This week saw two media events involving female «celebrities», as the Western media call them, media-savvy figures of high society. On March 9, British Prince Harry and his wife, Hollywood actress Meghan Markle, sitting in the garden of a fashionable villa, revealed their difficult lives to the world in an interview with African-American television host Oprah Winfrey. It turned out that the royal family had stopped giving money to Harry, who wanted to be independent, and this 36-year-old man was faced with the necessity — dare I say it — to make a living for himself. And Meghan Markle was treated coldly at the royal palace by her husband’s family and even the staff, which led her to contemplate suicide. One of the relatives even dared to ask Harry how dark her expected child would be (let us remember that she is biracial).
Such inhuman oppression and cruel suffering have caused a storm of outrage among the global progressive community, accusing the royal family of social and even real racism, and consequently calling for the abolition of the British monarchy as the embodiment of all these shameful phenomena.
Now, how does all this affect Muslims? In no way, but it does affect the second media event of the week, which is not as resonant as the first. We are talking about a major article in The Economist about another female celebrity, Asma al-Assad, who, as this article shows, was for many years perceived as a progressive victim of oppression by the ruling family, just as Meghan Markle is today (https://www.economist.com/1843/2021/03/10/banker-princess-warlord-the-many-lives-of-asma-assad). Moreover, the article shows that even the young Bashar al-Assad, who shied away from politics and chose to be an ophthalmologist instead of other medical professions because of his fear of blood, before the death of his older brother Basil, was similar to the current situation of Harry in the Assad family.
In general, this article about the lives of these two people — Asma al-Assad and Bashar al-Assad — is as instructive as it is horrifying from a human perspective. It shows how two people who were once possibly good people, engaged in their professions (a financier and a doctor, respectively), modest enough for people of their position, nevertheless became the leaders of destruction, death and torture (https://golosislama.com/news.php?id=39565). But more about this later…
For now, let us return to the fact that both the romance of Bashar and Asma and the reaction of his family to their marriage, as shown in this article, are very similar to the story of Harry and Meghan. The sectarian issue in Syria was and is important, perhaps even more so than the race issue in Britain. And the Alawite Assad clan, which rules the Sunni-majority country through brute force and repression, opposed the marriage of its representative, who became Hafez Assad’s heir after the death of his elder son Basil in a car accident, to a woman from a Sunni family. Moreover, Asma grew up in England, knew little Arabic, and was unfamiliar with Syrian culture and Syria as a whole. So it is not surprising that her husband’s family rejected her.
Moreover, we do not know how Queen Elizabeth really felt about her grandson Harry’s fiancée, whether what is attributed to her is true or not. But at least publicly, she warmly welcomed Meghan Markle, hosted their $45 million wedding, and even invited an African priest to the ceremony. In contrast, Asma was categorically rejected — the groom’s mother, Anisa, and many members of his family ignored her wedding, and for many years afterward she was held captive, not only in terms of information, which silenced her existence, but also physically.
Whether Asma al-Assad had thoughts of suicide because of all this or not, we do not know. However, the article tells us how she endured these difficult times and, after the death of her mother-in-law, had the opportunity to become the «First Lady,» known worldwide for her Western education, perfect English language and manners, and European appearance. Asma Assad effectively combined highly publicized diplomatic and charitable activities with the remaining shadowy economic expansion of herself and her family, thanks to her husband’s position.
After the death of Hafez Assad, who became infamous for his brutal methods, the young Bashar, married to such a «progressive first lady,» was called upon to create the image of a new, open-minded and reforming regime. Together, they did so successfully until 2011, when, amid protests in the region and the country, the question arose of not only handing over power, but sharing it with Syrian society, seeking real democratization — freedom of assembly, speech, criticism, political competition, etc.
And here the article shows how Assad, who pretended to be ready for reform when it came to going beyond words, turned into a fanatical, uncompromising executioner, butcher and mass murderer. His «progressive, secular first lady» became not only a passive accomplice, but an active collaborator. Moreover, as the article shows, due to the changing political landscape of the country and the weakening of other elite clans, Asma al-Assad became the number two political figure in Syria after this bloody massacre, capable of succeeding her husband. This includes using her image as a «progressive secular woman», albeit stained by the «light» pools of Syrian blood.
Fortunately for them and those around them, Harry and Meghan pose no threat of becoming Britain’s Bashar and Asma. But mainly because Queen Elizabeth is not Hafez Assad, and most importantly, the British constitutional monarchy system is not a clan-based Middle Eastern dictatorship system. The very foundation of the British system is based on the recognition of human and social rights, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, political pluralism and, by the way, the protection of the rights of various minorities, which are actively co-opted into its ruling class, including by the Queen, who grants peerages to representatives of various faiths and races.
In such a situation, it doesn’t matter who looked at whom with a glare or a cold shoulder, or inquired about the skin color of a potential heir to the throne — if you don’t believe it, ask the Syrians who were crushed by the fifth progressive couple, Bashar and Asma, if they would be willing to trade their situation for the «sufferings» of Harry and Meghan. But in the absence of such a system, in the conditions of an abnormal system, as this story shows, even the most «progressive» and humane people can eventually turn into bloody and merciless tyrants. And it is important to understand this, especially for Muslims today, when the real struggle for civil rights is often attempted to be replaced by a «progressive agenda» that convinces us that in order to transform society, it is necessary to bring more women, LGBTQ+ people, and other representatives of the «new world» into power. From the same series come the conversations about how the situation in Russia will automatically change if «dark men» are replaced by «progressive women» — presumably people like Ksenia Sobchak or Yekaterina Tikhonova.
The story of Asma al-Assad vividly demonstrates the value of such hopes.