Dotting the I’S & Crossing the T’S
What is happening in Moscow?
Written by Nasser Kandil,
What is going on in Moscow towards the Syrian crisis, is it a dialogue, negotiation, discussion, preparation, test or a path?
Each party is making a description in accordance with the point of view of its consideration towards the events in Moscow and what is going on in Syria, the objectivity involves to be away from the points of views and away from the attitudes and desires, so what is happening in Moscow is firstly a meeting of opposers who stayed outside the coalition, or the coalition has refused to include them in its ranks, together with closed group of members from the coalition that were not members of its main basis, those will try to constitute unified attitudes to form a center of reference for an opposition that can under the sponsorship of Russia, start the discussions with the governmental delegation. May this will be a starting point for a wide long-termed dialogue in Geneva as the Russian involved officials declare, whether through the Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergeg Lavrov or his secretary Mikhail Bogdanov, or what the participants or the Syrian government say. This description will not be objected by the boycotters, as far as they will have negative opinions in answering the question whether this meeting would achieve the result, for which the participants and the sponsors aim, and hoping that its results will be certainly positive.
The objective estimation must base on the equations, that do not associate with the desires, in its forefront, that whatever the political dialogue between the opposition and the government becomes wider, it will not stop the current fighting in Syria which is revolving about two parties; the Syrian army and ISIS and Al Nosrah, it is possible to add small parties that are with ISIS and Al Nosrah, but they are not involved in any dialogue. On the other hand the agreement to hold a dialogue with the opposition in all its formations will not add for the Syrian army against ISIS and Al Nosrah any additional realistic power that will disturb the power balances, because the military and the security value of the dialogue whether it is close or open with a whole opposition or a part of it, is almost zero.
The objective estimation must stem from the international and the regional aspect which was the main motivation for the opposition forces; this has encouraged them to take the military option, and prevented them from entering into a dialogue that leads to a political solution when the popular mood was supporting its attempts for the change and reform, and when the country was ready for any opportunity as long it means the localization of the opposition away from the abroad, through which the country knows that it is preparing a war against it. The international dimension which the opposition followed, and which made it lose the chance of the political solution in the Syrian timing and the respond to its people desires is the same international and regional dimension which the desired task of the opposition ends with it, in order to exhaust the alliance which Syria constitutes the linkage between its parties, and which spread from Iran to Lebanon and Palestine. After four years the balances have turned into equations in which the party which is led by Washington has no longer the illusion or a bet that it can achieve the best, while the worst seems to be approached if the war continues. For that the international war forces and in its forefront Washington have moved towards the political engagement, thus the understanding with Iran was, which nowadays is in its end , and was the talk about a political solution in Syria, the supporting of the dialogue’s initiative of Moscow, the taking about the future of the Syrian president and his role in the political solution in a new American way, moreover the opposition which abandoned its independence and the solution ‘s chances for getting more while it was capable, aiming for something that transcends its abilities through the support of the strong abroad, today it is convinced with the little and has obeyed the task which the abroad has drawn for it, but now it is feeble and weak, and it becomes just only temporary political informative presence.
The objective estimation stems also from that the war against Syria which becomes in a stage a pure American war in which the international, regional, and local allies are taking roles and the taboo is justified, has brought the terrorism forces to Syria till they strengthen and become savage, with a wider influence, and most powerful in the areas which were outside of the domination of the Syrian country under the flag of the opposition and its supporters. This terrorism becomes dangerous, and its threat is transcending the borders of Syria, so this involves making it a Western priority and an American one in particular, in addition this involves mobilizing the opportunities of global war against it, but this will not happen with wading another international war against Syria, since it was proven the failure in it despite the cooperation with this terrorism itself, so how the two wars will take place, so this means stopping one of them for the sake of the other. The opposition is a part of an alliance in which it puts itself by a decision of stopping here and joining there, while Moscow is just only the gate.
In addition, the objective estimation has to stem from that a military and a popular change is going on in Syria for two years, its title is the transition of the initiative from the war’s alliance to the control of the Syrian country. The changes in the war field on the one hand and the presidential elections on the other hand reveal that in the military and the popular environment where it is not affected of the atoning thinking of Al-Qaeda and its variations, the imbalance between the country and its opponents became of ninety to ten percent, and those opponents who were outside the organizations of Al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood have no longer the bet’s chances of reserving a place or a rank through the ballot boxes, if the elections have been held according to clear high international standards, it means reserving a place of this opposition into the politics will not be legal through a settlement that is presented to the abroad which wants to announce the end of the war under the same plea of hiding when it announced the war, in return it will gain the end of service indemnity and a reward represented by ministerial seats within a coalition government.
Here Moscow is opening a path neither wading a test nor running a dialogue, this path has the American, Russian, Syrian, and Iranian agreement , and is observed accurately in detail to achieve its goals by normalizing the relationship between Syria that is led by the President Bashar Al-Assad and the opponent war countries. This normalizing is emerged from classifying the opposition components which are good for this task from those which are not such as the Muslim Brotherhood and the various names of Al-Qaeda. Through this cumulative classification, we can reach to the justification of reconciliations and Syrian understandings in a way that permits the Arabs who were part of the war to go into the reconciliations, after Washington is handling their forming according to its time and followed by the West, while Washington is adapting them. Turkey which is observing angrily has to decide in the suitable time either to go on with the rest or to be out of the flock with its opponents. The way is starting by making a center of snow ball, while the criterion of the success or failure is not the attitude of Turkey or the Arabs of the war, it is according the designed arrangement ( the follower not the former), this criterion is not the decision of the coalition whether to participate or not, the task of the Meeting of Moscow is to disunite the coalition not to preserve its unity, the duty is to try to attract those who are outside the organization of the Muslim Brotherhood who are forming the half of the coalition, it means fifty percent of its members, while the rest of it are in the centre of targeting.
One third of the success in ( Moscow one ) is the participation of the armed opposition which only fights ISIS and Al Nosrah, and which represents the popular Kurdish protection committees which have not the coincident chances of winning against ISIS with the opening of Moscow meeting, its second-third is the participation of the interior opposition which is headed by the National Coordination Body by a consensus decision, accompanied by opposing formations that are accused of their relationship with the government in a way or another, while the last third of success is the penetrating of the coalition body by attracting a participation from the ranks of fifty figures who are not affiliated to the Muslim Brotherhood. Here it is clear that the participation of five of fifty of the coalition means a success in the penetration which will become wider and grower with the calm engagement from one time to another among the remained of fifty members, and so on towards summer, where there will be a new government in which the opponents will participate after they will become officially the opposition, along with the involved forces of the recent government under the presidency of the President Bashar Al-Assad and under the titles of the war against terrorism and the free competitive parliamentary election in the year 2016.
The Meeting of Moscow has succeeded in constituting the basis; the path has started, with a success’s rate of approximately fifty seven percent, this degree in the exams means excellent.
Translated by Lina Shehadeh,
2015-01-29 | عدد القراءات 3233
