The Ghosts of Syria’s History:

 

I have been closely examining the pressing controversy surrounding the al-Sharaa HTS government's decisions to politicize Syrian history, alter the national holiday calendar, and manipulate the collective memory of the Syrian people. The government has motioned to remove holidays commemorating the October War of 1973, March 8 Revolution Day, Teachers’ Day, and Martyrs’ Day based on the HTS's aim to distance the newly formed state from Hafez al-Assad's legacy. Many articles touch upon these critical issues, but I have chosen to focus on four that stand out.

 

One particularly striking piece is Ali Safar's article, "The Politicization of History: The Martyrs of the ‘Great Arab Revolt' Were Conspirators," published in Al Modon.* In it, Safar powerfully criticizes the Syrian regime's removal of Martyrs' Day — a significant holiday celebrated on May 6 each year, honoring Syrian and Lebanese intellectuals and activists who were executed by the Ottoman authorities in 1916. This commemoration holds great importance for both Lebanon and Syria, serving as a cornerstone of civic education in Lebanon, free from ideological manipulation. It is profoundly ironic that the individuals executed in Marjeh Square in Damascus and Bourj Square in Beirut, who are revered as symbols of resistance, are now recast in revised HTS literature as conspirators. Safar criticizes the intentional rewriting of history, arguing that it weakens national identities, and points out the irony in blaming Syrians and Lebanese for their hardships. He goes on to challenge another depiction of Sharif Hussein's revolution (referred to as a rebellion) and its fighters as "insurgents." This change in terminology alters the historical narrative that previously revered them as "martyrs of the Great Arab Revolt." Safar believes the shift into depicting previously revered martyrs as conspirators harms the collective consciousness of Arab society. Martyrs symbolize sacrifice, unity, and a deep emotional connection to the homeland, while the new interpretation undermines these values. Additionally, he argues that this revised perspective dismisses the significance of Arab struggles for independence following Ottoman Turkification.

 

Safar’s observations provide valuable insights. He highlights an irony in how society adapts to these changes, ultimately perpetuating a version of history shaped by Jamal Pasha's reign 109 years ago. This misrepresentation reflects a broader effort to influence the moral compass of future generations. It teaches young people that obedience is more virtuous than dignity, loyalty is more significant than liberty, and that heroism is defined by the state rather than by ethical principles.

 

Authoritarian governments often exploit revered traditions, including martyrdom, to serve their own narrow interests. They manipulate historical accounts of "martyrs" to control the narrative, enforce silence, and maintain their grip on power. However, it is essential to note that societies that have endured tyranny recognize that history is preserved within collective memory, regardless of state-controlled education.

 

Safar argues, along with other Syrian intellectuals, that rewriting history for political reasons is pointless. He contends that attempts to revise or erase history only increase the determination to reclaim it. For example, the cancellation of Martyrs' Day and the negative portrayal of its figures in textbooks do not lessen their importance. Instead, these actions liberate the martyrs from official control, turning them into symbols of dignity and collective conscience.

 

Basheer al-Bakr makes similar observations in his essay, "The Martyrs of May 6: Patriots, Not Traitors," in which he reinterprets the May 6 Martyrs, presenting them as patriots rather than traitors, which aligns with this revised historical narrative.** As a result, broad ideological efforts to rewrite history threaten to undermine national identity and moral values.

 

Bakr's concerns about the changes proposed by Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) reflect views shared by other Syrian commentators. Modifying the Syrian national calendar could significantly impact the country’s collective memory, historical understanding, and cultural identity. Such changes might serve specific political agendas, similar to past textbook revisions concerning the May 6 martyrs. This raises concerns about the potential erasure of honorable narratives and the promotion of a particular cultural perspective. Bakr insists that history should stay transparent, accessible, and free from political influence.

 

He promotes key principles of historiography, including impartiality, authenticity, and transparency. These principles sharply contrast with the manipulation of history for political purposes, as seen in the controversy surrounding the Syrian conflict. He emphasizes several vital points: history belongs to the people, rather than to governments; responsible historiography fosters moral and intellectual values; and authoritarian regimes frequently manipulate or erase historical narratives for propaganda purposes. Additionally, incorporating political theories such as memory studies and theories of national identity can deepen our understanding of this issue.

 

In his article “Syria: Rewriting History Instead of Making It,” published in Al Modon, Omar Kaddour highlights the reasons behind the modifications made by the HTS government to the calendar and educational curricula.*** These changes were intended to appease external powers, particularly Turkey under President Erdogan. Kaddour argues that these alterations serve to undermine the moral legitimacy of dissent and establish an ideological narrative that prioritizes compliance over resistance.

 

According to Kaddour, both Assad's regime and HTS forces distorted history. Authoritarian tactics continue to thrive because they influence collective memory. The Assad regime, for instance, controlled historical narratives by Arabizing place names and promoting its rule through a "national education" system, a keen example of how the manipulation of history can maintain power. Kaddour cautions that groups emerging after Assad may very well follow in the same steps by attempting to erase the past instead of reinterpreting it.

 

Kaddour discusses two approaches to history: rewriting it, which supports the current power structure, and creating it, which seeks to develop diverse and empowering narratives. He believes that Syria's transition away from dictatorship should be guided by transitional justice rather than mere symbolic revisionism.

 

His arguments are based on several assumptions. Authentic revolutionary ideals should focus on creating a fair and inclusive society rather than simply rectifying past injustices. Education is a crucial arena for ideological conflicts, as regimes often manipulate history to maintain control. In contrast, democratic societies encourage critical examination and celebrate diversity. Symbolic politics, such as the exclusion of Nowruz and the retention of Mother's Day, highlight how regimes marginalize non-Arab and non-Sunni communities. To prevent the recurrence of authoritarian practices, history should be written collectively, incorporating self-criticism and diversity.

 

Similarly, Mamdouh Azzam, in his Al Araby article "Manipulating History," criticizes the HTS government’s modifications, claiming they are politically motivated and aimed at reshaping national identity to advance specific ideological and political agendas.**** Many of Azzam's ideas align with those of other Syrian critics regarding recent changes. Modern history is frequently manipulated or ignored for political reasons. The atrocities committed by Assad should not be used to reinterpret modern history. While interpreting or reshaping the present can lead to a deeper understanding of past events, it also has the potential to trivialize history and serve ideological agendas.