Lehigh hosted Jon Alterman, the director of the Middle East Program Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C., Monday evening when he gave a talk entitled “Hot War, Cold War: Syria, the Gulf States and Iran” to faculty and students in Zoellner‘s Lower Level Gallery.
Alterman clarified that it is difficult to make sense of what is happening in Syria and even harder to figure out what is behind the conflict because of the “multiplicity of agendas supporting each side.” People show support for many different reasons and it undermines the unity that they are seeking, Alterman said.
“The most interesting thing for me in [his] talk was his systematic perspective looking at this Syria event,” said Hao Tian, ’15. “He examined not only the Syrian domestic riot and domestic tension, but also asked important questions like, who is supporting each side in Syria, and what is behind what is happening.
“He gave a clearer look at the whole thing through understanding neighboring countries and their preferences regarding religious attribution—Shiite or Sunni—ethnic composition, and political preference—whether or not the Assad regime per se matters.”
Syria is 60 percent Sunni-Arab, but the country also has a lot of robust minorities. It is heterogeneous in ethnic diversity with well-developed urban migration, of which many are unaware, Alterman said.
“There are people, 30 percent of the population, who support the government because they fear disorder,” Alterman said.
The conflict cannot be grasped without understanding that there is still support for the government. However, 40 percent do strongly oppose it, he continued. The rest of the population is just seeking stability, but they are unsure how to achieve peace.
Siri Sollerud, ’15, said she attended the talk because of her fascination to learn more about the conflict in Syria and how it affects the Middle East.
“The conflict in Syria is very complex, and there exists a multiplicity of actors and objectives both in and outside the country,” she said. “It is not simply a two-sided conflict.”
Alterman proceeded by explaining how the conflict is seen through the lenses of neighboring countries. First, Iran plays a critical role. The conflict, which is not about sectarianism, allows Syria to help project Iran into the Middle East that it would otherwise feel estranged from.
Iran’s role in Syria is a front line state against Israel, wanting to seize the Arab-Israeli conflict and facilitate support for Hezbollah, but it undermines the U.S. agenda in the Middle East, Alterman said.
“Iran does not have to win in Syria. Iran has to not lose in Syria,” he said. If a pro-Western government like Jordan is set up in Syria, Iran will risk losing foothold in Syria and effectively become diminished.
There are not a lot of official statistics about Saudi Arabia, Alterman continued; they oppose revolutionary Islam. He compared the Saudis to the Hasidim in New York, to the effect that they support the ruler when the time comes. They like religious leaders who support existing leaders, he said.
Other Middle Eastern countries are important to study too. Qatar is fearful of Saudi Arabia and Iran, and the United Arab Emirates are not really playing a role in the matter, but they are extremely “hawkish” on Iran, Alterman said. They are concerned about revolution and political Islam and only see the bad choices that are coming out of Syria.
Next, he mentioned Iraq saying, “There are lots of Iraqi policies toward Syria, but there is no Iraqi policy toward Syria.”
He also spoke of Israel, who likes to make symbolic moves like allegedly sending jets fast and low over the presidential palace and breaking its windows with sonic booms. Israel is concerned about deterring Syria once more, because it is significantly more difficult for them to deter non-state actors, simply because there is less to hold as risk.
“Everyone feels the stakes are high, and it’s about creating a better life for tens of millions of Syrians,” he said.
In a brief question and answer session following the lecture, Alterman fielded comments and inquiries from the audience. One audience member asked about President Barack Obama’s portrayal of the conflict to which Alterman responded that Obama is looking to make his mark on healthcare reform and gun control, and although he does not want bad things to happen, he is not looking to be a foreign policy president.
“His way of interpreting international events made me realized the importance of understanding culture itself as oppose to measuring events by material benefits gained by each side,” Tian said. “So the conclusion is that there is no unity, no preference, and no objective in Arab world. People see Iran in different ways and fear Iran for different reasons. All of these complicate the issue.”
Alterman has served as a member of the policy planning staff at the U.S. Department of State and as a special assistant to the assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs. He is a member of the Chief of Naval Operations Executive Panel and also served as an expert adviser to the Iraq Study Group.
In addition to his policy work, he teaches Middle Eastern studies at the School of Advanced International Studies, at Johns Hopkins University, and the George Washington University. His opinion pieces have appeared in The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, The Financial Times and other major publications.
“It’s important for students to attend such lectures to broaden your knowledge of what is happening in the world today and to see the world in different perspectives, which might challenge your own views,” Sollerud said.
Story by Brown and White news writer Samantha Orlan, ’14.