The talks in Astana are just another example of how the Syrian conflict has nothing to do with Syrians themselves.
Russia, Turkey and Iran agreed to enforce a partial ceasefire, which was already supposed to be in place, touting the agreement as a victory.
The major players in Syria affirmed their commitment “to the sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity of the Syrian Arab Republic as a multiethnic, multireligious, nonsectarian and democratic state”, and their conviction “that there is no military solution to the Syrian conflict and that it can only be solved through a political process”. Those sentiments echo principles that the United Nations Security Council has already laid out.
But it only takes a bit of critical thinking to understand that such agreements made on behalf of the Syrian people will likely fail.
Large segments of Syria’s rebel opposition were not represented at the talks. While Jabhat Al Nusra, now known as Fateh Al Sham, was not invited, other rebel groups such as Ahrar Al Sham boycotted the talks, citing repeated violations of a ceasefire agreed upon by Turkey and Russia at the end of last month.
They point finger at the ongoing attacks on Wadi Barada just outside Damascus, by the Syrian regime, but in particular the Iran-backed Hezbollah militia. The government claims there are Jabhat Al Nusra fighters there, who are not covered by the ceasefire, but rebels emphatically reject the claim. There is little that came out of Astana that sets it apart from previous failed ceasefires and the final communique issued gave vague declarations at best.
While the three powers agreed to set up a mechanism to monitor and enforce the nearly month-old ceasefire, they did not say what the mechanism should look like, deferring that crucial matter for future talks. Rebel negotiators said the meetings had given them hope that Russia might be open to hearing rebel concerns and become more willing to press the Syrian government for a political resolution, but such optimism did not extend to Iran, which had stuck to a harder line.
Perhaps the Astana meeting had less to do with finding a solution to the Syrian conflict and more with cementing Russia’s role as the final decider for the fate of Syria.
By holding the talks without UN and US presence, Russian President Vladmir Putin sends a clear message that previous UN-led peace efforts in Geneva were just a sideshow and the main attraction will be Russian-led.
