By Matt Underwood Syria’s new government appointing Maysaa Sabrine as the first woman to lead its central bank is a significant event, signifying a potential shift in priorities and possibly a learning experience from past mistakes. This appointment not only breaks a significant glass ceiling but also suggests a departure from the de-Ba’athification approach that proved disastrous in Iraq. Avoiding the pitfalls of wholesale purges of individuals with system knowledge is crucial for stability and avoiding internal conspiracies.
This appointment appears merit-based, given Sabrine’s impressive background, including a master’s degree in accounting, CPA certification, and her prior position as deputy governor of the central bank. This suggests a prioritization of competence over party loyalty, a welcome change that could foster greater efficiency and effectiveness within the institution.
This development, alongside other recent positive indicators, hints at a possible trend towards greater stability and modernization in Syria. There’s hope that the country is moving past the cycle of conflict and rebuilding, mirroring the eventual fatigue with war experienced by European nations after World Wars I and II. Perhaps Syrians, like some Arab states, are prioritizing stability over continued conflict, even considering pragmatic compromises.
The appointment also signifies a rejection of past practices, including leaving behind extremist roots and potentially paving the way for the removal of sanctions. International aid is vital for the country’s reconstruction, and a genuine turn away from extremism should encourage such support. However, it’s crucial to remain cautious and monitor the situation to ensure this is not merely a facade.
A key question remains: how to integrate existing government personnel into a new system without mass firings. The experience of past nation-building efforts, particularly in post-war Germany and Japan, suggests that a complete purge is not necessary. Rehabilitating and incorporating individuals with valuable experience, while holding accountable those responsible for atrocities, can be a more effective approach. This approach seems especially relevant given the significant corruption within the former regime, even evident in a striking reduction in urban illumination across regime-controlled territories compared to opposition-controlled areas.
Conversely, the opposition-controlled areas, despite economic pressure and warfare, saw substantial increases in illumination, indicating a potential advantage in economic management and rebuilding efforts. Interestingly, groups like Tahrir al-Sham have even digitized some government services in Idlib to combat corruption. Scaling such efficient systems to a national level is challenging, but it’s feasible without resorting to the chaos of widespread dismissals.
Concerns about potential authoritarianism remain, particularly given the length of time proposed before new elections (four years). While this period allows for necessary rebuilding and organization, it also raises concerns about consolidating power. However, it’s important to compare this timeline to historical examples, such as the post-World War II rebuilding periods in Germany and the US, where establishing stable democracies also took considerable time.
Furthermore, many people tend to dismiss the potential for moderate or secular governments in the Middle East, pointing to Tunisia’s regression towards authoritarianism as an example. However, the relatively rapid establishment of a secular system in Tunisia post-revolution, albeit short-lived, illustrates that such models are possible. The challenge lies in safeguarding these systems from the influence of oligarchs and propaganda. This requires commitment to institutional building and a long-term perspective, as seen in countries like Hungary, Turkey, and Belarus, which have struggled with similar challenges.
The educational systems in many poorer Arab states, including Syria, are frequently superior to those in wealthier Gulf states, providing a higher proportion of highly educated women entering the workforce. This counters the stereotype of limited opportunities for women in these regions. Women are highly educated and have leadership potential. Numerous Muslim-majority countries have had women in prominent political roles, including Indonesia’s democratically elected female president and Pakistan’s Benazir Bhutto.
Finally, the significance of Maysaa Sabrine’s appointment cannot be overstated. While concerns about potential authoritarianism under Jolani’s leadership remain valid, the need for economic sanctions to be lifted remains critical. A thriving economy will support a more stable and hopefully democratic Syria. This appointment, while potentially a significant step forward, needs to be seen within a broader context and ongoing observation to determine its long-term effect on Syria’s trajectory.