clear

Creating new perspectives since 2009

The Geneva trap

January 28, 2016 at 11:46 am

The Russians and Americans are keen to stick to specific “principles” for the management of the Syrian war; at least this is what President Vladimir Putin has tried hard to suggest. The US has also made great efforts to dispel the impression of a Russian “stick” which some have claimed US Secretary of State John Kerry waved at the Syrian opposition in Riyadh.

There is nothing new in Putin’s defence of the “legitimate authority” in Damascus, and it is not altered by Washington’s talk of President Bashar Al-Assad losing his “legitimacy”. If the Russia-Turkey clash on the eve of the Geneva talks is a reflection of the continued dispute between Moscow and Ankara, along with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s defence of the Syrian Kurdish Democratic Union Party’s participation in the talks, then it is odd that the Kremlin continues to insist that it does not interfere in Syria’s political affairs.

Another dark irony in the Syrian catastrophe is that Lavrov challenged anyone to find evidence of Russian fighter jets killing civilians during its scorched earth raids. The jets bomb residential buildings, but the minister’s logic suggests that the missiles must be able to distinguish between Daesh fighters and women and children as it is the latter who are found in the rubble.

Lavrov’s objective was to create a new obstacle for the opposition’s Supreme Negotiations Committee just hours before it made its decision about going to Geneva. At the same time, the minister sent another message that contained an implicit threat: Moscow wants a final settlement. This means that if the negotiations are conducted only with those who are present, the Russians can accuse the committee of isolating itself and refusing to find a solution for the five-year conflict. The Russians can also present faces who have been accused openly of having links to the Syrian regime as the “legitimate representatives” of the opposition, who will join the regime in forming a national unity government.

The minefield that the committee is facing neither starts nor ends with the representation of the Democratic Union Party or with the acceptance of negotiations in light of the regime’s siege of cities and the raids of which the Russians are boasting, without a ceasefire first. No matter what Washington or Kerry do, the greatest suspicion that many opposition factions have is that the Russian-American agreement in Zurich on the eve of Kerry’s trip to Riyadh reinforces their concern regarding the possibility of dragging the negotiations committee into a trap in Geneva. This would mean that the ceiling for outcomes would be co-existance with Al-Assad’s regime in a “unity government”, the postponement of a decision about the president’s fate and no reform to be implemented without his approval.

Could you make it as a refugee?

Since January 2015, over 1 million people have arrived in Europe by sea and land
Take the journey from Syria to Europe and see if you’d survive

Following the explanation from US special envoy to Syria Michael Ratni of what happened during the meeting between Kerry, the Supreme Negotiations Committee and de facto chief negotiator Riyad HijabIt, it may be an exaggeration to accuse the secretary of state of “conspiring” with Lavrov, who is aware of what is “fair” and what is “unfair” in the formation of the committee’s delegation to Geneva. Although Kerry reassured the opposition that it will still be supported, even if the negotiations fail, a question arises about Washington’s failure to provide any guarantee to those who were supported to prepare for the fully-mandated transitional ruling committee. Hence, the fate of Al-Assad has become a “Syrian affair”, while the elimination of “terrorism” from Syria has become Russia’s job, even if dozens of civilian leaders fighting the regime are killed during Moscow’s air raids.

Hence, the Russian-American agreement in Zurich includes Al-Assad’s fate, and it is worth noting that Moscow has not promised him asylum, nor has it been requested. If the Syrians have fought for five years, sacrificed 250,000 people and seen millions more displaced, how can the Geneva III conference, and whatever is to come after it, succeed after 6 months, while the main enemy remains in his position thanks to Putin’s “stick” and bombs? How many more Syrians will be killed before the master of the Kremlin is reassured of his victory over Daesh from Syria to Afghanistan and Georgia?

Kerry seems to be exhausted by his work on the Iranian nuclear agreement, the US-Cuba sanctions deal and Baghdad’s stubbornness, which caused the loss of Mosul in the dead of night. Perhaps he will ask has pal Sergey to show “mercy” to the Syrian opposition after convincing its leadership about the awful alternative to negotiations. The Russian Geneva trap has much more room for the delegations and six months is enough to break any of them.

According to Putin, Moscow still does not interfere in politics, and he is happy with the US intercontinental mandate. The Russian leader is definitely not concerned with Washington’s programme to train the opposition or by Iran’s bitterness after he pulled the carpet from under Tehran’s feet in the Levant.

In the best case scenario in Geneva, the opposition will not, no matter what, be able to pass any clauses unless they are accepted by the Syrian regime, assuming that the opposition surrenders the right to determine the fate of the regime. What kind of negotiations are these intended to be? How many more innocent lives will be lost; how much more destruction will take place in the cities; and how much more fragmentation will happen in the six months set aside for the Geneva trap, while Syria is handed over to another occupier?

Translated from Al Hayat, 27 January, 2016.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.