Dotting the I’S & Crossing the T’S
Between Al-Ibrahimi & De Mistura : Does the solution like the Lebanese style or the Iraqi one?
Written by Nasser Kandil,
The international envoy of the political solution in Syria Steffan De Mistura was conservative during his meetings with the foreign ministers in the countries of the European Union, while he was talking about his thoughts and suggestions for the solution, he insisted on his formula to stop the conflict in Aleppo as a possible preparation for a political settlement, he saw the dialogues of Moscow as a good beginning on this way, moreover, he indicated to his reservation upon the Syrian objections of the participation of others, he continued the suggestion in an implicit criticism against the insistence of the Syrian country on linking his mission with the issued resolutions of the United Nations, and the International Security Council to combat terrorism, and what it included of a commitment of the neighboring countries of Syria of stopping the smuggling of weapons and the militants. Because he was in front of the inquiries of the European ministries about his ambiguous linking, so he was obliged to clarify two points, firstly, that the partnership with the Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad in the political process is a necessity that cannot be ignored, and his survival is related to the political process either concerning the aspect of the understanding of the parties, or concerning the ballot boxes. Secondly, according to his point of view, the associative solution of Syria has to be inspired by the Lebanese example, remembering that this matter is related to the Syrians on the dialogue table.
The speech of De Mistura revealed the formula through which Washington moves, as he does not talk without the consent of Washington, this is proved through the correspondence in the attitudes towards Moscow’s dialogues between him and the American Secretary of State John Kerry. Generally this matter does not need a proof, because the appointment of an international envoy for such a task with the sensitivity and seriousness of Syria, is impossible to be done without high study and consideration from Washington, which led the war against Syria for four years, it linked many of its considerations with the future of this war, moreover the fate and importance of most of its allies have been linked with this war, and in order to win this war, it has brought the terrorism from all over the world, and now it becomes the main problem for the region and the world, and what its presence and rootedness have imposed of a priority in the region to accelerate the understandings and the settlements, and at its forefront the political solution in Syria.
The reality is in the American pursuit to reach a political solution, that is revealed by the admission of the role of the President Al-Assad who becomes one of the fundamentals of the political solution, according to what has been mentioned in the speech of De Mistura and the direct American speech despite the fastness of its change by a nonsense speech of illegality, and which is usually said in order to placate or appease the allies who are still living the expired old illusions, the same as the long term plans to arm <<the moderate opposition>> about which the American President Barak Obama said, that only the thinking of its presence is mere an illusion or fantasy.
As an opposition of this reality, it is clear that Washington through De Mistura and through the negotiation with Moscow and Tehran wants to present its reality as an abandonment that needs a cost, which is as De Mistura suggested, to remove Damascus its reservations on three things, first, the participation of some figures of the opposition in the dialogue, therefore in the political solution , it is normal that whom Washington is insisting on their participation are not angels, they are just its tools, which it wants to integrate them within the structure of the new Syrian country, as well as its allies, which wants to grant them a big share in the Syrian rule.
Second, the Syrian government has to accept to be lenient in the security solutions, in a way that preserves the presence of the armed groups that dominate on neighborhoods and areas, as De Mistura presented the suggested solution for Aleppo, with the contentment of ceasing the fight, and generalizing the example on the other areas, so we will become in front of a scene of thousands militants that share carrying weapons with the country, so we will need to enroll in the work agenda of the political solution an issue which is called the integration of the militia with the army and the security forces like the Lebanese one , and which De Mistura has intently omitted the details of presenting it . There will be a section called as the Lebanese one the reorganization of the army and the security services, through which Washington will integrate through its different ranks armed agents.
Third, the objection of De Mistura (Washington) regarding the insistence on the Syrian link between the project of ceasing the fight and implementation of the United Nations resolution 2170 and the resolution 2178 which are related with the closure of the borders in front of the weapons and the militants, like the borders of Turkey, Jordan, and the occupied Golan, it means to keep the supply lines of men and weapons at the armed groups, and grant them various regional sponsorships like Saudi Arabia across Jordan, Turkey and Israel, in order to have their own army which is committed to ceasing fire, and waiting for occupying a planned rank within the Syrian army and the security services, which they suggested that it will be an outcome of a political solution, and according to Washington’s view which De Mastura hided it. So they will continue pushing opponents that represent the American, French, Turkish, Saudi, and Israeli abroad within the political structure of the government accompanied with the anticipated penetration within the army and the Syria security services for those who carry the weapons, and who are condemned of allegiance to the same references of that abroad.
This American consideration of a political solution involves the admission and the acceptance of the role of the President Al- Assad in the political solution, and looking forward trapping the government, army ,and the security services as a result of the political solution, and therefore trying to remove the Syrian opposition which will prevent that trapping. This needs a reply for a question, how to ensure the continuation conditions if the structural amendments in the constitution of the Syrian country have been linked with the end of the transitional stage which will not last more than the deadline of the parliamentary elections approximately after a year, so everything will be due to the ballot boxes which America knows that its groups and the groups of its allies have not the choice of getting it, so this will prevent the effect on the sovereign decision of the Syrian country, whatever the parliamentary criteria were strict, transparent and matching the most accurate international criteria. So the geniuses of Washington will be away from an understanding of the political solution and this involves the Lebanese example. Washington, De Mistura, and Al Akhdar Al-Ibrahimi feel ashamed to say like the Iraqi example; it means the sharing of the presidencies on a sectarian basis, or as De Mistura’s description the amazing mosaic in Lebanon. Although he knows that Lebanon is at the brink of a permanent volcano, but he fears of mentioning Iraq in order not to remind of the daily spilled blood in its stresses, but the difference of the civil strife is in the consequences of this American vision, which Al Akhdar Al-Ibrahimi has made it as he has made in Lebanon, and the same as he has made and publically presented in Syria, and which the American Secretary of State John Kerry has announced in Doha Conference on 30th of June, 2013 which is known as (( Friends of Syria )) when he called to restore the military balance after Al Quoseir war as a condition to return to the political dialogue, he said that the ideal solution is that the inferiority will accept to abandon the presidency for the sectarian majority after this formula had failed.
The American Secretary of State as well as De Mistura have said let the presidency for the minority like the Lebanese way, but without powers as in Lebanon, however, the authority will be under the control of the Council of Ministers, in which the sects are shared through their regional sponsors, and headed by the representative of the sect which the world and the region are trying to manipulate the characteristic of its representation, so the groups of Washington, Paris, Ankara, Riyadh, and Tel Aviv will have their important share.
The solution which De Mistura has alluded to of four items are a security solution that preserves the weapons for the militias, leaving the borders in bulk, a hypocritical political representation on the dialog meeting, and the project of building a country on sectarian basis which according to the Syrians equivalent to a full war, where they are ready to go in for a whole century. Here the American acceptance of the fact of the survival of the President Al-Assad is not an abandonment of them, but just an admission of the failure. It is logical that there will not be a political solution that does not adhere these items. The identity of Syria is a powerful central civil and secular country that has essential constants, and there is no one who can get the needed popular majority in the ballot boxes, because it changes as a constitutional fact whatever were the conditions, moreover De Mistura is no longer useful as well as Al-Ibarahim, despite the difference between the politeness of the former and the rudeness of the later.
De Misutra has well done by his awareness that the matter is decided just only by the Syrians in the dialogues without foreign intervention, however, it is good if he assimilates that the survival of the President Al-Assad is a matter resolved by the Syrians, and it is not a favor, and if he interested in carrying out the international resolutions rather than postponing them, furthermore, it is good if he assimilates that the new Syrian country will not merge militarily, except by one army which is the Syrian army, and through magnitudes determined by the Syrian people in the ballot boxes constitutionally and politically.
Translated by Lina Shehadeh
2015-02-07 | عدد القراءات 1947
