Beirut: The representatives of world powers agreed on a political roadmap for Syria’s future on Saturday, inspired into action by the Paris attacks. The decision to act was swift, and the outcome, although impressive, remains filled with loopholes.
Clearly moved by what happened in Paris, world leaders who assembled in Vienna reached a historic breakthrough for Syria on Saturday.
Although incomplete and riddled with political loopholes, the tentative consensus was a major shift on Syria, uniting everybody’s effort in the global war on Daesh.
Fighting Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi and his men was officially prioritised by the international community, more so than toppling the regime of President Bashar Al Assad.
Additionally, previously Moscow and Tehran were saying that fighting terrorism comes first, and a political process next. The Vienna talks, however, made the two tracks parallel.
According to the Vienna deal, signed off by Russia and the US, along with Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Iran, negotiations between the Syrian Government and Syrian Opposition will commence before January 1, 2016.
The Russians are busy drafting lists of which ‘moderate’ opposition members will be invited to attend talks. Those deemed as ‘terrorist’ affiliates or sympathisers will be excluded.
This job is being done with the help of the Jordanian government. The Syrian government has already named its representatives to the upcoming talks, drafting a delegation that will likely be headed by Foreign Minister Waleed Al Mua’alem.
The opposition is still to decide on who will attend, given major differences between different camps and factions. President of the Syrian National Coalition Khalid Al Khoja has already met the foreign ministers of Qatar, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia, preparing for a wide and inclusive conference for the Syrian opposition in Riyadh, ahead of the face-to-face talks with the Syrian government.
The ultimate aims of these talks, on paper, would lead to the creation of a “credible, inclusive, non-sectarian” government within six months, approximately by May 2016. If the deadline is maintained, it would coincide with the next constitutional parliamentary elections in Syria, where all sides will get to run, challenging a Baathist monopoly over the Chamber of Deputies, in place since 1973.
According to earlier versions of UN and Russian proposals about how the next Syrian government would look, ten seats would go to the opposition, ten to the regime, and ten to independents agreed upon by both camps.
Syrian officialdom has so far refused such a division of power, but might find itself obliged to accept after international consensus was reached in Vienna. Sources in Damascus told Gulf News that the regime has a major problem in relinquishing the portfolios of foreign affairs, interior, defence, education, and finance.
These are the exact same posts that will be sought by the opposition when it’s time to form the next government in mid-2016. The government would supervise the nationwide ceasefire and unite efforts of both the government and opposition in the war on Daesh.
If no changes are made to the constitution before next May, the next government would be signed off by Al Assad and its members would have to swear their legal oath before him.
There will be no Transitional Government Body (TGB) as mandated by Geneva I — and crossed off from the first Vienna communiqué by Russian Foreign Minister Serge Lavrov.
According to that 2012 suggestion the TGB would determine Al Assad’s fate.
In fact, the President of Syria was not even mentioned in the Vienna communiqué and nothing was said on whether or not he would run in the next presidential elections, scheduled now for June 2017 instead of summer of 2021. It was left hanging, pretty much similar to the fate of Jerusalem at the Oslo Accords of 1993.
According to the constitution of 2012, Al Assad is currently entitled to two more terms in office as of June 2014. Meaning if Damascus, Moscow, and Tehran get their way, he would run for the fourth and last term that ends in 2028.
The Syrian opposition and its Saudi backers insist, however, that Al Assad must go for any transition or ceasefire to see the light. US Secretary of State John Kerry was more nuanced, saying: “We did not come here to impose our collective will on the Syrian people; exactly the opposite.”
Sources told Gulf News that Kerry switched from being party to one camp at Vienna into playing the intermediary between both camps, which was a change in US policy.
Addressing reporters at the end of the talks, he added: “The Syrian people will be and must be the validators of our efforts”, noting, however, “we still differ on the issue of what happens with Bashar Al Assad. We do agree to this: It is time for the bleeding in Syria to stop.” His Russian counterpart maintained that the problem “is not about Al Assad” but about Daesh.
“It doesn’t matter if you are for Al Assad or against him. Daesh is your enemy.”
Nothing was said in Vienna about prisoners of war, besieged civilians in war zones, or international sanctions on the Syrian economy, in place since the summer of 2011.
Sami Moubayed is a Syrian historian and former Carnegie scholar. He is also author of “Under the Black Flag: At the frontier of the New Jihad”
