- Sustainable legitimacy cannot be built without opening up the public space for the living forces in society to contribute to decision-making and accountability.
- Restoring the institution as a guarantor of sovereignty
Afrasianet - Amjad Ismail Al Agha - Political modernization in the current Syrian context is not just an option among the available alternatives, but rather a merit dictated by the need to move to the logic of nation-state building, especially since the Syrian event and the nature of its problematic headlines presuppose the neutralization of traditional modes of governance and political visions.
In addition, the current reality has revealed a deep gap between the existing power structure and the aspirations of the transnational project that transcends alignments, and political modernization emerges as a national necessity in the structure of the Syrian political mind, aiming to rehabilitate the institution as a guarantor of sovereignty and citizenship as a pillar of legitimacy.
Accordingly, this approach is based on the objective need to repair the cracks in the national fabric and formulate a new social contract that frees the national project from the predicament of dependence and places it in the context of institutional sustainability.
In line with the above, a careful reading of the current Syrian landscape requires moving beyond the superficial approaches that frame the crisis in its current headings, and diving deep into the constitutive structure of the Syrian state, which is in dire need of a comprehensive and non-postponement political modernization process.
The national necessity to recalibrate the course stems from the realization that continuing with the traditional political approach can no longer contain societal contradictions or respond to the demands of the complex stage.
The political impasse finds its roots in the absence of an inclusive national project, which has transformed the Syrian event from a movement towards comprehensive change into a state of political labyrinth, as the major headlines faded in the face of the hustle and bustle of daily details that exhausted Syrians, leaving the Syrian cause lacking a local national compass capable of imposing its will.
The essence of the solution lies in launching an inclusive national project that derives its legitimacy from its ability to contain Syrian pluralism within a solid institutional framework that protects the state from fragmentation and society from marginalization.
In this context, the deep rift between the official government discourse and the essence of the political dimension of the crisis is clearly apparent: while the official discourse tends to adhere to classic administrative and political tools in dealing with the problems of the Syrian event, reality imposes national entitlements that go beyond the logic of conducting business to the logic of policymaking.
This disparity casts a dark shadow on public affairs, as citizens lose confidence in the ability of existing institutions to make a real breach in any path, and political action turns into a formal ritual that lacks the spirit of effective participation.
Therefore, the promotion of political participation in its broad sense is a safety valve for the stability of the state, as it is not possible to build sustainable legitimacy without opening the public space for the living forces in society to contribute to decision-making and assume national responsibility. This calls for a transition to the spaciousness of pluralism It believes that strength lies in diversity, not in a single model.
In this sense, the theory of political modernization, in its Syrian manifestations, today imposes itself as a mandatory entry point for the redirection of the entire Syrian file; in essence, it means a transition from the structure of power based on personal loyalties to the structure of the state based on institutional and legal legitimacy.
This is where the real stakes arise: the rebuilding of a real state does not begin with the mere change of faces or the recycling of elites in positions of power, but rather with an epistemological and political break with the logic by which this authority is managed.
The fundamental problem is not in who rules, but in how he governs, and in the reference from which the government derives its power. On the other hand, if the logic of political management continues to be a tool of domination rather than a means of representing the interests of society and managing differences peacefully, we will continue to be in a vicious circle of successive crises that are draining the country's capabilities.
Accordingly, any serious project to build a future Syrian state must be built on the pillars of equal citizenship, the rule of law, and the positive neutrality of state institutions towards societal components. Otherwise, we will face no rebirth of Syria, but rather a recycling of the totalitarian model that has brought the country to the brink of collapse.
The political deadlock finds its roots in the absence of an inclusive national project, which has turned the Syrian event from a movement towards comprehensive change into a state of political labyrinth.
Repeating the same mechanisms in managing political affairs while waiting for different results is a costly historical illusion, as a state that is built on an exclusionary basis or on the logic of dominance remains a fragile state, no matter how much it possesses the tools of control and control over decision-making.
Therefore, the desired political modernization lies in the formulation of a new social contract that gives Syrians the belief that the state is everyone's home, and that real change passes through the gate of established institutions that protect the individual from the intrusion of power, and guarantee society a safe path to stability and growth, away from the shocks of violent transformation or the deadly stalemate that paves the way for future explosions.
As a result, political modernization remains the obligatory way to overcome the intractability that has characterized the Syrian landscape for years. Thus, the essence of the solution lies in launching an inclusive national project that derives its legitimacy from its ability to contain Syrian pluralism within a solid institutional framework that protects the state from fragmentation and society from marginalization.
In summary, the restoration of national initiative and the consolidation of the theory of political modernization depend primarily on the boldness to review the foundations of governance and the transition from a legitimacy based on dominance to legitimacy based on achievement and participation, especially since Syria today, in the midst of its difficult labor, is facing a moment of truth: either political modernization that rebuilds the human and the state together, or remaining in the spiral of the national impasse that drains the elements of the future.
