The tumultuous collapses of Iraq, Libya and Syria offer stark parallels and contrasts, shedding light on the complex interplay of foreign intervention, internal strife and the fragile dynamics of power in the Middle East.
At the heart of anti-colonialism lie two principles which, at first glance, seem to stand in direct opposition. The first calls for unwavering support of the global struggle for resistance and liberation against white supremacy and colonialism, a battle fought across borders and systems of oppression. The second prioritizes empowering the poorest workers and peasants, ensuring that wealth is redistributed to uplift those most marginalized.
Achieving both of these core principles is rare and remarkable. State-building efforts, including attempts at socialist state formation, are constantly pressured to compromise with colonial powers and transform into comprador states that serve external capitalist interests. Most succumb to this pressure swiftly. The coup against Ben Bella in Algeria and the betrayal of Lumumba by Kabila are just two of many examples.
Despite their flaws and criticisms, Saddam’s Baathist Iraq and Gaddafi’s Libyan Jamahiriya managed to uphold both principles. In stark contrast, Syria failed on both fronts, resulting in the hollowed-out, degenerated state under Assad. This stands in sharp contrast to Iraq in 2003 and Libya in 2011, both of which resisted colonial destruction at the time. A telling indication of Syria’s failure is the complete lack of popular will to fight for the decrepit Baath regime once it falls.
Hellbound and Down 