"Don't expect anything from
Geneva II. Neither Geneva II, not Geneva III nor Geneva X will solve the Syrian
crisis. The solution has begun and will continue through the military triumph
of the state."…….. Ali Haidar (Syria's National
Reconciliation Minister)
From the
frenzy immersions of the wave of the Arab Spring that swept across the Middle
East in 2011, one nation where the simmering dregs of the revolution will not
dry quickly is Syria.
From
pockets of mild solidarity Arab Spring protest in 2011, the Syrian situation
fast spiralled into a full blown irreconcilable civil war with the belligerents
serving as proxy armies for regional powers from the Islamic Shia and Sunni
divide in Iran and Saudi Arabia.
Starting
from political agitations, the Syrian conflict also smouldered along its major
sectarian religious divide; thus making any peace settlement difficult as both
parties to the conflict label the enemy as the infidels. Barring direct
intervention from foreign powers across the West East divide, the Syrian
situation continues to plunge to a hopeless abyss carnaging over 150,000
casualties and dispersing over 4 million of its citizens as refugees while
leaving the once tranquil settlements of Homs, Aleppo, Deraa, Maloula as
battlefield ruins.
 |
| Devasted Aleppo, the Industrial hub of Syria |
After defying all appeasement avenues
despite agreements and moves to dismantle Syria’s Chemical weapons arsenal, the
US, UN and Russia agreed to bring the warring sides to Geneva to talk peace. |
John Kerry (US), Lakhdar Brahimi and Sergei Lavrov (Russia) at the opening of the Geneva II Conference in January 2014 |
In the
words of Ban ki Moon, he says it would be "unforgivable
not to seize this opportunity" that has left more than 100,000
people dead and driven 9.5 million from their homes. And so for the first time
during the Syrian conflict, Russia and the US had a common understanding to
bring the warring parties to the negotiation table in what is to be known as Geneva II peace
talks which was especially made urgent after the chemical attack in Ghouta on
21st August 2013.
As party
to the Conflict, the Syrian government of Bashir Al Assad has to negotiate with
the Syrian Opposition to achieve a tangible peace settlement for Syria. For the
case of the Syrian opposition, there exists a wide gulf between the political
and armed opposition although both parties are united in their desire to
achieve a post Assad Syria. Compounding the position of the Syrian opposition
is the divergent intentions of the armed opposition who are at best serving the
interest by proxy of regional powers while the political opposition do not in
effect have control over the armed opposition.
Coming to
Geneva to negotiate may be a plausible attempt at achieving peace, and considering
the devastatory depth of the Syrian conflict, necessary concessions must be
made by the warring parties.
The government of Assad has to stay
put at least for the short term future.
There cant be a successful military
end to the conflict
Acknowledging
this fact, a rebuilding phase can then be inaugurated via a transition
government. Things may then begin to fall into place and twill be easy to rein
down the extremists.
For all
the care of the cause of the warring parties, the concern should shift from
fluidic gains on the battle field to the welfare of Syria and her citizens. For
all the world cares for, the Syrian conflict is becoming a pain in the neck for
her much smaller neighbours in Lebanon and Jordan where the Syrian refugee
crises is drowning the population of the host countries. With two rounds of the
Geneva II talks ended, the hopes and fate of the Syrian people lies on a yet to
be decided third round--- and will all parties learn from the past deadlocks?
The only good thing is that the talks are in place. Hoping it does spring an
eternal hope to end the stodgy nature of the Syrian conflict.
‘The Geneva process is destined to remain stagnant unless its
patrons adapt to the realities on the ground and reframe what constitutes core
political issues and points of negotiation. The current realities suggest that
the solution of the battlefield is preferred to that of the negotiating table.
Until this changes, the Geneva negotiations will remain political theatre’……Samer N Abboud (Assistant Professor of
International Studies at Arcadia University, Pennsylvania.)
