Looking for political solution in Syria
A flurry of diplomatic activity on Syria has boosted hopes for a political solution to resolve what has become a global and regional challenge. Last week’s announcement in Moscow by US Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov that they have agreed to hold an international peace conference on Syria, as soon as the end of this month, to implement last summer’s joint Geneva communiqué was seen as a breakthrough by two countries with huge influence on players in the Syrian crisis. That plan calls for the Syrian government and fighters to agree on a transitional government leading to elections but does not specify the fate of President Bashar Assad
Syria welcomed what it described as US-Russian rapprochement, but a Foreign Ministry statement stressed that “the credibility of the US position lies in working seriously with its allies to halt the violence and terrorism so as to pave the way for launching the political dialogue.” Previously Damascus had rejected calls for such dialogue by the Arab League and the UN.
A spokesman for the Syrian National Coalition (SNC) responded to the US-Russian agreement by saying any political solution must begin with President Assad leaving power. The coalition will meet in Istanbul next week to finalize its position and elect a new leader.
But is it too late for a political way out of the Syrian conflict, which has claimed more than 70,000 lives and driven more than four million Syrians out of their homes? Certainly the devil is in the details of the agreement.
Supporters of the Syrian regime were quick to state that the agreement was a political victory for Russian President Vladimir Putin. They pointed that the US and its allies have failed to defeat the Syrian president who has managed to “repulse the conspiracy” against his country.
But opponents believe it was the other way around. They say that Russia, and Iran, now realize that it is impossible for government forces to defeat the armed rebellion and that a political solution must be found to preserve the country’s integrity and prevent it from falling in the hands of radical Jihadists. They believe Russia and Iran are now willing to put pressure on President Assad. Just before Kerry and Lavrov’s meeting Iran’s Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi was in the region last week calling for a political settlement to the problem. Jordan too has been calling for a political agreement involving the US and Russia, while Egypt is proposing its own initiative. The biggest challenge to the conference, aside from logistics, will be deciding the fate of President Assad. The Geneva communiqué does not address this issue and soon after Kerry left Moscow for Rome he stated that Assad will have no role in the transitional government. Later Russian officials said they don’t believe the conference can be held before the end of May.
Others denied that the agreement means that Russia has abandoned President Assad.
Chances for success have dwindled after Turkey accused a group with links to Syrian intelligence of carrying out car bombings that killed 46 people in the Turkish border town of Reyhanli on Saturday. It was a reminder that the Syrian conflict could easily spread across borders. Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said: “It is time for the international community to act together against this regime.” Turkey, along with Qatar, has been calling for tough measures to be adopted against Syria including the imposition of a no-fly zone. Both countries are accused by Syria of arming the fighters.
But while diplomatic efforts intensify, the situation on the ground is getting messier. The regime was shaken by two Israeli airstrikes two weeks ago that allegedly hit missiles heading for Hezbollah. Syria vowed to retaliate and recently Iran said that Damascus was adopting new tactics to allow Hezbollah-like resistance against Israel to take place in the occupied Golan Heights. That maybe empty rhetoric, but it underlines the many facets of the Syrian civil war. Hezbollah fighters are reported to be fighting alongside government forces in Al-Qussair south of Homs. The opposition has accused the regime of carrying out massacres against Sunnis in Alawite areas in and around Banias. Turkey accused the regime of ethnic cleansing.
Meanwhile, the fate of Jabhat Al-Nusra, which the West regards as a terrorist organization, will become a major issue in the coming days. It is one of the biggest and most organized groups fighting the regime and it has rejected calls for any dialogue with the government. It is one reason why the West is still debating ways to arm the opposition. Even if the SNC agrees to attend the proposed conference it is certain that it will undergo another episode of internal divisions. It is unlikely that the SNC can impose its will on elements fighting under the banner of the Free Syrian Army (FSA).
While the option of a military intervention in Syria seems remote now, it is still possible that armed intervention will happen if the conference fails.
It is clear that neither the regime nor the fighters are able to end the conflict on the ground. The specter of partition along sectarian lines has never been more real. With so many parties involved in the Syrian quagmire, it will take much more than an international meeting to end the bloodshed.
[email protected]
