So I think my first bet on the Assad regime is looking pretty safe. For those of you coming late, a year ago I bet that Syrian dictator Bashir Assad would still be in power one year later — that is, at 5:00pm EST on August 31, 2012. John Quiggin of Crooked Timber took the other side. The loser will pay $50 to a charity of the winner’s choice.
A quick glance at the calendar will show that I haven’t won this yet. In theory, the rebels could storm the presidential palace tomorrow. Or Assad could get on a flight to Moscow next Tuesday bound for a long quiet retirement in a beachside villa outside of Uglegorsk. But I don’t think it’s very likely. Assad has some problems! But he’s probably not going to fall in the next 18 days.
Close followers of this blog may recall that back in April, I challenged John to a second bet: viz., that Assad would continue in office for another six months beyond August 31. He accepted. So it’s entirely possible that I could win this bet, but lose the second one. These things happen; let’s see how it goes.
Meanwhile, two things. First, you may recall that this bet arose out of a more general discussion on the topic of dictators and their place in the world of the early 21st century. I’m mulling over a “one year later” post on this topic. Comments and suggestions are welcome! Second, I have to think about what charity I’d like John to pay his $50 towards. Suggestions on this are most definitely welcome. (No, I’m not going to ask him to contribute $50 to the Scaife Foundation. Play nice.)
It's certainly looking like a win for you this time around, but I'm pretty confident I won't have to pay up twice. On the bigger issue, this looks interesting
http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2012/1110/cu2.htm
Posted by: John Quiggin | August 14, 2012 at 06:11 PM
I think you two need to define "in power." As you know from earlier posts, I would bet on Assad will in February control an organized military force that claims to represent the Syrian state and enjoys at least some international recognition.
But is that the same thing as "in power"? John?
Posted by: Noel Maurer | August 14, 2012 at 06:15 PM
I agree -- we probably do need to define it.
If Syria next March has turned into Greater Lebanon, and Assad is just one warlord among several, then I would call that a draw.
A nicer question is, what if Assad is a warlord, but he's the most powerful warlord? If he's able to defeat any single foe, and assert his regime's authority in any given area if he really wants to, but not able to defeat them all and regain control of the country?
Doug M.
Posted by: Doug M. | August 15, 2012 at 11:16 AM
John Quiggin, sir! You there?
Posted by: Noel Maurer | August 16, 2012 at 04:58 PM