It is hard to see al-Assad ever regaining his previous strong grip and unquestioned control over his country but the road to freedom is quite long and dangerous for the Syrian people. Below is a list of entities and countries which not only want Bashar to stay in power but also hope he can gain back absolute control over the streets:

1) Iran’s radical clerics: The regime in Tehran would certainly be one of the first to be hard hit by the loss of a close ally such as al-Assad in Damascus. The two governments share a religious bond since both al-Assad and the extremists in Iran see the Sunnis as a threat to their agenda to dominate the region. Syria’s President is an Alawite, an offshoot of the Shiite Muslims, and Iran’s regime and population are majority Shiites who see themselves as a minority in a region dominated by Sunnis. Thus, al-Assad and his cronies are a minority in a Sunni-dominated Syria while the Iranian regime has the same problem but on a regional basis since Iran and Iraq as well as tiny Bahrain are the only Shiite majority countries in a region dominated by the Sunnis.

2) Hezbollah: The Shiite party in Lebanon relies heavily on Iran’s aid, both financially and militarily. Syria’s al-Assad serves as the link between Hezbollah and Iran since the Syrian-Lebanese border allows for the smuggling of weaponry, military experts and much more. In addition, the ruling al-Assad family, with its minions in Lebanon, offers a political blanket for Hezbollah. The Shiite party overthrew the March 14th alliance from the Lebanese government to assume control the Lebanese cabinet considering Hezbollah now has a majority when counting its allies. Bashar al-Assad’s fall from grace and the formation of a new government in Syria will deprive Hezbollah of a crucial hub for the supplies flowing from Tehran. Furthermore, Hezbollah’s allies in Lebanon will be greatly weakened since they have a relatively small influence and their limited strength is derived from followers who blindly support the Syrian regime based on their conviction that it is wise to side with a powerful leadership.

3) Hamas: Like Hezbollah, Hamas is a beneficiary of both the regime in Tehran and al-Assad. The Palestinian radical group would be another organization to feel the pressure if al-Assad is overthrown. Despite being a Sunni party like the majority of the Palestinians, Hamas relies heavily on financial aid from Iran while Syria offers the extremist group refuge and training ground free from Israeli threat inside the Syrian territories. Hamas would likely survive longer as a force in the Palestinian territories, specifically in Gaza, when compared to Hezbollah’s chances at usurping Lebanese politics if al-Assad’s regime collapsed.

Both al-Assad and the Israeli government try to overstate the threat posed by the opposing government. In reality these exaggerations are a blatant ruse used by Bashar to manipulate the emotions of the Syrian public and an attempt by the Israeli government to pressure the U.S. Congress into providing additional military aid. The Syrian public is against Israel because of the occupation of the Golan Heights and because of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Thus, Bashar focuses on that sensitive topic to foster hatred towards Israel while diverting attention from his oppressive rule.

For those who question this unspoken for but mutually beneficial relationship between the Israeli government and al-Assad regime, just take note of the Israeli strike against Syria in 2007 which targeted a location reportedly used to manufacture and perhaps store unconventional weapons. The Syrian leader did not retaliate against Israel and the Syrian military did not engage in any attacks against the Israelis.

Bashar al-Assad did not use Hezbollah or Hamas to create instability for the Israelis and the only time he allowed any sort of chaos on the Syrian-Israeli front is in 2011 during a critical time when the Syrian protesters were demanding their rights. At that point al-Assad and his military turned a blind eye as pro-Palestinians and Palestinian refugees in Syria tried to protest the Israeli occupation by breaching the security zone between the Syrians and Israelis. Bashar believed his regime can use Israel as a distraction and shift the fury of the public towards the Israeli government as opposed to their demand for freedom and the ouster of al-Assad.

The fact the Syrian autocrat has not drawn a line between those unarmed protesters calling for his ouster and some small minority of armed gangs can reveal the extent of his dissociation from the masses. The ruling al-Assad family has resisted change for decades and it is doubtful Bashar will see a need for genuine change beyond the cosmetic and surface reforms he has recently called for under the increasing pressure from the streets of Syria. The dictator’s younger brother Maher al-Assad is renowned for his aggressive approach and it has been widely reported that Maher has not been shy about directing his units as well as the security apparatus and other government thugs to punish those voicing their displeasure at Bashar’s rule. In fact, none of the Syrian military and police forces would engage in any action against the public without permission from the Syrian leader and his brother Maher.

The fact it took so long for the Arab League to make a statement shows how ineffective and divided the council is due to a number of reasons, most prominently the presence of several autocratic regimes as members in the Arab League. How ironic would it be to see dictators from Kuwait, Bahrain or Sudan issuing a statement of condemnation against a fellow autocrat seated in Damascus? However, the increasing pressure on countries such as Saudi Arabia and the unpopularity of the Syrian regime amongst other Arab states has made it easier for the Arab League to come to an agreement on making this mild statement which is both late and lame. There is no condemnation whatsoever of the extreme measures taken by al-Assad regime while the organization urges restraint from all sides to end bloodshed. It raises the question whether unarmed people protesting in the streets constitutes an aggressive approach in the pursuit of justice and basic rights such as freedom of speech and the right to vote the proper candidate to rule Syria. The al-Assad regime responded in a typical dismissive and delusional manner affirming the government in Damascus will behave as if such as a statement by the Arab League was not issued.

The next few days will determine whether the tame effort undertaken by the Arab League will yield any results or will just serve as a way to appease some of the increasingly disgruntled masses in the Arab world. Bashar al-Assad is unlikely to be deterred by statements and despite his increased isolation following sanctions by the United States and other countries, it will take much more to lead to his capitulation. The best example is former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein who remained in power for many years despite sanctions imposed by the United Nations. Those sanctions caused major problems for the civilians in Iraq while the former ruthless ruler of Baghdad emerged unscathed until the Bush Administration opted to remove him from power.

Libyans must seek a reconciliatory approach and avoid revenge killings:

Libyans must be patient because building a democratic system is a long-term project:

Despite the different factors shaping up the various uprisings in the Middle East it must be stressed that Hosni Mubarak’s fall from grace gave many ordinary citizens hope of toppling their own suppressors. Egypt has long been considered as the most powerful Arab nation, even more after the destruction of Saddam Hussein’s military, so the fact that Mubarak was forced to abdicate emboldened many people in the Arab world. Without delving deep into the circumstances which made Mubarak’s ouster possible, the Egyptian military’s willingness to sacrifice the face of the regime played a dominant rule in this hypothetical transition of power.

As of today, the leadership of the armed forces remains in power in Cairo. Below is a list of the main factors behind the uprisings in the Arab countries:

1) A young and restless population: The Arab youth feel disengaged and marginalized when they see aging rulers who have nothing in common with the public yet maintain a tight grip over their country. Many of the youth desire the freedom to express themselves and covet the ability to engage in activities without having to answer to a totalitarian regime and its secret police. The younger generations want to fulfill their ambition and have dreams yet feel they cannot achieve any of that whilst being ruled by an iron fist.

2) Younger generations not witness to atrocities of autocratic regimes: The Arab youth makeup a considerable portion of the population in their respective countries, in particular Egypt and Syria. In both countries, over 30% of the population is under the age of 14 while over 60% are between the ages of 15 and 64 leaving under 5% over the age of 65. Most of these younger adults and teenagers were not old enough to recall the brutality of long-time dictators when they took over power. None would likely have even heard of how Moammar Gadhafi took over in Libya since he has been in rule for a few decades while Mubarak took power following the assassination of former President Anwar al-Saddat in 1981.

The list goes on in other Arab nations where dictators and their heirs have succeeded as absolute rulers. This might explain the initial optimism in Syria when Bashar al-Assad, the relatively young son of late dictator Hafez al-Assad, took over in Damascus following his father’s death. Bashar was not the son being groomed to take over power yet his older brother’s Bassel’s unforeseen death propelled him to the forefront and he duly took over upon Hafez’s death. Many in Syria believed Bashar, who spent time studying in London , would be willing to introduce reforms yet they were to be disappointed as he failed to implement any changes worth mentioning.

3) Internet and social networking age: The age of social media has allowed the younger people in Egypt and Syria to express their opinion, plan protests and organize future gatherings to appeal for reform and/or change. In Egypt, Facebook served as the communication tool for many when they were protesting against Mubarak’s rule. In Syria, YouTube has clearly become the preferred means for demonstrators to post and share their videos covering the tragedies facing the Syrian people from the regime’s snipers, government thugs such as the Shabiha, the military and other armed gangs loyal to al-Assad.

4) Weak Economy and rising unemployment rate: Even the oil-rich Arab states have a considerable chunk of the population living under harsh conditions despite the vast wealth generated by their country’s oil fields. Nevertheless, the rich coffers of the Arab Gulf governments have enabled the absolute rulers to placate the public through the introduction of financial incentives as prominently witnessed in the case of Saudi Arabia. Only Yemen is witnessing notable protests due to the country’s dearth in natural resources and its ailing, poor economy. The ruling family in Bahrain faced serious challenges but was able to put down the protests with the aid of other Gulf states, most notably Saudi Arabia. It must be said that the use of demonstrations as a tool to voice displeasure has spilled over from the Arab world to Israel with protests in Tel Aviv taking place to complain about various economic grievances.

5) Once again, Egypt inspires other Arabs: One should stress on the outcome in Egypt being a very critical factor in raising expectations in other Arab countries where the citizens are demanding freedom of speech and the right to express themselves as well as extensive political and economic reforms. One should keep an eye on Libya because the fall of the ruthless and disillusioned dictator Gadhafi will give further impetus to those protesting Bashar al-Assad’s cruel reaction to the demands of the people in Syria. It would not be shocking to see a change in Libya lead to a considerable swelling in the ranks of the Syrian demonstrators and a major boost to their morale if the world makes sure the Libyan autocrat is ousted one way or another.

While the conditions in Libya are different from those prevailing in Syria, the fall of Gadhafi would serve as an encouraging benchmark for the Syrian protesters that they too can oust Bashar after the Tunisians, Egyptians and hopefully the Libyans have succeeded in forcing their oppressors to abdicate.