Was Al Assad’s time better?

Last week, Mr Kamal Velappakam wrote a response to my letter on Bashar Al Assad (‘Letter to the editor: Two wrongs don’t make a right’, Gulf News, June 20). I would like to say that Al Assad is still a man who is trusted by most of the Syrians. It seems to me that most people think that if Al Assad goes, the fight against Daesh in Syria will be easier.

Even though Al Assad’s regime is accused of bombing rebel-held areas with so-called barrel bombs, a couple of questions arise: If Al Assad goes, then who will succeed him? And if Al Assad goes, what guarantee can be given that we don’t see another Libya?

Now, let’s take an example of Raqqa, one of the main provinces taken by Daesh early on, in Syria. When the Syrian government troops withdrew from Raqqa due to widespread protests, the people there thought there would be someone better than Al Assad to govern them. But, ultimately, when Daesh took over Raqqa, the people there might have regretted that they protested against the regime.

Again, if we compare the areas controlled by rebels to that of the government, we do notice that people are still leading a normal life in government controlled areas. No wonder as to why almost 60 per cent of the population lives under areas controlled by the regime.

Also, western nations believe that the rule of the Al Assad regime is much better than a group of hard line terrorists like Daesh marching into Damascus.

If the moderate rebels, along with the Kurds, do support the regime, it might be possible that the people living there could lead a better life. The fight against Daesh could become much easier.

From Mr Leo Zehrack

Sharjah