Would UN's Political Resolution Save War-Torn Syria?
Syrian civil war already enters into the fifth year as it has claimed hundreds of thousands of lives and forced millions of people to flee the country. This country has also become the save
heaven for international terrorist groups including ISIL or Daesh, Nusra Font,
and many other. Syrian crisis is no
longer a civil war but a proxy war, which many countries have their dirty hands in.
And of course, many involving parties including regional and super powers have complicated
the peace process.
But yesterday became the landmark event when Russian Foreign Minister and US Secretary of State brought together a peace plan to United Nation Security Council with an aim to bring Syrian rivals to negotiation table. Before the adoption of resolution, UN’s secretary general Ban Ki-moon told the council that Syria is in ruins, convincing all members that it is the time to take concrete action. And eventually, the peace plan was adopted unanimously by 15 members of the Council. Generally, this is the first UN’s political resolution within 5 years since conflict broke out, and the most important element of the resolution is to address the humanitarian crisis in Syria by resuming aid distribution to those affected and traumatized by the continued fighting. However, it still remains skeptical whether this peace road map, without focusing on the role of Bashar al-Assad, will be ultimately put into action.
No Mention of Assad: Ending War is unlikely possible?
Despite the importance of resolution which bases on Vienna communique and other relevant documents on Syria peace process, there must be a long way to go in order to have each conflicting party agreeing to stop fighting. The main objective of UN’s peace plan is seeking to bring Syrian oppositions and representative of Damascus government to resume the peace talks, consequently allowing political transition to take place and then holding free and fair elections to pave the way for power transfer. But the problem is that it is not mentioning the role of Assad during the political transition, meaning that the super powers are still divided on what role Assad should play.
Regarding the solution to end year-long conflict in Syria, Obama administration has seemingly been forced to soften its stance, leaving some spaces for Russia to act as a peace broker. A few days before UNSC meeting, Washington sent its top diplomat to Moscow seeking cooperation with Kremlin. US’s John Kerry held bilateral talks on ways to end Syrian crisis with his counterpart Sergei Lavrov, followed by the talks with President Vladimir Putin. The leaders of both countries have acknowledged their differences, but emphasized the desire to find the common ground on some specific issues, especially on Syria and Ukraine crisis.
President Barack Obama and White House’s Top Diplomat John Kerry reiterated that Assad must go still remains the most important solution to put an end to the conflicts. Gathering for talks in Saudi Arabia last few weeks, US backed Syrian opponents also called for the resignation of Assad; they argued that peace talks only will be successful without Assad’s presence. It clearly illustrates that one party of the conflict tries to push another party over the edge by offering no political concession for a compromise.
Nevertheless, there is a split over the role of Assad within the US political sphere. The rise of Daesh makes U.S politicians believe defeating terrorism is the top priority and also is more important than overthrowing Assad. In the meantime some of American allies have already changed their policies toward Assad regime in order for effectively combating terrorism. As seen, Democratic Presidential Front runner and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton recently also called on Obama administration to abandon the attempt to topple Assad from power and to only focus on effective strategy to destroy terrorist groups. Besides Hillary, after 11/13 attack, French President François Hollande no longer considered Syrian President as a threat to his country’s national security. He stated that only Daesh is France’s biggest enemy not Assad regime. France’s major shift in policy toward Assad is actually significant but be at odd with Washington’s stance.
On the other hand, President Putin has had his own way to broker peace in Syria and at the same time expand Russia’s sphere of influence in the Middle East to fill American void. Russia, which has been deeply involved in fighting against Daesh to help reinforce Assad’s rule, still perceives including Assad in political solution is inevitable. During the talks in Moscow earlier this week between US secretary of State John Kerry and Russian President Vladimir Putin, the two leaders only could find a common ground on the fight against terrorism, but the two parties agreed to resume the talk in New York on Friday. President Putin many time claims that Assad’s future must be decided by Syrian people not by the outsiders. Kremlin leader also recalled the West’s fault of letting Iraq falling apart by mentioning the exclusion of those who are loyal to Saddam Hussein from the political solution after the fall of Saddam’s regime. Russia already imposed its stronger position and gradually becomes the strategic grand master.
After the downing of Russian jet fighters by Turkey, Russian government had an excuse to beef up military capability in the Middle East by sending more weapons and troops to Syria. Despite the struggle to overcome economic hardship at home, Russia’s Putin could manage to impose the so-called No-Fly Zone in Syria by deploying some of its very advanced air defense system “S-400” to Syria, forcing US and its allies to coordinate with Russian forces fighting terrorists there. And the Russian military buildup in Syria undeniably impelled Washington to accept the Russia’s vital position to broker peace in Syria.
Assad himself also has another version of the peace road map to rebuild his nation; he denies Western proposal of having him step down, says that any political solution should be made only after Daesh group is defeated. The dictator tries to play down his previous sectarian policies and is betting that the rise of Daesh will bring the West to cooperate with his government in fighting against terrorist groups. However, Damascus government, with Russian military assistance, has been able to reinforce its forces and rule over Syria and retake swath of territories from both Islamic State’s militants and rebel groups. The stronger Assad regime actually is making West’s demand of Assad’s retirement somewhat less possible.
But yesterday became the landmark event when Russian Foreign Minister and US Secretary of State brought together a peace plan to United Nation Security Council with an aim to bring Syrian rivals to negotiation table. Before the adoption of resolution, UN’s secretary general Ban Ki-moon told the council that Syria is in ruins, convincing all members that it is the time to take concrete action. And eventually, the peace plan was adopted unanimously by 15 members of the Council. Generally, this is the first UN’s political resolution within 5 years since conflict broke out, and the most important element of the resolution is to address the humanitarian crisis in Syria by resuming aid distribution to those affected and traumatized by the continued fighting. However, it still remains skeptical whether this peace road map, without focusing on the role of Bashar al-Assad, will be ultimately put into action.
No Mention of Assad: Ending War is unlikely possible?
Despite the importance of resolution which bases on Vienna communique and other relevant documents on Syria peace process, there must be a long way to go in order to have each conflicting party agreeing to stop fighting. The main objective of UN’s peace plan is seeking to bring Syrian oppositions and representative of Damascus government to resume the peace talks, consequently allowing political transition to take place and then holding free and fair elections to pave the way for power transfer. But the problem is that it is not mentioning the role of Assad during the political transition, meaning that the super powers are still divided on what role Assad should play.
Regarding the solution to end year-long conflict in Syria, Obama administration has seemingly been forced to soften its stance, leaving some spaces for Russia to act as a peace broker. A few days before UNSC meeting, Washington sent its top diplomat to Moscow seeking cooperation with Kremlin. US’s John Kerry held bilateral talks on ways to end Syrian crisis with his counterpart Sergei Lavrov, followed by the talks with President Vladimir Putin. The leaders of both countries have acknowledged their differences, but emphasized the desire to find the common ground on some specific issues, especially on Syria and Ukraine crisis.
President Barack Obama and White House’s Top Diplomat John Kerry reiterated that Assad must go still remains the most important solution to put an end to the conflicts. Gathering for talks in Saudi Arabia last few weeks, US backed Syrian opponents also called for the resignation of Assad; they argued that peace talks only will be successful without Assad’s presence. It clearly illustrates that one party of the conflict tries to push another party over the edge by offering no political concession for a compromise.
Nevertheless, there is a split over the role of Assad within the US political sphere. The rise of Daesh makes U.S politicians believe defeating terrorism is the top priority and also is more important than overthrowing Assad. In the meantime some of American allies have already changed their policies toward Assad regime in order for effectively combating terrorism. As seen, Democratic Presidential Front runner and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton recently also called on Obama administration to abandon the attempt to topple Assad from power and to only focus on effective strategy to destroy terrorist groups. Besides Hillary, after 11/13 attack, French President François Hollande no longer considered Syrian President as a threat to his country’s national security. He stated that only Daesh is France’s biggest enemy not Assad regime. France’s major shift in policy toward Assad is actually significant but be at odd with Washington’s stance.
On the other hand, President Putin has had his own way to broker peace in Syria and at the same time expand Russia’s sphere of influence in the Middle East to fill American void. Russia, which has been deeply involved in fighting against Daesh to help reinforce Assad’s rule, still perceives including Assad in political solution is inevitable. During the talks in Moscow earlier this week between US secretary of State John Kerry and Russian President Vladimir Putin, the two leaders only could find a common ground on the fight against terrorism, but the two parties agreed to resume the talk in New York on Friday. President Putin many time claims that Assad’s future must be decided by Syrian people not by the outsiders. Kremlin leader also recalled the West’s fault of letting Iraq falling apart by mentioning the exclusion of those who are loyal to Saddam Hussein from the political solution after the fall of Saddam’s regime. Russia already imposed its stronger position and gradually becomes the strategic grand master.
After the downing of Russian jet fighters by Turkey, Russian government had an excuse to beef up military capability in the Middle East by sending more weapons and troops to Syria. Despite the struggle to overcome economic hardship at home, Russia’s Putin could manage to impose the so-called No-Fly Zone in Syria by deploying some of its very advanced air defense system “S-400” to Syria, forcing US and its allies to coordinate with Russian forces fighting terrorists there. And the Russian military buildup in Syria undeniably impelled Washington to accept the Russia’s vital position to broker peace in Syria.
Assad himself also has another version of the peace road map to rebuild his nation; he denies Western proposal of having him step down, says that any political solution should be made only after Daesh group is defeated. The dictator tries to play down his previous sectarian policies and is betting that the rise of Daesh will bring the West to cooperate with his government in fighting against terrorist groups. However, Damascus government, with Russian military assistance, has been able to reinforce its forces and rule over Syria and retake swath of territories from both Islamic State’s militants and rebel groups. The stronger Assad regime actually is making West’s demand of Assad’s retirement somewhat less possible.
Comments
Post a Comment