Besiege Your Siege

Breaking the siege of Deir al-Zour should be the beginning of a siege of another kind and direction; a siege against all the extremist forces that are trying to continue fabricating excuses and seeking justifications for keeping the train of negotiation stuck in place, and preventing the implementation of Security Council Resolution 2254.

The political propaganda used by the hardliners in the Riyadh platform to justify the preconditions – i.e. the propaganda about the claimed “faithfulness to the blood of the martyrs and to the rights of the widows and the bereaved...” – and hiding behind the mask of the so-called “objectives of the revolution”, along the years of the crisis, has resulted in nothing but more blood, more destruction and devastation, displacement and refugees. It became clear, in concrete terms, that such a propaganda does not serve the interests of Syria and the Syrians. In fact, it is a concretely refutable argument, or rather a mere propaganda to cover up the failure and stalemate of the political project of the hardliners. It also expresses the flounder and chronic disability of the Riyadh platform, that began with its very formation, and were uncovered later, when the regional and international attitudes changed.

In addition, the persistence of the regime in ignoring the necessities of change – basing its ignorance on field progress alone – and constant discrediting of the opposition, are practices that place the task of continuing and accomplishing the war on terrorism at a serious challenge; at least because of delaying the unification of the Syrian guns against terrorism. Such an attitude by the regime also takes the de-escalation zones from their natural context as a premise for a comprehensive political solution, and part of an integral process.

Resolution 2254 is a resolution of a consensual nature. Therefore, placing any precondition, from any party, on the negotiating process, is contrary to the spirit of the resolution itself. The resolution 2254 is neither an instrument to hold on to power, nor an instrument to cede the power. At the same time, the consensus does not eliminate the right of any party to put what it deems appropriate at the negotiating table. Therefore, compliance with the resolution as it is – without interpretations and jurisprudences out of context – does not actually eliminate the conflict, and does not mean, in any way, a declaration of the defeat of one party and the victory of the other. It rather means breaking of the vicious circle of the crisis, and substitution of the military conflict between the Syrians with a political one. That means what is stipulated in the provisions of the resolution 2254 itself, and what makes its essence and justification of existence, is exactly the self-determination of the Syrians, all Syrians, of their own fate, and of their country’s fate.

The range of field and political developments, internationally, regionally, and internally, and their acceleration and progress, in light of the steady increase in the role of the peace forces around the world, not only provides the Syrians with an opportunity to resolve their crisis, but also sets the possibility of making of this solution a model of resolving disputes and crises. It is an opportunity for “besieging the crisis” and resolving it, by addressing the premises that produced it, and the outcomes of its terrible six years, and opportunity for the entry of Syria into a new political space whose main title is: the sovereignty of the Syrian people.

Kassioun Editorial, Issue No 827, September 09, 2017.