Daniel Byman and Kenneth M. Pollack
154 μ¢¤³£ ¬μμ¬
principal grievance o the Venezuelan opposition, and o the United
States, has become Maduro himself, and should he Änd a comfort-
able exile on a Caribbean island, it would be far easier to resolve the
conÁict. Likewise, in years past, both the Iranians and the Russians
at times Áoated to the United States the idea that they were willing
to sacriÄce Assad as long as their own interests—and those o the
Alawites—were protected. I Assad had found himsel on the wrong
end o an assassin’s knife or under an enforced vacation during a visit
to Tehran, a new leader might have proved willing to make more
concessions to the opposition and lay the groundwork for a negoti-
ated peace. Yet both leaders’ continued hold on power, in the face o
both international and domestic pressure to go, has locked their
countries into needless agony.
Some might sco at this argument, contending that vast imper-
sonal forces—the ruthless domestic politics in a country roiled by
civil war and a regime’s inherent desire to survive—make it unimag-
inable that any leader in such a position would ever step down. Yet it
is worth remembering that South African President F. W. de Klerk
did just that. De Klerk had plenty o incentives to Äght for apartheid to
remain in power, just as his predecessors did. Indeed, when de Klerk
assumed power, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, an antiapartheid activ-
ist, said that the leadership change was “just musical chairs.” I de
Klerk had remained committed to apartheid, the most likely out-
come would have been South Africa’s descent into even greater racial
violence or quite possibly an all-out civil war, not much dierent
from what is happening in Syria and Venezuela today. Yet de Klerk
did the opposite, dismantling apartheid, allowing free elections in
1994, and yielding power when he lost. Despite a background that
suggested he would Äght to preserve the apartheid system, he recog-
nized both the need to avert civil war in South Africa and the oppor-
tunity to bring his country into the ranks o civilized nations.THE OPPORTUNISTS
Fortune favors the bold, and some leaders are skilled at seizing oppor-
tunities as they arise. Russian President Vladimir Putin exempliÄes
how a wily leader can parlay a relatively weak position into a much
stronger one. In 1999, Putin replaced Sergei Stepashin as Russia’s
prime minister, becoming the Äfth person to occupy the post in two
years. Few expected this creature o the Russian system to shake things