The Baath Party - Rise and Metamorphosis

The Baath Party: Rise and Metamorphosis Author(s): John F. Devlin Source: The American Historical Review, Vol. 96, No. 5 (Dec., 1991), pp. 1396-1407 Published by: Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Historical Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2165277 . Accessed: 19/05/2013 07:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Oxford University Press and American Historical Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The American Historical Review.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 132.66.11.212 on Sun, 19 May 2013 07:27:40 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Baath Party: Rise and Metamorphosis JOHN F. DEVLIN

ARAB SOCIALIST BAATH (RESURRECTION) PARTY began its half-century of existence as a movement standing for Arab nationalism, freedom from foreign rule, and the establishment of a single Arab state. For the past quarter-century, it has been represented by two mutually hostile authoritarian regimes, those in Iraq and Syria. Each claims to be the sole legitimate inheritor of the original Baath legacy. Their antagonism is so deep that Syrian forces joined the coalition to liberate Kuwait, going into action against the Iraqis in the short combat that ended the Iraqi occupation. This essay examines these two phases of the Baath party's existence and explores why and how the second phase developed from the first. It concludes with a brief assessment of the two single-party states at this time of domestic and interstate political ferment in the Arab world. Pan-Arab nationalism was the foremost ideology of the Arab world for half the twentieth century, from the end of World War I to the late 1960s. Its origins reach back into the nineteenth century, as Albert Hourani has lucidly shown us.' As a political force, Arab nationalism may be said to have begun in the decade immediately prior to World War I, when Arab subjects of the Ottoman empire began to assert their Arabness in opposition to the Turkish focus of the Committee of Union and Progress in its governance of the Ottoman state after 1908. Of success these Arabs had little until the Allies had defeated the Ottomans and set up several Arab states in the former eastern Arab wilayets(provinces) of the defunct empire. This change opened the way for Arabism to function as a legitimate political ideology in those entities. "Arab nationalism became the creed of all political activists everywhere in the Fertile Crescent except Lebanon." However, the same class of notables that had been locally dominant under the Ottomans continued to wield extensive power.2 As a result, Arab nationalism came to be defined by those in political opposition, and, with such definition, it progressively became their property. Theywere the nationalists; the notables of the ruling elite were agents of imperialism. The energies of the political elite during this interwar period were necessarily focused on gaining independence from their mandate overlords. In time, their interest and attention shifted away from general Arab affairs to the state in which THE

' Albert Hourani, ArabicThoughtin theLiberalAge, 1798-1939 (London, 1962), chap. 11. C. Ernest Dawn, "The Formation of Pan-Arab Ideology in the Inter-war Years," International Journal of MiddleEast Studies,20 (February 1988): 80. 2

1396

This content downloaded from 132.66.11.212 on Sun, 19 May 2013 07:27:40 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Baath Party

1397

the struggle for independence and their own political fortunes were situated.3 By the end of World War II, the system of Arab states within boundaries drawn in European chanceries in the early 1920s was well on its way to general acceptance by dominant political forces. The Arab League, founded in 1945, consisted of seven sovereign states. To be sure, expansionist ambitions existed; the Hashemites in Iraq and Transjordan cast covetous eyes on Syria, and the growth of the Saudi state was stopped at the borders of British-protected principalities. Arab nationalists in the Fertile Crescent saw the ruling elite as compromising full Arab independence by its willingness to cooperate with Britain or France. Getting rid of entrenched political elites was seen by the founders of the Baath movement as an entirely logical and necessary step on the road to achieving pan-Arab nationalism. During the same interwar period, the concept of who was an Arab and what were the nation's boundaries underwent a major change. As of World War I, Arabs thought of their nation as existing solely in Asia. Husain ibn 'Ali, sharif of Mecca, in his 1915 correspondence with the British high commissioner in Cairo, defined the western boundaries of "the Arab countries as the Red Sea, the Mediterranean Sea up to Mersina."4In the 1920s and 1930s, Arabism came to be defined by language rather than by geography; an Arab was a person whose native tongue was Arabic. People had created the Arab nation, which had spread out, in the view of nationalist writers, from its heartland in much earlier times. Where Arabs lived and spoke their language, whether east of the Mediterranean or in North Africa, there was the Arab nation. The limitations imposed by the geographic concept from World War I of an Arab state or states east of the Mediterranean and Red Sea had disappeared twenty-five years later. When the Arab League was founded in 1945, one of its seven members (as it happened, the largest and strongest), Egypt, was in Africa. The league reached the Atlantic with the admission of Morocco in 1958. The founders of the Baath party were products of this interwar growth of nationalist sentiment. Michel 'Aflaq, Orthodox Christian, and Salah al-Din Bitar, Sunni Muslim, born in 1910 and 1912 respectively to Damascene merchant families of middling status, attended secondary school in the 1920s and university in the 1930s.5 They accepted wholeheartedly the Arab nationalist ideology to which they had been exposed in school, pan-Arabists having been especially influential in the school systems of Syria and Iraq in those years. In 1942, the two friends abandoned their own teaching careers to devote themselves full-time to the creation of a movement dedicated to achieving freedom (hurriyah)from foreign control and the unity (wihdah)of all Arabs in a single state. To these goals, the Baathists added socialism (ishtirakiyah), which they interpreted as social justice for the poor and underprivileged. The slogans "Unity, Freedom, Socialism" and "One Arab Nation with an Immortal Mission" appeared on party publications 3 Philip S. Khoury, Syria and the French Mandate: The Politics of Arab Nationalism, 1920-1945 (Princeton, N.J., 1987), chap. 21. 4 Cited in Sylvia G. Haim, ArabNationalism:An Anthology(Berkeley, Calif., 1964), 90. 5John F. Devlin, "Michel Aflaq" and "Salah al-Din Bitar," in Bernard Reich, ed., PoliticalLeaders MiddleEast and North Africa:A BiographicalDictionary(New York, 1990), 32-39; of the Contemporary 108-12.

AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW

This content downloaded from 132.66.11.212 on Sun, 19 May 2013 07:27:40 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

DECEMBER 1991

1398

John F. Devlin

from the mid-1940s and continue to appear on the mastheads of the Baath newspapers in Syria and Iraq. 'Aflaq and Bitar initially thought of themselves as leading a movement capable of inspiring Arabs with the ideas of Arab nationalism.6 'Aflaq in particular believed that the Baath's primary function was to educate people through pamphlets, lectures, and meetings. Others among the handful of early associates, including Bitar, believed that a political organization was necessary for the ideas of the group to be truly influential. In time, 'Aflaq agreed, and by mid-1945, the Baathists made their first application to form a political party. The government rejected it. The movement continued to call itself a party, however, and gained permission to function as one and to publish a newspaper (Al-Ba'th) in mid-1946, shortly after French troops had left Syria. The formal founding congress of the Baath party took place on April 4-6, 1947, in Damascus, with about 200 attendees. A number were Arabs from countries other than Syria, for membership was open to all from the "Arab fatherland [which] constitutes an indivisible political and economic unity" according to the first Fundamental Principle of the party constitution adopted at this congress.7 The congress brought into the party a group not directly tied to 'Aflaq and Bitar, many from the Latakia governorate, among them numerous 'Alawis. These men (and boys, for many were students, as were many of 'Aflaq's immediate followers) shared the Baath party's goals of Arab independence and Arab unity. They differed in two respects. First, they looked to Zaki Arsuzi, an 'Alawi expelled from the Sanjak of Alexandretta for opposing French policy, which ended in any case with the transfer of the Sanjak to Turkey in 1939. As a teacher, he spread the ideas of Baathism via the classroom and attracted a circle of followers. A proud man, Arsuzi was influential intellectually but not organizationally; he and 'Aflaq appear to have disliked each other.8 His disciples were led to combine with those of 'Aflaq and Bitar by another 'Alawi exile from Alexandretta, Dr. Wahib al-Ghanim. Ghanim added recruits of his own. One was a sixteen-year-old from the hill village of Qardaha, who had come to the provincial capital to attend school. His name was Hafiz al-Asad.9 The second difference between the groups was over the issue of socialism. Ghanim was deeply concerned about the wretched conditions of many rural Syrians, which he came to know as an itinerant doctor in the villages of the Latakia district. He blamed the ruling elite for these conditions and insisted on the inclusion in the 1947 party constitution of clauses calling for social justice: the limitation of agricultural holdings, worker participation in management, and state ownership of heavy industry, natural resources, and public utilities. While 'Aflaq concentrated on nationalism and the issue of unity, he was also aware that the economic as well as the political power of the notables in Syria, and by extension in other states, had to be broken if the Baath's vision of independence was to be 6

See John F. Devlin, TheBa'th Party:A Historyfrom Its Originsto 1966 (Stanford, Calif., 1976).

7Text of the constitution is in Devlin, Ba'th Party, 345-52; and Haim, ArabNationalism,233-41. 8 Years later, the 'Alawis from Latakia, who had come to dominate the regime in Damascus, remembered Arsuzi, who died in 1969, and named a school for him. 9 Patrick Seale, Asad of Syria:The Strugglefor theMiddleEast (London, 1988), 34-35. The author's long experience in Syria and direct access to Asad make this an especially valuable study.

AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW

This content downloaded from 132.66.11.212 on Sun, 19 May 2013 07:27:40 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

DECEMBER 1991

The Baath Party

1399

achieved. While he had resisted Ghanim's insistence on including socialist or social justice goals in the Baath constitution, by early in the 1950s he and Bitar agreed to amalgamate the Baath party with the Arab Socialist party of Akram Hawrani, which shared some of Ghanim's concerns. Although he came from a landowning family of Hamah, Hawrani turned against his class and organized the landless or impoverished peasants of the district as his political base. In the mid-year elections of 1954 the freest in independent Syria's history-Hawrani's followers accounted for one-third of the dozen and a half seats that Baathists won. As the first Arab political party with pan-Arabist goals, the Baath had a leading role in spreading the doctrine of unity in the 1950s. In the party newspaper they edited, 'Aflaq and Bitar hammered away at the theme of unity and the "sacred mission" of revitalizing Arabdom. Party branches were founded in Lebanon, Iraq, and Jordan in 1948-1951, and adherents were recruited even farther afield. A new force appeared in the Arab east with the seizure of power by the pronationalist Free Officers Society in Egypt in 1952. Nasser emerged as the leader among them in 1954, took his place among the nonaligned leaders at Bandung in 1955, and made an arms deal with the USSR in the same year. At about the same time, he adopted Arab nationalism as a key element of Egypt's external policy. Once he had done so, the combination of his personality, his appeal to the masses, and Egypt's position as the wealthiest and most populous Arab state and a focus of Arab culture sent the popularity of Arab nationalism skyrocketing among hitherto-unmobilized opposition groups throughout the Arab world. The Baath leaders, who had harbored strong doubts about Nasser's Arabism during his early years in power, overcame their hesitancy and announced on April 17, 1956, that the party would work for the union of Egypt and Syria as a first step toward Arab unity.

for Egypt, an interest that went back centuries. Muhammad 'Ali had taken control of the area from the Ottomans in 1832 and held it for a decade until forced out by European pressure. Iraq, too-or whatever power had controlled the Baghdad and Mosul areas-traditionally sought a friendly or subservient state in the area of the trade routes from the Tigris-Euphrates Valley to the Mediterranean. The interests of the two riverain powers often clashed in regard to Syria. They did so after World War II, when Egypt bested Iraq to dominate the new Arab League. The contest continued for a dozen years; Syria in those years was what Lebanon became in the 1970s and 1980s, namely, an arena in which other area powers jousted for supremacy.'0 The meddling by Iraq and Egypt, plus an increasing factionalization of the Syrian officer corps, the ultimate domestic arbiter of Syrian political life from 1949 to 1958, brought the issue of Arab nationalism and unity to a head in early 1958. The officers, badly divided by the coups and counter-coups of the previous decade, proved unable to agree on how to share power among themselves. A SYRIA

HELD A PARTICULAR

INTEREST

10 Patrick Seale, The Strugglefor Syria:A Studyof Post-WarArabPolitics, 1945-1958 (New Haven, Conn., 1986), is the classic treatment of this subject.

AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW

This content downloaded from 132.66.11.212 on Sun, 19 May 2013 07:27:40 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

DECEMBER 1991

1400

John F. Devlin

majority of politically active officers, strongly Arab nationalist in sentiment, and from the postwar military academy classes of 1947-1949, turned to Nasser, by then the foremost Arab nationalist, for a solution. Vigorously supported by the Baath leaders, a delegation of officers went to Cairo in January and asked Nasser to agree to the union of Syria with Egypt. The Egyptian leader hesitated; influence over Syria was important to him, but union carried with it potential problems. It was a tempting offer, however, a testimony to his rapid rise in importance. Moreover, failure to honor a request for unity would call into question his own Arab nationalist credentials. After thinking it over, he agreed on condition that all political parties in Syria dissolve in favor of a single, mass party modeled on the Egyptian National Union of 1956. Syria's party leaders agreed to this stipulation, some with considerable misgivings, except for the Communists, who chose to go underground. Egypt and Syria became the United Arab Republic (UAR) on February 1. The Baathist leaders accepted Nasser's condition enthusiastically. 'Aflaq stated, "We will be officially dissolved but we will be present in the new unified party, the National Union. Born of the union of two countries, this movement cannot be inspired by principles other than those of the Ba'th."Il This was a colossal miscalculation. Nasser was a master at political maneuvering; 'Aflaq and Bitar were not. Influential as it was in forming opinion and promoting Arab nationalism, the Baath party in Syria had only four or five thousand members, concentrated in certain towns and districts. When the National Union elections were finally held in July 1959, the Baath organization had been defunct for sixteen months; "former Baathists" won less than 200 of 9,445 seats on local councils. Lasting damage was done to the pan-Arab nature of the party and to its leaders' reputations by the manner of the party's dissolution. 'Aflaq, Bitar, and Hawrani agreed to dissolve the party without consulting others on the Baath Party National (Pan-Arab) Command or on the Syrian Regional Command as required by party statutes.'2 In Syria, party members were stunned at the move, the party organization collapsed, and the three leaders received an irreparable blow to their prestige and influence. The UAR episode constituted a major turning point in the history of the Baath party. First of all, this experiment in combining two Arab states in one failed. Syrians quickly came to resent the way in which Nasser's appointees dominated all aspects of policy and administration. The union cabinet sat in Cairo, and decisions were made there. In September 1959, Nasser sent a close Egyptian colleague to govern Syria with the help of a small coterie of pro-Nasser Syrian military officers. The previous ruling elite was excluded from power and its economic base hurt by a land reform program begun in the same year. On September 28, 1961, major units of the Syrian army rose in rebellion, declaring that Syria was seceding from I

L'Orient(Beirut), February 25, 1958. Growth led the Baathists to adopt a formal organization in 1954. The pyramidal structure rested on units in city quarters or rural districts; above that came a branch for each province with its elected command, then a regional command and a national command. The terminology reflects the Baath view that the entire Arab world was one nation divided into artificial political units, which should be considered regions of the whole. 12

AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW

This content downloaded from 132.66.11.212 on Sun, 19 May 2013 07:27:40 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

DECEMBER 1991

The Baath Party

1401

the UAR. Nasser's instinct was to resist, but with few Egyptian troops there and little chance of sending sufficient forces quickly, he accepted the inevitable. Second, Syria's secession was a powerful demonstration that the states created after World War I had developed great staying power. That staying power had already been shown in Iraq three years earlier, when enthusiasm for Arab unity ran high among opposition groups in eastern Arab states. On July 14, 1958, a group of Free Officers overthrew the monarchy in Iraq. Several of its leaders rushed to Damascus, where they declared their interest in joining the UAR. However, the senior officer of the group, 'Abd al-Karim Qasim, who remained in Baghdad, moved efficiently to isolate the pan-Arabist officers and to bolster his personal position.'3 He succeeded, and Iraq kept its distance from the Arab community during his five years in power. Now Syria, which had for many years enjoyed the distinction of harboring the strongest advocates of pan-Arabism, had forcibly rejected unity. There remained many Syrians and other Arabs who held fast to the goal of unity; some were Baathists and others Nasserists. But the appeal of Arab unity, which had been uncritically espoused by opposition groups in the eastern Arab states as a solution to Arab problems, received a blow from which it has not recovered. 14 Third, major changes occurred in the leadership and membership of the Baath party. Many members in Syria, shocked at the abrupt dissolution of the party and deprived of an organizational connection, drifted away and did not return in significant numbers when the party was reconstituted in 1962-1963. Hawrani went his own way. No member of the pre-UAR Syrian Regional Command served on that body after secession. In addition to 'Aflaq, only one pre-UAR member (a Lebanese) remained on the National Command by 1960. In both Iraq and Jordan, the secretaries of the Regional Commands left the Baath to form pro-Nasser organizations. These wholesale changes opened the way for a new generation to emerge in the party's National Command and in the four principal Regional Commands-Syria, Iraq, Jordan, and Lebanon-as well. This generation was on average about twenty years younger than 'Aflaq and Bitar and their contemporaries. Its formative years were the 1940s rather than the 1920s, and its members tended to have greater concern for the socialist component of Baath ideology than did the party's founders. Finally, failure of the Baath leaders to consult elected party bodies before ordering the dissolution set a precedent that helped move the Baath party from an organization with elected commands to one rigidly controlled from the top. The original structure had a pyramid of commands organized by district, branch, region, and nation and chosen by delegates elected to the relevant congresses. 'Aflaq, Bitar, and Hawrani thought of the Baath as their party and were often authoritarian in running its affairs, but they did have men with differing views serving on the various commands. After the UAR, military men emerged on the Regional Commands in Iraq and Syria; their training in a chain-of-command 13 Phebe Marr, TheModernHistoryof Iraq (Boulder, Colo., 1985), 159-60. A good overview of Iraq since World War I. 14 Muammar Gaddafi of Libya, who was a schoolboy during the Arab nationalist heyday of the 1950s, was unique during the 1970s and 1980s as an Arab head of state who was a true believer in pan-Arabism.

AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW

This content downloaded from 132.66.11.212 on Sun, 19 May 2013 07:27:40 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

DECEMBER 1991

1402

John F. Devlin

system disposed them to authoritarian control from the top. It was not a long step from having Baathist officers as members of a regional command to having officers dominating a command through control of military power. Nor was the next step, centralization of power in one man holding the offices of Baath party head, military commander-in-chief, and head of government. Before that happened, selection had replaced election as the Baath method of filling party commands. The party's haphazard recruiting practices resulted in Baathists turning up in field grade (major, colonel) officer levels in the Syrian and Iraqi armies by the end of the 1950s. Young men typically were indoctrinated in political ideology by secondary school teachers in the expanding public school system. Poorly paid, such teachers were rarely apologists for the ruling elite. Hafiz al-Asad joined the Baath in secondary school, as did his close colleague, Syrian defense minister Mustafa Talas, a Sunni from a village near Homs. So did most of their Baathist contemporaries. Asad and Talas found 15 fellow Baathists or sympathizers out of 110 students in their class when they entered the Homs Military Academy in 1951.15 The process of recruitment was similar in Iraq, although more rigorous control by the regime hindered political activity and organization. Also, the Baath organization lagged behind that in Syria by some eight years. Syrian Baathists in the military built an organization of the deepest significance for Syria's future during the short life of the UAR. In extending his authoritarian governing system to Syria, Nasser was extremely wary of the problems that political activity on the part of military men could cause. He was familiar with the history of military involvement in Syrian politics-three coups in 1949, three more in the 1950s, including the move that delivered Syria to Egypt. Moreover, he was a successful coup plotter himself. Under the rubric of integrating the Egyptian and Syrian armed forces, hundreds of officers who had records of political activity were posted to Egypt. Among them were a score or two of Baathists, mostly captains and majors. In late 1959, five formed a Baath Military Committee; Asad and SalahJadid were to be the most prominent. In the next two years, it expanded to a dozen members, with twice that many sympathizers in Egypt and Syria. The committee leaders were in Egypt when the secession occurred. Even though they had no part in it, they were well placed to participate in the military-political maneuvering that followed, far better placed than the civilian Baath leaders who only began active reorganization in mid-1962. The Military Committee joined forces with a faction of non-Baath officers and seized power on March 8, 1963. Over the next several months, committee members purged and exiled their non-Baath associates and brought civilian Baathists into the government. On the surface, it appeared that the pre-UAR Baath party was recovering its lost status. 'Aflaq and his close Syrian followers enjoyed strong support in the National Command. As the senior Baathist politician with the most experience, Bitar became prime minister. Within Syria, however, they had little support. A majority of returning or newly recruited party members blamed the old leaders for the UAR fiasco; these members wanted social 15 Lucien Bitterlin, Hafez el-Assad:Le Parcoursd'un combattant (Paris, 1986), 34. Seale, Asad,39, gives the class size as ninety.

AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW

This content downloaded from 132.66.11.212 on Sun, 19 May 2013 07:27:40 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

DECEMBER 1991

1403

The Baath Party

and economic change in Syria rather than more talk of pan-Arab unity. The Syrian Regional Command quickly came under the control of a mixed militarycivilian group of these "regionalists,"so-called because they considered the Syrian region and not the Arab nation the appropriate focus for the Baath's efforts. 'Aflaq, viewing Syrian matters from his position as party founder and secretarygeneral, had support in the Iraqi and other regional organizations. Content to have the party come to power through military force, he expected the regionalists and the military Baathists especially to take orders from the National Command. Most of them did not agree, and the stage was thus set for a power struggle. The contest took three years to resolve. It was fought out in three National (pan-Arab) Congresses and five separate sessions of two elected Syrian Regional Congresses. Although some of his colleagues from other states had their doubts about 'Aflaq's tactics, he retained their support. Within Syria, the regionalists were supreme and remained firmly in control of the Regional Command. 'Aflaq himself gained some allies in the military, which led him to overestimate his strength and to dismiss the Regional Command at the end of 1965. The Military Committee Baathists made their preparations and on February 23, 1966, ousted the 'Aflaq-Bitar faction by force. In a short time, all were in exile.'6 Although the issues that precipitated this development were exclusively ones of policy and power in Syria, the coup of February 23 split the Baath party in two. Most Iraqi Baathists continued to recognize 'Aflaq and his colleagues as the legitimate leadership. Once they had won power in Baghdad, the Iraqi Baathists offered asylum and the assurance of continued titular leadership to 'Aflaq and his Syrian associates. In Syria, the winning coalition of officers and their civilian Baathist allies soon fell out over issues of policy and power. By the end of 1966, most of the half-dozen second-echelon members had been driven out of the army; one even sided with the 'Aflaq faction out of frustration at having failed to receive the senior military post to which he aspired. Intra-Baath politics in Syria settled into a contest between two factions. That led by Salah Jadid espoused a doctrinaire socialist system domestically and support externally for a Palestinian war of national liberation against Israel. Jadid had resigned his post as army chief of staff in 1965 and directed the Baath regional party bureaucracy with the aid of many like-minded civilians. His challenger was Hafiz al-Asad, who was more concerned with results than with doctrine in domestic affairs. Defense minister Asad was shaken by the smashing defeat of Syrian forces by Israel in June 1967 and had nearly been sacked for it by his colleagues. If he were to bear responsibility for such matters, he believed that he should have commensurate authority. 17 Through control of military postings and promotions, he patiently moved into an impregnable position. On being informed in November 1970 that a party congress had voted to remove him from his party and government posts, Asad 16 Itamar Rabinovich, Syria under the Ba'th 1963-66: 1972), The Army Party Symbiosis (Jerusalem, covers this period in detail. Nikolaos van Dam, The Struggle for Power in Syria; Sectarianism, Regionalism and Tribalism in Politics, 1961-1980 (1979; London, 1981), is also a valuable study. 17 Seale, Asad, 142-45.

AMERICAN

HISTORICAL

REVIEW

This content downloaded from 132.66.11.212 on Sun, 19 May 2013 07:27:40 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

DECEMBER

1991

1404

John F. Devlin

took over the government in a bloodless coup in order to "correct,"as he put it, his opponents' deviations.

in 1966 and Asad's takeover in November 1970 placed Syria squarely in the hands of men of rural origin. During the 1940s and 1950s, the Baath message of pan-Arabism appealed to many levels of Syrian society, but its socialist or social justice message was most attractive to those who believed that they were not receiving a fair share of the state's resources. In Syria, a state that lacked an industrial proletariat of any size, that meant rural people. As it happened, three of the five founders of the Military Committee were 'Alawis, members of a heterodox Shi'i Muslim sect, which, as a group, was historically the least-favored rural community in Syria. Like Hafiz al-Asad, 'Alawi boys who could get to secondary school often chose the military academy as a promising start for social advancement. Once in power, Asad naturally selected trusted rnenbrothers, cousins, clansmen in the first instance-for sensitive posts, and 'Alawis have been prominent in the military and security services since the mid-1960s.'8 That Syria is ruled by a man from a village in the 'Alawi hill country and that the rural areas of Syria have for more than twenty years obtained a respectable share of the state's resources are striking consequences, though surely not intended ones, of the Baath movement 'Aflaq and Bitar started a half-century ago. Baathism was originally brought to Iraq by students who were Shi'is, and the party's leaders in the 1950s were predominantly of that sect.'9 Recruits to Baathism in Iraq, like recruits in Syria, Jordan, or other states, were attracted to this opposition movement by dislike of foreign influence on their government, a desire to break the power of a ruling elite perceived as oppressive, and a belief in pan-Arab nationalism. The Baathistsjoined Qasim's first government in 1958 but soon fell out with him over his reliance on the Iraqi Communist party and his lack of enthusiasm for pan-Arabism. The party sponsored an effort to assassinate him in 1959; its failure can be attributed in part to a lack of discipline within the assassination squad. Saddam Husain made his first appearance as a Baathist militant in that operation. The Iraqi Baath party was badly disrupted by subsequent government repression. In time, the Baathists recovered, and on February 8, 1963, they took power in a bloody coup. Several hundred Communists were killed in street fighting with the party militia or in torture chambers.20 The Baath regime that succeeded Qasim in February 1963 destroyed through internal quarrels its capacity to govern and was ousted by the Iraqi military after nine months. 'Aflaq's National Command appointed a provisional Regional Command of Iraqis whom 'Aflaq had met in the early 1960s while they were THE SUCCESS OF THE REGIONALISTS

18 The army is by no means exclusively 'Alawi.Jadid is the only member of that sect to hold the post of chief of staff. Asad's defense minister and chief of staff are Sunnis; loyalty to him is the key requirement. 19 Sa'dun Hammadi, prime minister from March to September 1991, is the only survivor from that era. He was a member of the Regional Command in the 1950s. 20 Hanna Batatu, The,Old Social Classesand the RevolutionaryMovementsof Iraq (Princeton, N.J., 1978), 974-94. This massive and detailed study is essential for understanding the political dynamics of Iraq in the twentieth century.

AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW

This content downloaded from 132.66.11.212 on Sun, 19 May 2013 07:27:40 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

DECEMBER 1991

The Baath Party

1405

outside Iraq. Its six members were Sunnis from the Baghdad-Mosul-Al-Qa'im triangle (the third town is where the Euphrates enters Iraq from Syria). Of the three from Takrit, two were to be Iraq's future leaders, Ahmad Hasan Bakr and Saddam Husain. At an Iraqi Regional Congress in 1966, while the party was still illegal, five other Sunnis from the same area were added; then four of the eleven were Takritis. Men from that town have dominated the councils of the Baath party in Iraq for nearly thirty years and the government for over two decades. Saddam Husain's dictatorship, exercised since 1979 through a tight circle of relatives and marital connections, stems from his attracting 'Aflaq's favorable notice during attendance at a party congress in Damascus in 1963. On July 17 and 31, 1968, the rebuilt Baath party seized power from the military faction then ruling Iraq. The second date is that on which the Baathists ousted the non-Baath military faction that had provided the force essential to success on July 17. Earlier in 1968, 'Aflaq's followers in exile from Syria, together with Iraqis, Lebanese, and others, held a National (pan-Arab) Congress that formalized the split between them and the regionalists in Syria. Iraqis were prominent on the National Command that the congress chose. Alert to the advantages of party legitimacy that association with 'Aflaq would bring, Bakr and Saddam made sure this command stayed linked with Iraq. They offered the 'Aflaq group a haven in Baghdad, organized another National Congress in 1970, and ensured that 'Aflaq retained his post of secretary-general. After several lengthy visits to Iraq, he made his home permanently in Baghdad in 1975, when civil war made Beirut an unsuitable residence. Until his death in 1989, 'Aflaq was honored as the founder but had no influence on party affairs or government policy. Real power lay with Bakr and Saddam and their growing coterie of kinsmen from the Takrit district. Once the Baathists had seized power, Bakr and Saddam worked as a team for a decade to assure permanent Baath control over Iraq. The older man (Bakr was born in 1914, Saddam in 1937) had impeccable credentials as one of the Free Officers who overthrew the monarchy in 1958. Aware that the Iraqi officer corps' belief in its right to be part of the political process posed a danger to their dominance, Bakr and Saddam forced influential Baathist officers out of office by 1973. Three years later, Bakr arranged for Saddam, who had never served in the military, to be commissioned as a lieutenant-general; Saddam made himself field marshal in 1979. Saddam, meanwhile, laid his own plans. Through the 1970s, he systematically purged potential rivals and promoted supporters, employing multiple security services accountable to him personally. Several years as head of the party's security arm enabled him to choose for these services leaders sufficiently ruthless to carry out any order. In mid-1979, he pushed Bakr into a retirement that amounted to virtual house arrest, discovered a "plot" against himself, and executed a score of colleagues, including five on the Regional Command. His control of all instruments of government was complete. The scope of Saddam's agenda became abundantly clear once he could drop the pose of deferential second-in-command to Bakr. His insatiable ambition for power and the adulation that accompanies it is manifest in the thousands upon thousands of representations of him throughout the country, the dozens of public works named for him, and the huge monument to "victory" over Iran which

AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW

This content downloaded from 132.66.11.212 on Sun, 19 May 2013 07:27:40 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

DECEMBER 1991

1406

John F. Devlin

features bronze replicas of his "forearms and fists, sixteen metres in length ... [rising] with their firmly grasped swords to an apex forty metres above the ground."2' Externally, he moved to take advantage of Egypt's isolation in the Arab world following its signing of a peace treaty with Israel in 1979. Two major miscalculations have thwarted his ambition to have Iraq supplant Egypt as the leading Arab state. Iraq's invasion of Iran in September 1980 led to eight years of debilitating warfare, and its seizure of Kuwait in 1990 has shattered his leadership image and weakened his hold on power.

UNDER THE AUTHORITARIAN RULE of the past two decades, the Syrian and Iraqi Baath organizations have grown enormously. As of the mid-1980s, the parties have 100,000 full members and 400,000 candidates in Syria, 25,000 full members and 1.5 million candidates in Iraq. Over the same period, however, vitality has drained out of each. People join for party benefits-jobs, access to places in the university-or merely to avoid suspicion of disloyalty. Party meetings and publications are devoted to indoctrination of members with the regimes' attitudes and policies. Neither leader has any use for an organization that allows members freely to propose new ideas, criticize regime policies, or suggest that the leader can make mistakes. Baathism plays little part in either leader's Arab policy; each uses Baath rhetoric but deals externally through the Arab League, other regional groupings, or bilaterally. The most recent National (pan-Arab) Congress of the party held by the Baghdad-based Baath was in 1977 and by the Damascus-based Baath in 1980. Asad's tenure in Syria divides, very broadly, into three phases. In the earliest, he cemented the loyalty of the rural population by devoting resources to land reclamation, education, and services such as electricity and water, in addition to allowing a significant measure of private economic activity.22Next, for half a dozen years, the regime fought an Islamic revolutionary movement that sprang from the urban Sunni Muslim groups the Baath had replaced, in a combat conducted with increasing ferocity on both sides. The government broke the power of the Islamists with extremely harsh measures in Hamah in 1982. Not long afterward, Asad suffered a serious illness, which has diminished his ability to govern efficiently. He lacks the energy to attend to detail but continues his career-long practice of resisting delegation of authority. Combined with the heavy cost of a military build-up to confront Israel, this diminution of leadership has resulted in a sense of drift domestically and in negative economic growth in the late 1980s. A stagnating dictatorship has been Syria's lot for nearly a decade. If Asad can rightly be assessed as the man who converted Baathism in Syria from party rule into a dictatorship, Saddam Husain can be characterized as the man who turned the Iraqi Baath system into tyranny. His first public act as a 21

Samir al-Khalil, TheMonument:Art, Vulgarity,and Responsibility in Iraq (Berkeley, Calif., 1991), 3. Raymond A. Hinnebusch, in Peasant and Bureaucracyin Ba'thistSyria: The Political Economyof Rural Development(Boulder, Colo., 1989); and AuthoritarianPowerand StateFormationin Ba'thistSyria: Army,Party, and Peasant (Boulder, 1990), analyzes the bases of Asad's system and the rise of a new 22

elite.

AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW

This content downloaded from 132.66.11.212 on Sun, 19 May 2013 07:27:40 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

DECEMBER 1991

The Baath Party

1407

Baathist militant found him, gun in hand, attempting to assassinate a prime minister. Force has been his preferred tool to accomplish ends, whether internally or externally. Both regimes have poor human rights records, routinely using torture on detainees; Iraq's is by far the more extensive. Close colleagues whom Saddam suspects of disloyalty or even holding views differing from his have been executed. Samir al-Khalil, in his chilling analysis of Saddam's system, lists a number of the more prominent victims.23 He also argues, persuasively, that Saddam has worked -to alienate Iraqis from their traditional societal groups and force them into total reliance on the state, which governs through doling out rewards and punishments and routinely uses institutionalized violence. Khalil also contends passionately that Saddam's creation of a system in which citizens come to believe that they share responsibility for actions over which they have no say derives from Baath ideology. Perhaps, but Saddam's personal rule goes far beyond anything that Baathist ideologues conceived. His system is totalitarianism carried to the ultimate degree, if that is not an overly tautological phrase. In pursuit of his personal goals, Saddam has abandoned pan-Arabism, presented himself as a Muslim leader (the Baath is an areligious ideology), and claimed direct descent from the Prophet Muhammad.24 His inner circle of associates has become progressively dominated by men related to him by blood or marriage. The Baath organization serves as both rubber stamp and propaganda channel. The primary function of the party member has become one of support for Saddam's compulsion to retain and exercise power. 23 Samir al-Khalil, Republicof Fear: ThePoliticsof ModernIraq (Berkeley, Calif., 1989), 291-96. Two other useful works are Committee against Repression and for Democratic Rights in Iraq (CARDRI), Saddam'sIraq:Revolutionor Reaction?(London, 1986); and Marion Farouk-Sluglett and Peter Sluglett, Iraq since 1958: From Revolutionto Dictatorship(London, 1987). Saddam's life is covered in Efraim Karsh and Inari Rautsi, SaddamHussein:A PoliticalBiography(New York, 1991). 24 In an interview, Saddam said, "I no longer view Arab unity ... as I did in the past. . . We (Arabs) in actual fact are several entities"; Al-Tadamun(London), February 6, 1988, translated in Foreign Broadcast Information Service/NES, February 12, 1988. Saddam's portrayal of "himself as a blood descendant of the Prophet . . . is a rather extraordinary claim"; MaryJane Deeb, Washington Post, February 2, 1991.

AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW

This content downloaded from 132.66.11.212 on Sun, 19 May 2013 07:27:40 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

DECEMBER 1991