Letter from me to authors of a Los Angeles Times article on Syria, 05/29/2013

Dear Mr. McDonnell and Mr. Richter and Mr. Loiko:

     I read your article about Syria with great interest.  It was not only a balanced article but viewed the situation honestly and with acknowledgement of all the key players usually mentioned. 

      I do have a suggestion for the possibility of a more peaceful solution to the Syrian crisis that does not include an increasing arms race.

As you have rightly pointed out there is not a neighbor of Syria that has not been affected in a major way by the continuing conflict.  I believe it is these affected neighbors that hold the key to peace in the region, with perhaps a lot less involvement by any country with the exception of perhaps Russia and the blessing, however public, of Iran.  

      It is my contention that the only real path to peace is a unified active or agreement too, by all neighbors concerned for the return to the dream and concept of a Greater Syria.  Or as I prefer to call it Syriaq.

http://hashemitekingdomofsyriaq.blogspot.com/

      There is no need to go into the complete disintegration of the entire region going back to the creation of Mandates for France and Britain at the end of World War I.  Suffice to say it evolved into ever smaller and smaller political, religious and economic divisions throughout the Levant.  

       Much speculation has been made as to whether the end result would be the disintegration or Balkanizing of Syria.  I believe that actually the reverse is the key to peace.  

        If indeed there was to become an effort to steer the entire region towards the creation of Syriaq to solve the conflict it would, in my opinion need just a few key, non negotiable realities to make it happen.

         1.  The first, no matter who wins, or compromises or unifies or shape of the resulting government, if the major core of the Syriaq Army is not the current Syrian Army  left in place and a part of the resultant nation then it will indeed be chaos for a great long time. Years in fact.   

          2.  If the resulting Syriaq is not a Hashemite Kingdom with the unified capital in Amman then it will never become a multi religious sectarian nation.  

          3.  All attempts should be made to ensure that the Palestinians are actively invited and made to feel as though they are the very core component of any Levant wide peace settlement.  It is the Palestinians who, of all the nations involved, strike the greatest sense of being of one common purpose among all the nations of the Levant.  And as Jordan is the Keystone nation to Palestine again being a Hashemite Kingdom with the capital in Amman is hard to deny.   (Borders with Israel would still have to be negotiated, but it would be between Israel and Syriaq not Israel and the Palestinian Territories.)

          4.  Any solution, again of any area, people, final borders, leaders and such, if the Russians are not asked to remain, with all military installations included,  by whoever or whatever form a post Syrian government becomes, again its chances for success are greatly reduced if not impossible for an conclusion for years to come. 

           Those are it.  All else are debatable, deniable, win some loose some, would have been nice, too many egos not left at the door and just plain isn't happening.  

            Almost everyone besides the most extreme of the rebel forces vaguely agree upon the need for new elections for the Syrian people to decide on a new government.  It is my thoughts that it is what that first election should be about, who should vote, that it should include all of Syria's current Arab neighbors and it should happen as soon as possible.  

             I would suggest dividing the Levant into 8 regions.  Syria, Lebanon, Kurdish Autonomous Regions, Sunni dominated Iraqi governorates, and Shia dominated Iraqi governorates, Jordan, the West Bank, Gaza.  

             I would also suggest that any thought of unity just between any two of these regions, with the possible exception of the West Bank and Gaza,  would not only not work but would not be considered at this time, if ever.  

            Each votes yes or no to join the Hashemite Kingdom of Syriaq (with the capital in Amman).   That simple.  Just debating the concept all across the Levant could also, I believe, send great numbers of combatants to a area wide cease fire to debate the pros and cons of what can be gained or lost in joining the nation of Syriaq.  Those voting no remain just as they were before the vote and back to business as usual.  (perhaps a modified Jordanian Constitution would suffice until a new Constitution could be written and unity  government formed.  

            I am fully aware of the irony if Jordan votes no.  However it is my contention, that when it would be pointed out that by Amman being the capital of a much larger nation, of say 40 to 70 million people, the city and region of Amman would at long last loose the "living on the edge economically" reality of the last 100 years.  It would also mean that most, if not all of the endless cycle of new refugees constantly swarming into the region might also finally come to a halt.   But as Amman has been one of the primary "go to" refugee destinations for decades now it has developed an often deserved image and sensibility  of neutrality over the years.  

            I also think such a formatted vote would allow for many various outcomes all of which are not earth shattering if voted no and very exciting possibilities for those who vote yes.  

            I would imagine that the majority of Syrians would vote to accept joining Syriaq if the 4 key points mentioned above were a part of the pre-vote "election promises".  If electing the King of Jordan to the Head of State, it would mean that Assad might possibly be elected PM at some early future date but the rest of the Assad power base would have a clear alternative and a much greater chance of retribution worries.  The number 3 core issue of also becoming one with the Palestinians is a long held Syrian core of their social dogma.  Also to keep in mind, the alternative goal of creating a Greater Syriaq might be something for which Assad would willingly step aside.  

            Jordan for the reasons already mentioned.  The West Bank I would hope would vote yes as it might be, finally the leverage they need to achieve peace.  I also think that if it was just a vote to join Jordan the outcome would be much different.  But as a Levant wide peace initiative it would be hard to deny.

             Gaza is an open question with no honest idea how it would vote.  Thus the separate regional voting.  It might end up that there is a Syriaq and just Gaza is Palestine.  (in my blog I also include the Sinai in Syriaq.  It is too long and involved and a distraction for this email but I do consider it a major if not critical point for both Syria and Egypt.)

             Sunni Iraq I believe would jump at the chance.  As it would be a compromise but by the sharing of power between the King and the Syrian Army and Alawite core the Sunni Iraqi access to  any sort of power, even within their own region, would be greatly enhanced.  

             The Kurdish Autonomous Regions would vote to join if they were assured continued Autonomy.  I see no reason for that to change.  They would also possibly pick up governorates the former Iraq and Syria in the new Syriaq.  

             That only leaves Shia Iraq and Lebanon.  For the Shia of Iraq it would mean returning to a minority group within a possible larger whole.  But it would also mean joining again, as with Syrians, with their Palestinian fellow countrymen.  Iraq's national anthem is a Palestinian song.  Another thing for the Shia to consider is that they would both joining the Alawites and Lebanese Shia in covering their backs but perhaps taking advantage of the fact that many Alawites have had a long period of being economically successful. 

               The final considerations, that of Iranian influence, it would seem to me that Iran would give its blessing for two reasons.  One is that "inside the tent" is better than being outside looking in.   The second would be the great number of Shia holy shrines within Sunni areas of Iraq, Jordan and elsewhere and normalization might mean greater access to them over time.  The final reason would be the possibility of a solution to the Palestinian question might ease world tension towards Iran in the world community.  

                Lebanon is about as easy to predict as Gaza.  I have no idea.  The one factor I think often overlooked by everyone in the region for decades concerning Hezbollah is the fact that in Lebanon they pretty much sit beside the Litani River from headwaters to the sea.  And the Litani is by far the largest river in the entire Levant that sends millions of gallons of some of the freshest water into the Mediterranean each and every year. Unstopped.  Never used.   It is the great water waste tragedy of the entire region.   The only diversion now for the Litani is to send water to Beirut.  For years the Shia of the region had no political power to fund such water projects.  Now with political power comes infighting and distractions of fighting elsewhere.   If there was one region in the entire nation of a new Syriaq that could be converted to very productive agriculture in a very short amount of time,  it is the lands the Hezbollah now live in.  Turning their attention and giving financial aid to develop the Litani could be a massive game changer for all involved.  ( I would also suggest that the entire Golan Heights and the former Syrian Governorate be made a Druze Autonomous Region for all the Druze in Lebanon, Syria and Israel, again without regard to any outcome of any vote.). 

              Exactly one century ago the dream of almost all the peoples of the Levant who knew of life beyond the horizon dreamed of one day living in a Greater Syria with the Hashemite King as their leader.  They were even promised this by France and Britain.  While they did get compromise and divided positions the dream of Greater Syria died every so slowly a greater death year after year.  The Levant has, as mentioned before, been a mess ever since.

              If the people of Syria, on all sides, want to have peace I think they need to look to a Syria that has been missing for this past century.  There they might find not only the agreed upon peace they so desire, but the chance to move forward.

              Whatever happens, it would be a shame to not literally "think outside the box" for a solution to the quagmire that is Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine.  For each the answer to their current ongoing crisis might be as close as just across the border.   

              Thank you for your time.  Best regards.

Thousands dead. Over a million displaced. What are YOU doing about it?

The crisis that is the Levant has, over the course of decades, has left hundreds of thousands dead, millions displaced and homeless.

I have written this blog to try to ignite other solutions, other options, than the few that have been proposed both within and outside of the Levant.

And yet if there is no great discourse among diverse people then solutions will not be found and thousands more will die and millions more will be displaced.

If you have reached this site I ask that the very least you could do is to pass it along to 10 other people that you know.  And they to 10 more.  Let other options be expressed.  Let other voices be added.  This is but the smallest spark in search of a great light of debate on new ways to stop the violence and the misery.

It is little enough to ask to perhaps find others among your friends who might come together and help to put and end to the suffering.

LinkedIn Group: Jordan Business and Professional Network. Comment left by me on May 21, 2013

 Over two centuries ago Petra created a thriving economy amid one of the harshest climates imaginable by recognizing and taking advantage to the fullest its strategic location for controlling trade, political stability and its economic independence. Petra also advanced their intellectual base to such an extent as to leave what was to become Arabic script to the region.

Today the country of Jordan, and more importantly the city of Amman, must recognize that it too must assess and take advantage of its strategic location, relative political stability in relation to its neighbors and the high regard in which the Hashemite dynasty commands worldwide.respect.

I think in terms of corporate acquisitions, restructurings and spin offs, as does almost everyone at this and other groups. And yet in such a climate of constantly evolving structures little is ever transferred mentally to the concept of nation states acquiring, restructuring or spinning off regions in a peaceful manner for the greater efficiency and future growth of the remaining entities. This thought process is, however, a primary mental exercise in which I often explore and evaluate possibilities.

One such possibility to reclaim stability, peace and forward economic progress for the entire Fertile Crescent is for the renewed concept of a Greater Syria. Or Syriaq if you will.

There is no country, city or group of leaders who are more acutely positioned to delve into the possibility of such a concept, with Amman as the capital and as a continuing Hashemite Kingdom, than the citizens both within or currently stranded within Jordan. Even more so perhaps also for those who have long standing political or business relationships with the Kingdom and who are very personally acquainted with the ideals of the nation, its people and the King and his family.

I do not propose the idea lightly. It is not a concept for the faint of heart or without great risk. But it is also a concept that could conceivably end decades of strife from Gaza to the Kurdish Autonomous Regions.

But then again Amman, as the capital of a nation of between perhaps 44 to 70 million people would no longer be so overwhelmingly and forever living on the very edge of economic crisis or stability. As the capital of a nation of 70 million Amman would be a virtually recession proof national and international center of constant activity. It is also, to be quite blunt, the only way to truly stop what is still, even now, the flow of refugees from neighboring countries year after year, sometimes decade after decade.

As for the long term residence of the city and region, the concept of being citizens of the capital would mean not only greater economic, social, educational and cultural advantages but would balance the constant flow of visitors to the city.

You can view short term possibilities to make it through this year and perhaps the next, wondering what the next round of regional consequences will bring to Amman and the nation of Jordan, or you can encourage Jordan to regain the insight it took to build Petra and the Nabataean Nation into the master of it and its neighbors destinies.

That is the underlying strength and virtual assets that Amman and the Jordanian people must recognize within themselves, their country and their leadership. Those are the true assets to be recognized for success in any endeavor in the 21st century. That is what they have to offer to the surrounding region at its embattled citizens.

Without taking that next step of discussing the ideas with those whom you might think have something more to add, or question, is to have already agreed to fail. There are more ideas to explore, evaluate and discuss at the following site. Read them yourself or just send to others. The region might thank you.

http://hashemitekingdomofsyriaq.blogspot.com/

Comment by "Jeff" to earlier post by me in Yahoo News May 20, 2013

One small kink in your theory:

In order to achieve peace they have to want peace. There are the surface problems of greed to deal with. Then there are the religious disputes. Then there are cultural evolution problems do to the previous root problems. All I see is a big knot.

The Shias and Sunnies are split do to religious doctrine. The Shias have a literal view while the Sunnies have a fundamental interpretation of the Qaran.

The UN, USA or Russia can't resolve this. This is much like the Spanish Inquisition or the Jewish holocaust in nature. All that can be done is contain it until they are tired of killing each other. 

Russia has interest in Assad. Assad has interest with others that are at odds with Israel. Israel is forced into this because of the antisemitic views of of some in the region that tend to blow stuff up. Turkey has been dragged into it. The USA wants to do business as look out friends that are suffering.

There are also secondary agendas to whoever wins to consider. The people factor, lol.... Everyone wants to do it their way. Everyone is right lmao....

Part 1. Reply to comment: Yahoo News May 1, 2013

I agree with virtually all your points. They are the crux of the matter. But lets go a little deeper into each one. 

The Shia's and the Sunni's are indeed split on religious doctrine. The split began with the line of succession to the Prophet. Shia's then as now believe that the leadership of the Muslim faith should have descended through the family line of Fatimah ( the Prophet's daughter) and her husband, Ali bin Abu Talib (also a cousin to the prophet) male heirs. This was done through 11 generations and the 12th is considered "hidden". 

The Sunni's, on the other hand, believe it should have passed down to the most agreed upon leader or in the early years the Caliph. The mantel of Caliph, and who had it and who actually decided they deserved the title passed down all the way to the last leader of the Ottoman Empire. But it was always to be an elected position. It was who got to vote that created problems through the centuries. 

A quick but notable point from Muslim history is that who and where the Shia and Sunni reside has been a major ebb and flow based upon leadership for centuries. For centuries Egypt was the center of Shia life while Persia (Iran) was not. Changes in leadership brought changes in religious followings. 

And among both Shia and Sunni's there are major factions that have separate and distinct religious doctrines and teachings. 

Today the major conflict is which of the groups has the political power and where. The French and British during their mandate periods used the same method of elevating the minority sect of the two to supreme leadership so they would be beholding to the French and the British for power. In Iraq it was the minority Sunni who ruled while in Syria it was the minority of Alawite's, an offshoot of Shia, of which the Assad family belong. 

In the case of Iraq, the US government's policy for containment in Iraq was to basically take all the guns away from as many Sunni's as possible and arm as many of the Shia majority as possible so they could leave. The Shia, out of power, have unrestrained scores to settle. 

One other major point to make in back round history. The current national anthem of Iraq is a Palestinian song. Each day Syrian children, before the strife, used to stand in class each morning and declare that "we are all Palestinians." And finally there are perhaps more Palestinians in Lebanon, Syria and Jordan than in Palestinian territories. 

In the case of Assad and Russia it is not really, deep down any love for Assad or his regime that keeps Russia in his corner. Nor is it weapons sales. It is the symbolic problem of a group of outside nations determining the legitimacy of the Syrian Leadership. Because of former incidents such as Chechnya and Kosovo and current "client" states of South Ossetia and Abkhaza in which Russia just cannot have such "regional or international" approval of legitimacy. Other nations such as Bahrain also have a huge majority Shia population while the ruling family is Sunni. In Saudi Arabia, a mostly Sunni nation, the area around their largest oil fields is mostly a Shia population. Thus Saudi nervousness about Iranian moves in the region. 

But then again Putin has said dozens and dozens of times, in public forums, that the greatest catastrophic event in recent Russian history was the loss of Ukraine and other CIS nations from "Mother Russia."

Which brings me back to my concept. While the complete unification of a Greater Syria or Syriaq is the primary, and in my opinion, the best goal, variations upon the theme succeeding are better that many of the conflicts in the region currently. 

(to be continued)

Part 2: Reply to comment on Yahoo News May 20, 2013

The first point about the Shia/Sunni schism is the primary reason I believe that the Hashemite King is the ideal compromise and yet also qualified choice to head the new nation. The Hashemite family, and particularly the lineage of the King are direct recorded descendants of the Grandfather of the Prophet. Thus he is "of the family household" of the Prophet. But he is also a Sunni. Until the House of Saud removed the Hashemite's from the lower Arabian desert, the family had been the rulers of Mecca and Medina for centuries. They are still technically the "keepers" of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem to this day. 

It is my belief that such historical roots plus factors of relative stability in dealing with all sides by both the King and his late father, make him a good choice to lead a larger nation.

As to the entire reason for a "larger" nation. Or "Greater Syria". Or Syriaq. It is for two primary and yet entirely separate goals. The first is the concept that the only reason that Iraq, Syria, Jordan and Lebanon would even consider the possibility of unification is because it might, .... just might...... also include and help resolve the Palestinian issue. And I mean the issue both within the Palestinian Territories and within each of the respective nations and their massive refugee problem that has been going on now for 65 years. It is not so much that Syria would join Iraq as it would be Syria joining with Palestine and Iraq joining with Palestine and Jordan joining with Palestine. And in the reverse, scenarios for peace in that area might also be more forthcoming if it involved not Palestinians but Syriaqi's or Syriaqians?? 

This also brings me back to the keystone position of Jordan in making such a unification possible. 

Perhaps more than the entire group of nations forming Syriaq the more likely, but less viable to me, would be for the West Bank of Palestine, Jordan, Syria and Sunni and Kurdish Iraq creating a Greater Syria or Syriaq.

This would leave Gaza, Lebanon and the Shia dominated governorates of Iraq remaining outside the union. Ironically however I believe that if unification did look possible it would be Iran pressuring the three regions to be "inside the tent wielding power" and not outside looking in. 

As for Russians. If the "theme" of a peaceful solution was "reunification of a lost greater nation" or "Greater Syria" and the current Syrian military were to remain, along with most of the upper government of Syria in some capacity and Russian forces got to keep the bases there, it would be Putin himself personally escorting Assad to the door. Whether it is "Truth and Reconciliation Councils" or whatever that keep the Syrians from wholesale removal as in the catastrophic blunder by the US in Iraq, a change at only the very top would be in the best interest of all. 

And besides Russia who is already there and Iran who is already the "elephant" in the room also, this version of events leaves the entire solution to the problem entirely within the boundaries of those who are to be directly effected or not. And it is to be a democratic election to decide to join or not. 

Too many minorities such as Christians, Kurds, Druze, secular Sunni's and Palestinians are flung as minorities among two or more of the nations involved. Their long term advancement would be much more viable within a single legal entity. 
(Historical note: from 400 BC to 100 AD as an unscripted language and then from 100 AD to 800 AD Syriac was the Aramaic language of the entire Fertile Crescent.)

A Gordian knot yes. But either hack it apart with a sword or start picking at the various threads to see where they lead. For those in the knot there is not much choice for a tenable third option. And it is theirs to undo anyway.

Legislature. Lower and Upper Houses.

The following is just a suggested outline form for a possible legislative structure.  Of course it would be determined by an elected constitutional committee or convention.

Lower House:

Citizens of Syriaq age 30 and above.  Members elected for 4 year terms unless lower house fails a vote of confidence.   Then Lower House and Prime Minister and Cabinet resign and await new elections within say 90 days.  The King appoints leader of the largest political bloc in elections to form a new government.

Initially 350 seats based upon districts of 200,000 citizens each.  Districts are redesigned every 10 years based upon census and number to maintain 350 seats. District boundaries are determined and reset every 10 years  by an election commission appointed by the King.  In the event of enlargement of the Kingdom the number of seats may change. Otherwise the number shall remain the same and the amount of people per district shall change to be as approximately the same population in each district as possible.

Elections for the Lower house shall commence by determined voting method by all eligible voters in each district from the first election onward.

Upper House:

Citizens of Syriaq age 40 and above.   Members elected for 6 year terms with 1/3 of the body being elected every two years.  122 seats.  Two for each governorate.   No two members of any one governorate shall be elected in the same election except to fill the remaining term on a vacated seat.

At the beginning of the new nation 1 member from each governorate shall be appointed by the King for 1/2 of the initial 6 year seats, 1/2 for the 4 year seats and 1/2  for the 2 year seats.  This shall be done in consultation with leading citizens of each governorate.    In two years those seats having been filled for two years shall all then be open to election by eligible voters in their respective governorates to begin serving a standard 6 year term.   In 4 years the seats of that group shall also be opened to full election to 6 year terms.  In 6 years all seats will then be open for direct election by eligible voters in their governorates to complete the standard 6 year cycle for all members.    

While the lower house "falls" if the majority party or coalition looses a "vote of confidence" and must stand for re election within 90 days, the upper house does not "fall".  The body of the upper house remains as is and continues to follow their 6 year cycles.  

The initial appointment by 1/2 of the upper body by the King, the staggered election cycles and the remaining in office while the lower house may "fail" are all designed to instill a sense of trust, experience and stability by those members serving in the upper house.

All legislation must pass both houses by a simple majority or by percentages agreed to in the constitution.  The King may veto any legislation but the legislature can then over ride the veto by a larger percentage of votes, again determined by the constitution.

The King may dissolve the lower house at any time but it must have the approval of the upper house by a set majority.  Elections for the lower house must then also be within 90 days.  The upper house may not dissolve the lower house without first action by the King.

Posted in comments in Yahoo News May 19, 2013

Negotiations should not be between Assad and the rebels.  The negotiations should be between the powers in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan and Palestinian Terr. to merge as one nation.  Greater Syria or Syriaq if you will.  Make the vote simple.  Each country or region votes Yes/No to join the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.    Amman as the Capital.  Iraq can vote by each of the three separate districts, Shia, Sunni, Kurd.  Palestine can vote West Bank and Gaza separately.  All the rest have a country wide vote.

  Even Jordan can vote No but for Amman to be the potential capital of a nation of 70 million would be the biggest economic boost to that city/region since it was named Philadelphia and Petra was down the road a ways.   It is not like Amman does not have citizens of the entire region in the city for sanctuary as it is.

That was once the dream, a Greater Syria, a 100 years ago.  The Levant got lost when the UK and France denied that happening.  Time to start again.

Depending upon the outcome each region or voting  country keeps current government while new government is formed among those voting yes.   Diaspora get to vote.  Those voting no just go back to their independent government.  Every government respects the will of all the other regions governments regardless of vote.

Some keys points to keep in mind.  No matter the outcome, except for the very top of Syrian regime which may stay or go, the rest has to stay for the foreseeable future. Greater success depends upon that.  Also the Syrian military has to stay with perhaps a few off the top. Again this should not even be debated.   Also Russia has to stay.  This is also true of all other governments and militarises in countries or regions voting as well.

Making it a  Hashemite Kingdom for continuity sake and stability at the top is key for success.  Many have already voted for Jordan with their feet in fleeing from other countries.   To those countries saying yes to unification perhaps the King assigns interim government while constitution and government is formed.   If Assad wins Syriaq wide vote to be PM he stays.  If he looses he is gone.  Any country voting yes has their military immediately transferred to the control of the Kingdom.

Kurds get to keep Autonomous Region designation with perhaps a few other governorates added.  Druze and Alawites perhaps Autonomous Regions as well but only one area each and each must be entirely contiguous.  Everyone else is in the big tent.

All current militia's, armed rebels etc, no matter what country go to their respective corners to await vote and  chance to build government.  Any person not a citizen of countries, territories involved in merger/government talks to leave the area.  If not Syrian, Jordanian, Iraq forces to escort them out.    Otherwise cease fire until unification vote and beyond.

Besides Russia and perhaps China talking to Iran everyone else can just stand by and see what happens.

There is a lot of regional strife in virtually all these respective countries and regions that can address solutions a lot more effectively and long term united than divided.  Also the economy of all has a much better chance to blossom and grow united as one.

It is true it should be Syria that decides its future.  But the real Syria.  Greater Syria.  Or Syriaq.  That country  should have been there all along.

posted as a comment to Al Monitor May 3, 2013

A peace proposal with Jordan as the keystone to the path to peace for the region with a 12 point list of ideas guiding the proposal. 

1. Recognition that the key to peace in the region is not division of established nation states and religious groups but instead unification. This includes Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, the Palestinian Territories and logically the Sinai. 

2. Recognition that the Hashemite Kingdom is indeed geographically and historically central to the long term unity of the region.

3. Recognition that for every current nation state in the region there are at least two, if not more, religious and ethnic groups who have shared and called that respective region their home for centuries. 

4. Recognition that for centuries the people of this region considered themselves part of one great whole and lived in relative harmony with their neighbors. 

5. Recognition that while in some nation states one or more ethnic and/or religious groups hold dominate power their fellow ethnic and/or religious contemporaries in other nation states are in peril of great physical danger in the current and/or coming time frame depending upon various outcome scenarios. 

6. Recognition that as past, current and future events have and will unfold it is likely that even greater numbers of refugees and diaspora of an unprecedented scale will be displaced unless solutions are found soon. 

7. Recognition that even those citizens not forced to move have and will continue to experience extreme hardship, fear for the future and the waste of what could have been a more productive and happy existence. 

8. Recognition that if a peaceful solutions to events throughout the region are not found soon the numbers of foreign citizens of nations not directly involved will increase in number joining the armed conflict. 

9. Recognition that in the case of Iraq, the wholesale removal of thousands upon thousands of members of the army, government and other civil jobs upon the fall of the Baath regime was a grave error in judgement and cost the lives of literally tens of thousands of Iraqi citizens.   Iraq has never recovered from such a blunder.  

10. Recognition that whatever the outcome in Syria to repeat the errors expressed in #9 would be a tremendous error. 

11. Recognition that the key to peace is to call upon all those involved to reach for a higher purpose and description of a national citizen.  Asabiyya if you will.  

12. There is no time like today. 

I propose the creation of the Hashemite Kingdom of Syriaq created by the unification of Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, the Palestinian Territories and hopefully the transfer of sovereignty of the Sinai from Egypt to the Kingdom.

****While at first thought it seems as if this is the creation of a long held dream of a Greater Syria, I am of a mind that it is actually the creation of the long held dream of a Greater Palestinian Homeland. The vast majority of people in each of the nations of Syriaq would, I propose, agree that to join in a Greater Palestine over and above any other factor. Even the upper echelons of the Syrian government would be hard pressed to be perceived as standing in the way of the long held dream of a Greater Syria or Palestine.   The retention of the Hashemite dynasty is primarily based upon historical recognition of the dynasty and its relationship and guardianship of religious sites throughout history. The dynasty would also allow for an anchor upon which to create a new nation, constitution and sense of unified citizenship. Finally the Kingdom is again the keystone to a unified and contiguous Greater Palestine. Thus too is the hope that Egypt will see this concept and consider the transfer of the Sinai to Syriaq. The final reason to hope for the transfer of sovereignty of the Sinai to Syriaq is that much of the industry in the way of transport such as oil transport being positioned in Aqaba might be moved further west to avoid ecological damage to the pristine Gulf of Aqaba****

I propose that it be a constitutional monarchy with a King as head of state, a bicameral legislature with a Prime Minister as head of government and independent judiciary. 

****A bicameral legislature would hopefully allow for a greater balance of power between various religious and ethic groups in two separate but equal legislative bodies. Other than the 2 chambers proposal the legal framework that would allow so many diverse and wide ranging peoples to live in unity would indeed be created by those who under which such laws they would live.****

I propose that the Royal and Legislative capital be Amman. I propose that the highest court of the Judicial branch be established in Al Quds. 

****The proposal of Amman as the capital is both a compromise for not choosing either Baghdad, Damascus, Aleppo, Beirut or Al Quds as the primary capital and the recognition that, as the capital of a country of some 70 million people, the economic foundation to the entire Amman region because of being  the capital would replace years of having to rely on economic aid. Being the capital would require thousands of permanent jobs across the spectrum of talents for such a city. Amman, while also currently the home of the Hashemite dynasty, already has much of the infrastructure in place and is currently home to thousands upon thousands of diaspora from other nations. Amman has become the center of unified cause without perhaps truly realizing what a valuable mindset has already been developing. One of acceptance and diversity. There is perhaps not a single minority in what would be Syriaq who does not feel already welcome in Amman.    While many may press for Al Quds to be the unified capital, I believe the factors of relative size and location make this unreasonable. Perhaps as a capital for a few millions of people, but not for a capital of a some 70+ million and growing population I do however believe that for Al Quds to be the Judicial capital is both historically symbolic and quite feasible relative to size and space needed. 

One must also recognize that in a country such as Syriaq, with a common currency, markets, commercial laws, resources and talents the cities of Baghdad, Damascus, Aleppo, Hewler and Beirut would each individually be great economic, cultural, educational and religious centers in their own rights without being a national capital. ****

I propose keeping the current governorates or equivalent with perhaps additions that were being contemplated before unification. Thus between 59 and 65 governorates. 

****I would hope that there is a great deal of governmental authority given to the governorate level. I also believe that it is imperative that the Kurdish Autonomous Region not only continue but perhaps be expanded to areas of Kurdish majority. I would, however not encourage other minorities to receive such autonomy but rather find that the level of authority reserved for the various governorates to be adequate. I would however propose that perhaps the Golan Heights be agreed to by both Israel and Syriaq to be a Druze Autonomous Zone.****

I propose that while encouraging the various foreign citizens who have come to the region to participate in the civil unrest will accept the concept of the Kingdom of Syriaq and return home it is my belief that it would be a very long term grave mistake to ask the Russians to leave. Indeed I would encourage perhaps an even greater presence. 

The Kingdom of Syriaq, just by its much larger size and geography will need a small but capable defense force. This will require an army, air force, navy and some sort of coastal defense force for which the Russians could provide valuable assistance. As they are already there and would provide valuable assistance in the establishment of the Kingdom I would again highly recommend that they be encouraged to stay. 

If the Kingdom is to also grow and thrive in the early first years the Syrian forces below the very upper echelons of power will be needed to be the core for an effective force. It is my belief that it would be a great mistake, no matter the outcome, to seek retaliation beyond the very highest members of the Syrian forces. To deploy many of these forces throughout the entire Kingdom of Syriaq, in use for training and border patrol should not be overlooked.

Thus too many civil servants, armed forces as well as technocrats will be needed to be transferred to other parts of the Syriaq nation as needed to rebuild the entire nation.   Many regions of what would become Syriaq would perhaps receive, for the first time, serious attention and development from the national government.  Regions such as the Litani Valley or central Syriaq.  

This proposal is but a very broad outline of one such option for the region, although one in which I believe is the best possible solution to bring the entire region to a more peaceful and prosperous course. 

What this idea is missing is both debate and leadership within the countries involved. The idea does ask that each and every ethnic and religious group cede some current political or religious power within their current nation state in order to protect, defend and join with their fellow citizens in neighboring nations to create a much larger common good. 

Ibn Khaldun called it Asabiyya.  Perhaps it is not too late to begin finding a new Asabiyya for peace to finally come to the region.  Today is a good day to start.