Bashar al-Assad guarantees that he did not flee Syria, that Russia forced him, that he was taken against his will. But fact: thanks or not, against his will or not, Assad really left. Contrast: When the war in Ukraine started, the Americans wanted to take Zelensky out of Kiev. Zelensky’s response: “I don’t need a ride, I need ammunition.” And there it stayed. Until today. But doubt: how can you take someone out of a country against their will?
Eight days after leaving Syria, “I never considered the possibility of resigning or seeking refuge.” The Syrian president even says that it was Russia that forced him to disband because it was “Moscow that asked the base command to provide an immediate withdrawal.” But is it possible to force someone to leave their country against their own will?
The simple answer is ‘no’, but Assad was left with only two chances: “Die a hero or take refuge.” In a crude and restricted analysis of the geostrategic facts at stake on that December 8th, Major General Agostinho Costa believes that we are facing a “mixture between a flight out of fear”: “If Bashar Al-Assad had stayed there, he would already be dead. He left because otherwise he would end up hanging from a crane like the images that emerged from a citizen who initially said he was the brother-in-law of Assad’s family.”
Tiago André Lopes, a specialist in International Relations, agrees with this analysis: “Assad would have ended up dead definitively, in the same way that happened with Gaddafi or even with Saddam Hussein. If he had stayed, Assad’s life would have already ended.” Tiago André Lopes remembers that, most likely, this was exactly what Russia explained to him. “The escape point is a normal point for most dictators, I immediately remembered the escape of the president of Tunisia when the Arab Spring began – and that he even stopped by the Central Bank to get some gold ingots before fleeing on the plane to Switzerland”, recalls the CNN Portugal commentator”, ensuring that “this seems to be a very typical profile of this region”.
Assad fled, Zelensky stayed: is it comparable?
“It is not possible and it is not fair – neither for one nor for the other – to make this comparison”, says Tiago André Lopes, who explains that “Zelensky cannot be compared with the autocrat”: “It is an unworthy comparison for the president of Ukraine”. But on the other hand, “Assad cannot be compared because you also don’t have the same system of allies or the same support system that Zelensky had.”
Faced with the incomparable comparison, the International Relations specialist categorizes Assad’s decision as “an escape, above all, through fear”. An attempt to “preserve life” and eventually “reorganize from the outside if there had been popular resistance”. “Realizing that there was no popular resistance, that there was no military resistance, that there was no resistance from the allies, Assad was dismayed and accepted”, considers Tiago André Lopes.
“Furthermore, Assad knew one thing: he would only be able to fight if he had massive support – whether from Russia or Iran, and he realized in the first few hours that he didn’t have it. Indicative of this is that he accepted his fate: when we saw the last conversation, if it is true, obviously, that he had with the last prime minister appointed by himself, the prime minister explains to him the country’s scenario and Assad’s response was ‘we will see tomorrow before the troops arrive at the gates’. of Damascus in relation to its political future”, points out Tiago André Lopes.
Agostinho Costa tends to agree that Zelensky and Assad are “completely different”: “In the first few days, President Zelensky was in Lviv until he realized that the Russian maneuver was fundamentally intimidation, then he was assured of support ‘as long as it takes’ by The whole West. The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom at the time, Boris Johnson, even went there, is completely different”, considers the major general, remembering that “the entire decision-making structure, the entire military structure, the entire structure. logistical support, everything is Western”: “Let us not have any illusions: at the moment of truth, al-Assad’s allies did not present themselves, as they say.”
With Assad, Agostinho Costa explains that “at the 25th hour the support disappeared, the close allies – Russians and Iranians – did not move and said that the first to fight had to be the national army”. “In Ukraine it was completely different, the Ukrainian army did not withdraw beforehand. On the contrary: it fought very hard, with great determination, because if the Ukrainian army had positively disbanded, Zelensky would be in Florida today”, summarizes Agostinho Costa.
Back to ophthalmology
What led Bashar al-Assad to remain silent for eight days – is this the expected attitude of someone who was allegedly forced to leave Syria? Tiago André Lopes understands that this is not the case: “If it were in fact true that he had been forced to leave the country and, quite possibly, he would have made statements on the same day, which he did not do.”
For the CNN Portugal commentator, “Bashar al-Assad’s statements are a post-fact justification and are possibly not very true.” “I don’t think it’s very viable, possible or credible that Russia forced a head of state to leave his own state”, argues Tiago André Lopes, theorizing that what may have happened is that “al-Assad may have asked for refuge or at the embassy of Moscow in Syria or in one of the bases controlled by the Russians”. “And the Kremlin took advantage of this moment to explain that, one, they were not going to defend the regime, and, two, that the only solution for Assad was one of two- either accept political asylum in Russia or face the wrath of the HTS”, says Tiago André Lopes.
“These statements are, above all, to show the country’s stock exchanges that are still with him that, if it had depended solely on his will, he would have stayed on the ground. It is not necessarily true that it was like that and, therefore, We have to be careful with these types of post-fact statements”, highlights Tiago André Lopes.
Agostinho Costa recalls that this outcome proves that Bashar al-Assad was a “road incident” in Syria’s leadership. In contrast, Bashar’s older brother, Bassel al-Assad, was trained in the special forces, was a paratrooper, had attended a military academy in Moscow, was on track to be the successor, but died in a car accident.” Agostinho Costa emphasizes that Bashar “was anything but a saint”, but brings up this point to explain that “he left with his family and is now going to open an ophthalmology clinic in Moscow, because, let’s say, I believe he has freed himself from a vocation”. burden.”
