dominated by religious fundamentalists. Until recently, for example, the Syrian National Council, a group of exiled opponents of the regime, was led by Burhan Ghalioun, whose unwillingness to counter the Muslim Brotherhood was widely viewed in the West as a troubling sign of Islamist influence.

But a confidential survey of opposition activists living in Syria reveals that Islamists are only a minority among them. Domestic opponents of Assad, the survey indicates, look to Turkey as a model for Syrian governance—and even widely admire the United States.

Pechter Polls, which conducts opinion surveys in tough spots in the Middle East, Africa and Asia, completed the Syria opposition poll in December 2011. Respondents were contacted over a secure Skype connection by someone they could trust—all native Syrians—who asked them to fill out a short questionnaire anonymously in Arabic. Interviewers were selected from different social and political groups to ensure that respondents reflected a rough cross-section of overall opposition attitudes. To ensure confidentiality, the online survey could be accessed only through a series of proxy servers, bypassing the regime-controlled Internet.

Given the survey’s unusual security requirements, respondents were selected by a referral (or “controlled snowball”) technique, rather than in a purely random fashion. To be as representative as possible, the survey employed five different starting points for independent referral chains, all operating from different locations. The resulting sample consisted of 186 individuals in Syria identified as either opposition activists themselves (two-thirds of the total) or in contact with the opposition.

What do these “inside” opposition supporters believe? Only about one-third expressed a favorable opinion of the Muslim Brotherhood. Almost half voiced a negative view, and the remainder were neutral. On this question, no significant differences emerged across regions.

Most of the survey’s questions asked, “On a scale of 1 to 7, where 1 means the most negative and 7 the most positive, how would you rate your opinion of X?” Answers of 1 to 3 were considered negative, 4 as neutral, and 5 to 7 as positive.

While many respondents supported religious values in public life, only a small fraction strongly favored Shariah law, clerical influence in government, or heavy emphasis on Islamic education. A large majority (73%) said it was “important for the new Syrian government to protect the rights of Christians.” Only 20% said that religious leaders have a great influence on their political views.

This broad rejection of Islamic fundamentalism was also reflected in the respondents’ views on government. The poll asked each respondent what country he or she would “like to see Syria emulate politically,” and which countries the respondent “would like to see Syria emulate economically.” The poll listed 12 countries, each with a scale of 1 to 7. Just 5% had even a mildly positive view of Saudi Arabia as a political model. In contrast, 82% gave Turkey a favorable rating as both a political and economic model (including over 40% extremely favorable). The U.S. earned 69% favorable ratings as a political model, with France, Germany and Britain close behind. Tunisia rated only 37% and Egypt 22%.

Iran was rated lowest of any country included in the survey, including Russia and China: Not even 2% of respondents had positive views of Iran as a political model. Fully 90% expressed an unfavorable view of Hezbollah, including 78% with the most negative possible attitude.

One of the surprises in the results is the scope of the opposition’s network inside Damascus, despite their difficulties in demonstrating publicly. One-third of the respondents, whether activists or sympathizers, said they live in the Syrian capital. (To protect their privacy, the survey did not ask for more precise identification.)

This “inside” opposition is well-educated, with just over half identifying as college graduates. The ratio of male to female respondents was approximately 3 to 1, and 86% were Sunni Arab.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, they were ambivalent about Syrian Kurdish demands for “political decentralization” (like autonomy). Views of “Kurdish parties” were evenly divided among negative, neutral and positive. (Such feelings are evidently mutual: In the six months since the survey was completed, Syrian Kurdish organizations have increasingly decided to go their own way, separate from the other opposition groups.)

Based on a statistical analysis of the survey, most secularists among the respondents prefer weak central government, presumably as a way to safeguard their personal freedoms. On the other hand, the one-third of respondents who support the Muslim Brotherhood also tend to have a favorable view of Hamas, despite the latter movement’s previous association with the Assad regime.

The survey demonstrates that the core of the Syrian opposition inside the country is not made up of the Muslim Brotherhood or other fundamentalist forces, and certainly not of al Qaeda or other jihadi organizations. To be sure, a revolution started by secularists could pave the way for Islamists to win elections, as has occurred in Egypt. But the Syrian opposition is solidly favorable to the U.S. and overwhelmingly negative toward both Hezbollah and Iran.

Mr. Pollock is senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and a consultant to Pechter Polls.

A version of this article appeared May 31, 2012, on page A17 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: What Does the Syrian Opposition Believe?.

The survey was conducted by Pechter Polls in November – December 2011 and the results were publically embargoed until today.

The confidential survey of opposition activists living in Syria reveals that Islamists are only a minority among them. Domestic opponents of Assad, the survey indicates, look to Turkey as a model for Syrian governance—and even widely admire the United States.

Pechter Polls, which conducts opinion surveys in tough spots in the Middle East, Africa and Asia, completed the Syria opposition poll in December 2011. Respondents were contacted over a secure Skype connection by someone they could trust—all native Syrians—who asked them to fill out ...]]> Syrian Opposition

Today the Wall Street Journal published results from the first-ever credible, scientific survey of the Syrian opposition from within Syria undertaken by Pechter Polls.

The survey was conducted by Pechter Polls in November – December 2011 and the results were publically embargoed until today.

The confidential survey of opposition activists living in Syria reveals that Islamists are only a minority among them. Domestic opponents of Assad, the survey indicates, look to Turkey as a model for Syrian governance—and even widely admire the United States.

Pechter Polls, which conducts opinion surveys in tough spots in the Middle East, Africa and Asia, completed the Syria opposition poll in December 2011. Respondents were contacted over a secure Skype connection by someone they could trust—all native Syrians—who asked them to fill out a short questionnaire anonymously in Arabic. Interviewers were selected from different social and political groups to ensure that respondents reflected a rough cross-section of overall opposition attitudes.

To ensure confidentiality, the online survey could be accessed only through a series of proxy servers, bypassing the regime-controlled Internet.

The landmark poll, was conducted via native Syrian interviewers, who contacted respondents over a secure Skype connection and asked them to fill out a short questionnaire anonymously in Arabic.

To read more about the key counter-intuitive findings, please download the highlight slides below and visit the Wall Street Journal website at: (WSJ Article)

Pechter Polls provides opinion and behavioral research in the Middle East, Africa, and South Asia.

Contact us if you would like additional information from the study or if you require research undertaken in challenging environments.

[actionbox color="green" icon="info"]Download Syrian Opposition Poll Highlights by Pechter Polls PDF (Right Click / Save to Desktop)[/actionbox]

Syrian Opposition