It makes sense to assume that the American administration strongly believes that Russia is not only a key player in Syria but also is one that could be used to help the transitional political solution take off. President Barack Obama — who made it perfectly clear that his country will not get involved militarily in the Syrian crisis — seeks the help of Russia to reach an acceptable deal on Syria.
On the surface, it seems that an agreement between Russia and the United States can work. Even Russian President Vladimir Putin believes that for any solution to hold, it needs the backing of the United States. At the start of the latest meeting with US Secretary of State John Kerry, President Putin said, “We are aware that the groundwork we have on Syria could only have been possible thanks to the supreme political leadership of the United States, specifically the position of President Obama.”
Putin pins hope on the cooperation with the United States to get a deal that keep Russia’s interest intact in that war-torn country.
That being said, one cannot ignore the fact that Washington and Moscow are still divided over the future of Syrian President Bashar Assad. While President Obama has long held that Bashar Assad’s departure is a must for any future sustainable political solution in Syria, his Russian counterpart strongly believes that Assad should be part of the solution. There is no indication that both sides have reached an agreement on this particular sticking point. Nevertheless, Washington and Moscow have decided to put aside these differences with the purpose to reach a final deal on Syria.
The latest round of the American-Russian meeting came as a special UN envoy Steffan de Mistura announced the end of the first round of talks, which in fact sought to achieve the end of violence and the move toward a political transition. In Geneva, De Mistura announced a list of 12 principals on which the Syrian government’s representatives and the opposition agreed. Those principles included the commitment to Syria’s territorial integrity and unity, rebuilding a strong and unified national army, and a democratic, nonsectarian state based on citizenship and political pluralism.
While the 12 principles seem to be a good start for political transition, it remains to be seen whether Assad will accept to cooperate in a process that will lead to his eventual departure. The Syrian opposition groups understand this logic perfectly. As they left the first round of peace talks in Geneva, they warned that unless Putin exerts influence on Assad there would be no hope of genuine progress.
On more than one occasion, the Syria opposition has vented its frustration at the lack of international support for a proper political transition in Syria. Russia’s role to prop up Bashar Assad can only make the regime more intransigent. While resenting Russia’s role and tactics, the Syrian opposition understand that Putin’s role is critical in helping get rid of Assad. For the opposition, Putin has become the lead powerbroker in Syria.
Bassma Kadmani, a spokeswoman for the High Negotiation Committee (HNC) hoped that Vladimir Putin would exert pressure on Assad. She warned that if the April 9 talks planned in Geneva failed to focus on the issue of political transition, the cease-fire would collapse.
She added, “This is a precious, unique moment and we hope Russia will seize this moment and use its leverage to ensure that the international consensus is implemented.”
A quick look at the documents provided by the opposition reveals that the opposition is aware of the need to rebuild the country without excluding any constituents. Obviously, the opposition understands the lessons of Iraq and the need to keep the institutions of the state including the army in tact. The Americans should press this point while talking to the Russians.
In brief, it remains to be seen how Kerry’s critical mission in Moscow is going to play out. On the surface, it makes sense that their agreement is of vital importance for any transitional process. But other parties especially Iran and Assad may exploit the sticking points.
On the surface, it seems that an agreement between Russia and the United States can work. Even Russian President Vladimir Putin believes that for any solution to hold, it needs the backing of the United States. At the start of the latest meeting with US Secretary of State John Kerry, President Putin said, “We are aware that the groundwork we have on Syria could only have been possible thanks to the supreme political leadership of the United States, specifically the position of President Obama.”
Putin pins hope on the cooperation with the United States to get a deal that keep Russia’s interest intact in that war-torn country.
That being said, one cannot ignore the fact that Washington and Moscow are still divided over the future of Syrian President Bashar Assad. While President Obama has long held that Bashar Assad’s departure is a must for any future sustainable political solution in Syria, his Russian counterpart strongly believes that Assad should be part of the solution. There is no indication that both sides have reached an agreement on this particular sticking point. Nevertheless, Washington and Moscow have decided to put aside these differences with the purpose to reach a final deal on Syria.
The latest round of the American-Russian meeting came as a special UN envoy Steffan de Mistura announced the end of the first round of talks, which in fact sought to achieve the end of violence and the move toward a political transition. In Geneva, De Mistura announced a list of 12 principals on which the Syrian government’s representatives and the opposition agreed. Those principles included the commitment to Syria’s territorial integrity and unity, rebuilding a strong and unified national army, and a democratic, nonsectarian state based on citizenship and political pluralism.
While the 12 principles seem to be a good start for political transition, it remains to be seen whether Assad will accept to cooperate in a process that will lead to his eventual departure. The Syrian opposition groups understand this logic perfectly. As they left the first round of peace talks in Geneva, they warned that unless Putin exerts influence on Assad there would be no hope of genuine progress.
On more than one occasion, the Syria opposition has vented its frustration at the lack of international support for a proper political transition in Syria. Russia’s role to prop up Bashar Assad can only make the regime more intransigent. While resenting Russia’s role and tactics, the Syrian opposition understand that Putin’s role is critical in helping get rid of Assad. For the opposition, Putin has become the lead powerbroker in Syria.
Bassma Kadmani, a spokeswoman for the High Negotiation Committee (HNC) hoped that Vladimir Putin would exert pressure on Assad. She warned that if the April 9 talks planned in Geneva failed to focus on the issue of political transition, the cease-fire would collapse.
She added, “This is a precious, unique moment and we hope Russia will seize this moment and use its leverage to ensure that the international consensus is implemented.”
A quick look at the documents provided by the opposition reveals that the opposition is aware of the need to rebuild the country without excluding any constituents. Obviously, the opposition understands the lessons of Iraq and the need to keep the institutions of the state including the army in tact. The Americans should press this point while talking to the Russians.
In brief, it remains to be seen how Kerry’s critical mission in Moscow is going to play out. On the surface, it makes sense that their agreement is of vital importance for any transitional process. But other parties especially Iran and Assad may exploit the sticking points.
No comments:
Post a Comment