Assad’s Earthquake Opportunism

The regime in Damascus tries to shed its pariah status while simultaneously stalling relief work.

By
8
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad visits Aleppo, on February 10. (Photo by -/AFP via Getty Images)

After more than a decade of destructive civil war, the Syrian people are now reeling from massive earthquakes. Yet Syrian President Bashar al-Assad sees an opportunity: While this month’s earthquakes killed at least 41,000 people in Syria and Turkey and left many more homeless, Assad has used the disaster to try to legitimize his contested rule. 

Last week, the United States Treasury announced a six-month freeze on sanctions against the Syrian government involving “all transactions related to earthquake relief.” Though U.S. officials insisted none of their existing penalties on Damascus targeted humanitarian aid shipments, the move followed finger-pointing from regime officials who wasted no time in blaming Western sanctions for their own deficient response to the catastrophe. 

“I want to make very clear that U.S. sanctions in Syria will not stand in the way of life-saving efforts for the Syrian people,” Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Wally Adeyemo said in announcing the temporary measure. “While U.S. sanctions programs already contain robust exemptions for humanitarian efforts, today Treasury is issuing a blanket General License to authorize earthquake relief efforts so that those providing assistance can focus on what’s needed most: saving lives and rebuilding.”

While his government complained about sanctions, the dictator of more than two decades has been stalling the delivery of life-saving relief for political gain. Until last week, the regime had insisted that all international assistance be routed through the Damascus government, delaying aid shipments to some of the hardest-hit areas in the country’s rebel-held northwest. 

Keep reading with a free account
Create a free Dispatch account to keep reading Get Started ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
8
By
Comments (8)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    JohnM.

    This was an excellent report, Charlotte. Thank you.

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    Jeff Walden

    Re the earthquakes: is this an opportunity for Finland to give a bunch of earthquake aid that gets Turkey to accede to them entering NATO, without any of the present stonewalling? And if it is, is Finland considering or making any moves in the direction of doing so? It's kinda gross to have to buy your way in, but there are much worse solutions than dispensing aid in the aftermath of a humanitarian disaster.

    Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    Ben Connelly

    Charlotte, when you get back to the States, hopefully Steve or Sarah or Declan will have you on the podcast to discuss this in greater detail the way Steve had Khaya on to discuss the election denial issue last year.

    Collapse
  4. Russell J

    The U.N. is predictably embarrassing. I can’t remember a single constructive thing done during the Ukraine crisis. In the 90’s it was easy to criticize but they made a show of aiding war torn and disaster afflicted areas. Guess it doesn’t help to have a country with an evil dictator on the security council.

    Collapse
  5. DTruitt

    The authors of the recently revised book, "Dictator's Handbook" devoted a full chapter to why foreign aid is the worst thing that free nations can do for nations governed by dictators. The foreign aid always ends up being diverted to the dictator's purposes, whether to line his or her own pockets and/or those of their key supporters, and effectively little to none of it goes to the citizens of the dictatorship. All dictatorships are built upon the key principle that the public goods must be diverted to the dictator and the key supporters without whom the dictator would quickly fall.

    The correct approach is to deny ALL foreign aid to any and all dictatorships. It will never accrue to the benefit of the intended citizens, only enrich the dictator and his cronies. Foreign aid, including humanitarian aid, always, I repeat always extends the life of the dictatorship.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Scarlette Tarte

      Private enterprise faces the same issue. Many African nations possess wealth in the form of resources, like oil or diamonds. Private companies want access to that. Most often, in nations led by strongmen or dictators, they have to pay them to get access. This is often played up by the dictator, who says ," look, I got this company to dedicate 1 million dollars to our schools or hospitals" or whatever. When in reality, the company gave the dictator 500 million dollars, 499 million which he kept for himself.

      So all companies should also not be aiding in extending the life of dictators.

      And this happens everywhere, not just Africa...in places like Afghanistan, private companies have had a hand in keeping groups like the Taliban in power.

      Collapse
    2. Hartzlk

      Sounds like an interesting book. I may try to work that in to my reading schedule.

      Collapse
      1. DTruitt

        Yeah, it's a great read (authored by Bruce Bueno de Mesquita & Alastair Smith), originally issued a little over a decade ago and updated and revised just last year, taking note of happenings in the interim that only reinforce the author's analysis of how dictators get and keep power and eventually lose power. A lot of what they postulate is counter to conventional wisdom (which is why conventional wisdom is often not very wise - just conventional).

        Dictators get and keep power by stealing public goods and keeping it for themselves and their key supporters who keep them in power. As much as a dictator would love to keep it all for himself, that is how he becomes an ex-dictator, because if the key supporters who keep him in power feel they aren't being compensated enough, they're open to switching sides, or at least withdrawing support, under the right circumstances such as foreign threats or domestic revolution.

        Truly free democracies end up devoting most of the public goods to the public, which is how their leaders stay in power. Sure, some democratic leaders may manage to squirrel away public goods for themselves and their supporters, but if they get caught they get voted out of office or imprisoned. The majority of nations rank somewhere in between the dictatorships and the truly free democracies in terms of how much of the public goods get stolen and redirected.

        It's like the old saying in journalism, "Follow the money!" As much as political activists and wonks and true believers want to believe that they and their movements are based upon principles, the reality is that people are greedy and greed is the greatest motivator of all when it comes to getting and keeping power. Fear is the second greatest motivator, and so dictators use heavy doses of both greed and fear.

        Collapse