Memories of the 28th Century

The general press has kept up attacks on the Al Assad family, while they praised the rebels who were seeking to eliminate the elected government of Syria. In addition to being elected many times Al Assad supported that various ethnic and religious minorities of Syria. They are of the Alawite sect, and many of their personnel were of that or other religious minority groups. Then there are all of the ethnic minorities who have sought and received asylum in Syria. I wonder where they will go.
In the past, the rebels openly claimed to be Sunnis, and their goal was to create another country for Sunnis. I assume that that goal is still in place. Rather than making a list from various sources, I will post the link to the Wikipedia page below, but there are dozens of religious and ethnic minorities in Syria, and many of them would be unwelcome in other places or in the new Sunni dominated Syria. You can denigrate Assad as a dictator, even though he was elected and reelected, but he and his father before him provided a country where other people were welcome.
Some of the minorities have not been happy there, and some, like the Circassians, have been slowly moving back where they came from, even though they are not welcome in Russia. Some, like the Aisors, have lived there for thousands of years; they are the descendants of the Ancient Assyrians, and they are not the only ethnic group that has been there for thousands of years.
Then there are the Circassians or Adyghe. Russia started trying to conquer them in 1725, and in 1862 Russia managed to defeat them. The Adyghe were given the option of swearing loyalty of the Imperator (Tsar) or leaving. They split about half and half. Those who chose to leave mostly went to Syria.

But enumerating the groups that probably will be affected is almost irrelevant, compared to the principles involved. It used to be that the U.S.A. supported regimes that were open and tolerant, but that doesn't seem to apply to the Middle East, where the U.S. Overthrew a democratic government in Iran and installed. And the U.S.A. opposes genocide and ethnic cleansing, except when done by the intolerant regime in Israel. In Syria, the U.S.A. started backing the rebels as soon as they appeared, and the elected government was ignored.

It doesn't make much difference, because no one will pay attention, but with its track record since the end of WW II, I think the U.S.A. would be better off having minimal contact with the countries in the Middle East. Except for the oil exporters, and the needs of allies for those products, there is little of interest in the region, except to religious fanatics. The only ones who would be harmed by a hands-off policy by the U.S.A. would be the dictators who have been propped up and the arms dealers who get rich off that region. However much the U.S. Spends in that region would be better spent elsewhere or used to reduce debt. It isn't easy to find how much gets wasted in the Mideast, but it appears that it has been $22 billion since October 7. I may look for more information about that later. But I could have used that money and I would spend it better than any government in the Mideast.

It looks like the U.S. will continue to support the Sunni sectarians who started rebelling so that they could suppress the other sect of Islam. I think that many people will leave Syria, because it will become dangerous for them.





U.S. foreign aid money by country in 2023
https://concernusa.org/news/foreign-aid-by-country/?utm_source=googlegrant&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaig n={campaignname}&utm_content=519755072549&utm_term =foreign%20aid&c_src=googlegrant-cpc&c_src2=Campaign-{campaignname}-AdId-519755072549-Keyword-foreign%20aid-QueryString-{searchterm}-ClickID-Cj0KCQiApNW6BhD5ARIsACmEbkVZNK-1dU4wHleJWHEUF6lODu7Toau0-LUdIWw2KIbA_PpNI4NijIkaAtxeEALw_wcB-Device-c&gclid=Cj0KCQiApNW6BhD5ARIsACmEbkVZNK-1dU4wHleJWHEUF6lODu7Toau0-LUdIWw2KIbA_PpNI4NijIkaAtxeEALw_wcB
Assistance amoounts
https://www.cfr.org/article/us-aid-israel-four-charts