For decades, the government of President Bashar al-Assad has protected Christian interests by enforcing its strictly secular program and by curbing the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood. In recent years, Assad has visited the town of Maaloula and other Christian communities to pray and pass on messages of goodwill. At Christmas, he addresses Syria’s Christians, carrying similar tidings. Assad is himself from the minority Alawite sect, a branch of Shia Islam, and many Christians feel they can relate to him.
Christians, who make up about 10 percent of Syria’s population, have largely stayed out of the anti-government protests, fearing what change could bring. Many are wealthy and could have much to lose if the uprising succeeds. Christians also occupy a disproportionately high percentage of senior positions within the government and tend to work in the educated professions as doctors, dentists and engineers.
As a minority, the Christians have real fears of the majority Sunnis oppressing them. The Assad regime offered protection and prosperity in exchange for Christian support of his own minority Alawite regime. This is a common approach of any minority (or colonial) government--reach out to oppressed minorities to control the majority.
Can the Christians be nimble enough to switch sides in time to avoid retaliation (assuming Assad falls)? Or must the Christians rely on the international community to protect them from a majority enraged at their support for Assad. Focusing majority anger on a hated minority is also tried and true.
However, while Sunni Arabs are a majority, with Alawites, Christians, and Kurds a substantial minority, could a newly empowered Sunni majority afford to go after this minority? The example of Iraq's Baathists resisting so bloodily after their defeat for years may deter such a revenge campaign in favor of reconciliation.
Assuming Syria's Baathists won't want to wage resistance to regain power regardless of any hypothetical magnanimity of the new government.
