The Ba’ath fall in Syria and Iraq: Similarities and differenceshttps://en.majalla.com/node/323864/politics/ba%E2%80%99ath-fall-syria-and-iraq-similarities-and-differences
The Ba’ath fall in Syria and Iraq: Similarities and differences
The Ba'ath movement was a big part of the Arab world for almost 80 years. Its demise in Iraq after 35 years in power—and in Syria just recently—comes with important lessons.
AFP
A broken statue of Hafez al-Assad lies outside the Ba'ath Party offices in Damascus.
The Ba’ath fall in Syria and Iraq: Similarities and differences
The fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria also marks the end of Ba'ath Party rule in the country. And while what happened in Syria has echoes in the downfall of Saddam Hussein's Baathist regime in Iraq, there are also important differences. While both Syria and Iraq were Baathist regimes under Hafez and Bashar al-Assad and Saddam Hussein, respectively, their trajectories greatly differed.
The Ba'ath (Resurrection) movement was a big part of the Arab world for almost 80 years. Founded in 1947, the ideology blends pan-Arab nationalism with hues of socialism and anti-imperialism. In this article, Al Majalla explains key similarities and differences between the two Ba'ath regimes in Syria and Iraq, as well as their respective falls and aftermaths.
Origins and evolution
The Ba’ath Party was established by Syrian politician Michel Aflaq, inspired by his book In the Path of the Ba’ath. It became the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party following its 1952 merger with the Arab Socialist Party led by Akram al-Hourani.
In Iraq, the party's presence began a year before the merger as a regional branch of the Syrian party. It soon evolved into an independent entity. A National Command was formed to oversee both parties, along with smaller satellite groups in countries like Lebanon, Jordan, and Yemen. In Egypt, however, efforts to establish a Ba’ath Party branch failed.
Former Ba'athists in Iraq launched a counterinsurgency to the US invasion, whereas Syria's Ba'athists immediately handed over their weapons to the new administration
Over the years, the Syrian and Iraqi parties became rivals and eventually clashed. The enmity escalated as both came to power—first in Syria in 1963 and then in Iraq in 1968. At first, the clash was viewed as an anomaly, but later, it became a regular feature of the regional landscape.
One of the more ironic aspects of their dynamic was the Assad regime's active role in countering what it viewed as Iraqi expansionism. When Saddam invaded Kuwait in 1990, Syria joined the international coalition against Iraq and fought in the US-led Operation Desert Storm in 1991, sending a battalion from its 4th Armoured Division to help liberate Kuwait. And although it did not engage directly in combat, its armoured vehicles were stationed dangerously close to Iraqi positions, raising the constant risk of confrontation between the two sides.
The quick defeat of the Iraqi forces and their forced withdrawal from Kuwait weakened the Iraqi regime, setting the stage for the eventual collapse of the Ba'ath Party in Baghdad. The decline accelerated during the subsequent period of US-led sanctions and culminated in its invasion of Iraq in March 2003.
US Marine Corp Assaultman Kirk Dalrymple watches as a statue of Iraq's President Saddam Hussein falls in central Baghdad's Firdaus Square, in this file photo from April 9, 2003.
Unlike Saddam, Syria's Ba'ath regime refrained from reckless military adventurism. However, its decision to align with Iran drove a wedge between it and the Arab world. Over the decades, it found itself increasingly isolated and weakened. Its role in Iran's so-called 'Axis of Resistance' meant that it became little more than a proxy for Tehran's regional ambitions.
The abovementioned history demonstrates just how different their paths turned out, despite their similar aim at their outset: consolidating power and influence. And despite their disparate trajectories, their end result was the same: the collapse of their respective regimes.
While Saddam's ouster was swifter, al-Assad's fall was dragged out. He survived a near-10-year armed rebellion against his rule, which began in 2011, only to see his regime collapse like a house of cards in an 11-day lightning offensive, which began on 27 November 2024. And unlike Saddam, who stayed in Iraq only to be later captured and executed, al-Assad fled and is currently in Russia.
The downfall of the Ba'ath regimes in Syria and Iraq was a result of a series of miscalculations and missteps. In Syria, the Assad regime, weakened by a decade of civil war, became increasingly dependent on Iran and Russia for support—which were unable to rescue it for a second time when the HTS offensive was launched this time around. It fell 21 years after its Iraqi counterpart.
Islamist-led rebels pose for a picture with a Syria army helicopter on the tarmac at the Nayrab military airport in the northern Syrian city of Aleppo on December 2, 2024, after a surprise lightning offensive on November 30.
The idea that the Axis was invincible was bolstered by the growing influence and power of Hezbollah in Lebanon. But they turned out to be a paper tiger. Israel was able to deal the group a series of devastating blows starting in September of this year, which also restricted its ability to come to al-Assad's aid like it did before in 2014.
In the aftermath of al-Assad's ouster, Syria's new administration has targeted some senior party leaders and others implicated in crimes but has not systematically gone after people based solely on their party affiliation like what happened in Iraq with the de-Ba'athifcation that was carried out there. With the luxury of learning from Iraq's mistakes, Syria's new administration took the decision to preserve state institutions and allow employees to continue their work. This suggests that rank-and-file Ba'athists, and perhaps even some mid-level members, may not face prosecution, as they are integral to the workforce.
Also, unlike Iraq, where former Ba'athists regrouped to launch a counterinsurgency against the US invasion, Syria's Ba'athists immediately handed over their weapons and documents to the new administration and announced it would suspend all political activities until further notice.
In the end, Iraq's Ba'ath party fell after 35 years, while Syria's managed to hold out for 61 years. Their beginnings were couched in grand and inspiring rhetoric of Arab unity and social equity, but they turned out to be empty slogans. History showed just how far removed their practises were from their professed ideals.
Meanwhile, their turbulent journeys, checkered with miscalculations, offer valuable lessons on the trappings of authoritarianism and serve as case studies that deserve close examination and reflection.
