 |
| Syrian Revolution artwork by Manar Qanah |
Moaz al-Khatib’s startling, six-week-old “personal”
offer of talks with representatives of President Bashar al-Assad risks undoing
the Syrian National Coalition he leads.
The SNC politburo and assembly promptly and formally
dismissed the proposal he made in late January (see my posts of Feb.
15 and Feb.
22).
But the suggestion is not going away and remains very
much alive.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry told reporters
at the State Department yesterday:
It is inevitable
and true of every single opposition in any kind of circumstance like this that
there are tensions and differences of opinion as they find their footing, and
there’s no surprise in that. So we have to work quietly and effectively with
the international community. There are lots of people involved and engaged with
the Syrian opposition. You could remember a year ago that they were completely
un-unified and spoke without one voice.
So we will
continue to work with them. I’m not going to vouch on any process over which we
don’t have control, but I will tell you that they are adamant, all of them,
about what they’re fighting for. And the cause is the cause of the Syrian
people. And they have committed themselves to a broad-based government that is
going to represent all of the people of Syria, even as there may be some
dissension as to tactics or process among them. So you have to have some
patience in this process even as you approach it with care. And I think that’s
exactly what we’re doing.
We want to stop
the killing. And they want to stop the killing. The world wants to stop the
killing. And we want to be able to see Assad and the Syrian opposition come to
the table for the creation of a transitional government according to the
framework that was created in Geneva, the Geneva Protocol, which requires
mutual consent on both sides to the formation of that transitional government.
That’s what
we’re pushing for. And to do that, you have to have President Assad change his
calculation so he doesn’t believe he can shoot it out endlessly, but you also
need a cooperative Syrian opposition to come to the table, too. We’re working
on it, and we will continue to work on it.
Laurent
Fabius
Laurent Fabius, Kerry’s
French counterpart, elaborated further.
He told the
foreign affairs committee of the National Assembly that France, Russia and the
United States are trying to draw up a list of Syrian officials with whom the SNC
can negotiate.
"We worked
together on an idea... of a list of Syrian officials who would be acceptable to
Syria's opposition National Coalition," he said.
Fabius said
Khatib had said in a "very brazen manner" that he was willing to
negotiate with some regime officials but not Assad.
"We have
discussed this with the Russians and the Americans... There have been exchanges
to seek a political solution," he said.
Farah Atassi
Overnight, Syrian
American activist Farah
Atassi reacted on her
Facebook page writing in Arabic:
Which
regime figures and Syrian officials would negotiate Assad’s exit? The Syrian
revolution spent two years looking for them.
When
Iraq, Lebanon, Algeria, Sudan, Yemen, China, Iran, Hezbollah and Russia – the
Assad regime’s official mouthpiece – avow publicly they can’t convince or force
Assad to step down, which prodigious Superman, Batman and Grendizer will assume
the task?
Are
the French, the Americans and the Europeans pulling the wool over our eyes or
their own?
James Clapper
America’s Director
of National Intelligence James Clapper yesterday told a Senate Intelligence
Committee on global security threats that forces
seeking to oust Assad are gaining strength and territory, but the Syrian
opposition remains fragmented and is grappling with an infusion of militant
foreign fighters.
"The question
comes up, 'How long will Assad last?' And our standard answer is, 'His days are
numbered. We just don't know the number.' Our assessment is that he is very
committed to hanging in there and sustaining his control of the regime,"
Clapper told the Senate panel.
Assad's government is
losing territory and experiencing shortages in manpower and logistics, Clapper
said. But at the same time, there are "literally hundreds" of cells
of opposition fighters over which leaders are struggling to impose more
centralized command and control.
Clapper noted a growing
presence among Assad's opponents of foreign fighters, many associated with al-Nusra
Front, an offshoot of al-Qaeda in Iraq
that has gained strength in Syria
partly by offering services to a population beaten down by two years of civil
war.
"They are, where
they can, providing more and more municipal services in what is a very terrible
situation from a humanitarian standpoint," Clapper said.
Henry Kissinger
Last Friday, Henry Kissinger took
questions at the annual corporate conference of the Council on Foreign
Relations in New York.
Wall Street Journal
columnist Peggy Noonan later wrote in part on Peggy
Noonan’s Blog:
Kissinger
of course is an iconic figure in the history of foreign affairs, a statesman
and historian of statesmanship. He will be 90 soon but he’s taken the opposite
of the usual trajectory of those formerly in power. Normally the longer you’ve
been from high office the smaller you seem. Kissinger has retained his gravity
and presence, and his foreign-policy mystique has in fact grown since he left
the secretary of state’s office in 1977. In part this may be because he thinks
about, writes about and supports the idea that great nations need grand
strategies…
From
my notes:
On
Syria:
“Someone who chooses ophthalmology as a career is not a man driven by huge
concepts of state.” President Bashar Assad’s father would have been ruthless
too in similar circumstances, but also “more skilled in diplomacy.”
“It
would be better if Assad left,” Kissinger said. America’s concern is to have “a
non-radical outcome.” The question is what Syria would look like after the fall
of Assad. “In the abstract, an outcome that permits the various ethnic groups a
certain autonomy” is desirable.
We
should be aware of Russia’s anxieties. “They are genuinely worried about the
spread of radicalism,” he said. “Radicalism that would fall from Syria would
reach them first.”
“If
we can make a strategic agreement with Russia, we would have to take it to the
Arab world.”
“Whatever
we do . . . in my life we’ve had four wars which we entered with
great enthusiasm and did not know how to end.” We want an outcome that takes
account of “humanitarian concerns” and “is not radical.” We should do what we
can “short of American ground forces.”
On
the Obama administration’s foreign policy: “They are skillful in handling tactical aspects of situations.” But
“they have not been able to put this together into a strategic overview of
where we’re going… I don’t think they’re disliked but they’re not fully trusted
anywhere. Nobody knows where they’re going.”
