Exclusive interviews | What is the fate of appeals calling for re-management of international dialogue about Syria?
Since the armament of the Syrian uprising by internal and external powers, Syria has experienced various attempts for reaching a settlement serving the Syrian people’s interests and meeting their demands. However, the various foreign agendas working against Syria and the Syrians, who are seeking for achieving social justice, regaining dignity and putting an end to the poverty, have impeded creating a clear vision and reaching consensus which may put an end to that protracted war.
The foreign and regional intervention in Syria’s civil war has hindered all efforts by the Syrians to restore their homeland which has been seized and whose sovereignty has been underestimated under ideological objectives.
Recently, the UN Special Envoy for Syria Geir Pedersen has called for the need to manage an international dialogue about Syria, especially after all previous courses, including Astana course which set a constitutional committee between the Syrian regime and the opposition to draft a new constitution, failed. Pedersen’s suggestions has been related to management of a dialogue for discussing concrete steps that should be exchange, accurate, achievable and workable and the way of implementing these steps.
Pedersen has noticed some indicators that support his initiative which the opposition see fruitless, even before it is launched, in light of the failure of the previous efforts.
Then, what is the fate of the appeals calling for re-management of an international dialogue about Syria, despite the failure of the previous courses?
In an interview with the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, the Secretary General of the Democratic Arab Socialist Union, Ahmed al-Asrawi, commented “let’s start from a basic rule, there are no major friends for the Syrian people, as the international relations are based on mutual economic and political interest. Accordingly, the international dialogue on sharing interests in Syria has priority over the Syrian people’s vision of democratic change, political transfer and the need to achieve the Syrian’s rightful demands.”
Al-Asrawi added “the main reason behind the failure of the political settlement in Syria is the Syrian regime’s obstinacy to start a workable and actual political process with its four pillars:
- The transitional governing body which secures a safe and neutral environment.
- The constitutional process which comes with a modern constitution that achieves social justice and equality.
- The free and fair elections which all Syrians can take part in, no matter the area they are living in.
- The security and countering terrorism, including the arbitrary arrests.
I am so sorry to say that the speech of the UN Special Envoy for Syria is right enough, as all Syrians have actually become the weakest party for deciding their country’s fate at a time when the legitimacy of any political regime is not gained by any party but the people.”
The representative of Syria Democratic Council (SDC), Mrs. Senam Mohamed, told SOHR “there is no doubt that the settlement in Syria has come down to the international powers. The Autonomous Administration has pointed out to that matter many times, as the internal settlement is no longer enough to get the country recovered in light of the Turkish occupation and the presence and intervention of other powers such as Iran and its proxy militias. Syria conflict has become a conflict among major powers to share considerable interests, and this conflict will never come to an end, unless a consensus is reached by these powers whether through international dialogue or an agreement. However, the international powers’ consensus will not be enough, as the solution of the Syria’s crisis depends mainly on reaching an internal consensus and volition of the international settlement together. If a solution was drafted without the Syrians, the international powers’ consensus will not be able to provide the needed momentum for reaching a workable settlement.”
“The Syrian regime wants this country to return to ancient eras, and this is not logical, as Syria’s interest lies in giving a chance for a non-conditional dialogue in order to reach a formula of a solution leading to stability and it should be based on freedom, democracy, citizenship for all Syrian people, political partnership and the unity of the Syrian geography,” said Mrs. Mohamed.
Mrs. Senam also commented on the statement by King of Jordan Abdullah II bin al-Hussein, when he said that al-Assad has a legitimacy and the regime is remaining. The representative of SDC said “the King of Jordan has not mentioned an unfamiliar or a shocking matter, the Syrian crisis has been already become a heavy burden for all and there is a great need for an urgent solution. The international community can not pay the costs of the overall situation in the Middle East any more, then, a solution for the Syrian crisis is needed for settling all files of conflict in the Middle East.”
On the other hand, the journalist and leader in the Syrian Democratic Left Party, Zaki Droubi, told SOHR “the international dialogue is often a cover for understandings that have been already reached among the participating parties with the aim to achieve two objectives, including the display of the understandings that meet the interests of these parties. On many occasions, some parties engaged in managing the crisis call for such conferences, so that they make sure that their interests with the major actors will not be overlooked. For example, the US administration has not announced that it reached understandings with the Russians regarding the future of Syria at a time when the Russians has also mentioned nothing about reaching such understandings with USA. However, there are several statements by the US administration which confirm that it still imposes sanctions on the Syrian regime until it changes its behaviour. Also, the US administration stressed that this matter is related to procedures of demonstrating good faith towards the four baskets, as well as engaging in a political process with the opposition which leads to a political transition.”
Mr. Zaki added “Israel is the only body stating from time to time that it regrets for supporting al-Assad, but it is to late and the Syrian regime cannot be toppled after the intervention of the Russians. On the other hand, the Arab regime, which was too close to adopt new rules of conflict in its war against the Arab people, including adopting the illegality of the free killing before cameras, has revoked these rules and now it wants to put and end to the international controversy regarding the legitimacy of the free killing and the use of chemical weapons against civilians. Moreover, it follows the policy of questioning the narration of the Arab Spring and the Syrian Revolution, as it learned that making doubt arounf its crimes is enough to rehabilitate it to commit new massacres.”
“The Arab regime can not accept the Syrian regime’s appeal to return to the Arab League, not only for the fact that the US administration will not allow thing to happen, but also the Arab regime does not want to be a partner the documented crimes. The Arab regime prefers that the Syrian regime is rehabilitated internationally before it returns to the Arab regime.
Today, the Russians are working on rapid rehabilitation at military and political levels in light of understandings with Israel’s new government, according which the Syrian regime will give up the Syrian Golan in return for the Russian cooperation for destroying all material evidences that prove the use of mustard gas against civilians. This development coincides with the reactivation of the anti-aircraft and air-defence systems to show the military power of the Syrian regime with the aim to promote a legend innovated by Israel and adopted by the Russian regarding the Syrian regime’s desire to disband all relations with the Iranians and its inability to do that without the help of the surrounding Arab countryside.”
“It seems that the Russians hurry to rehabilitate al-Assad’s regime as they are afraid that Vienna negotiations may lead to a military choice against Iran, which will lead to the defeat of al-Assad when Iran is defeated. Accordingly, Russia will loss its precious investigation in Syria. All actors therefore are seeking for disbanding relations between the Syrian regime and Iran before it is too late. We wait for the outcomes of Vienna negotiations, as there will be there no workable solution regarding the future of Syria before accomplishing these agreement or announcing their failure,” said Zaki Droubi.
It seems that Pedersen’s statement about managing an international dialogue on Syria is the most important matter at that time, although the international dialogue has not been come to an end. However, it is relied on the international determination and seriousness to reach a settlement and comprehensive solution for this crisis.