Saturday, February 15, 2014

Putin Can Better Improve his Image by Forcing al-Assad to Negotiate

The second round of the Geneva 2 talks on the Syrian civil war ended as they began - with the opposition demanding that negotiations focus on creating a transitional government which does not include President Bashar al-Assad, and the government saying that Mr Assad's role is not negotiable. The government said it was only open to discussing means of combating "terrorism," which it blames on opposition forces and their foreign backers. Mr. Brahimi, the Arab League negotiator, said future talks would focus on ending violence and terrorism, and then move on to discussing the creation of a transitional governing body. British Foreign Secretary William Hague blamed the al-Assad regime for the breakdown of the talks : "With the war in Syria causing more death and destruction every day to the people of Syria, we need to do all we can to make progress towards a proper solution," he said. According to new figures released by the Britain-based Syrian Observ Human Rights on Saturday, 140,000 people have been killed since the conflict began in March 2011. The stalemate caused Mr. Brahimi to end direct talks between the Syrian government and opposition Saturday without finding a way of breaking the impasse in the peace talks. Saturday's session lasted only a half an hour and left the future of the negotiating process in doubt, with no date was set for a third session. Brahimi told a news conference that both sides agreed that the agenda for the next round should focus on four points: ending the violence and terrorism, creating a transitional governing body, building national institutions, and reconciliation. Before resuming discussions, the parties must, according to Brahimi, be prepared to discuss on the first day ways to end violence and combat terrorism, the main thrust of the government's stance, and on the second day to talk about how to create a transitional body, as the opposition and Western powers insist. "Unfortunately the government has refused, which raises the suspicion of the opposition that in fact the government doesn't want to discuss the TGB (transitional governing body) at all," Brahimi said. "In that case, it's not good for the process, it's not good for Syria that we come back for another round and fall in the same trap that we have been struggling with this week and most of the first round," he said. "So I think it is better that every side goes back and reflect and take their responsibility: do they want this process to take place or not?" Brahimi said he would consult with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, US Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov about a way forward. "I am very, very sorry, and I apologize to the Syrian people that their hopes which were very, very high that something will happen here," Brahimi said. The Syrian government's ambassador to the UN, Bashar Jaafari, said the government accepted Brahimi's proposed agenda but a problem was raised "by the other side when they gave their own interpretation of the agenda." He insisted that the government is committed to returning to negotiations and will go back to Geneva to continue the talks as long as it takes, because "we are extremely careful about stopping the bloodshed in Syria and combatting terrorism," Jaafari told reporters. "This I promise you: We will be committed to doing so." Anas al-Abdeh, a member of the opposition negotiating team, said his side accepted the agenda but the government's refusal to go along with the order of discussions put the prospects of a third session of talks in the Geneva 2 negotiating round in doubt. The first two sessions lasted from Jan. 22-31 and Feb. 10-15. The first round, known as Geneva 1, resulted in a June 2012 roadmap for peace that was not followed. Al-Abdeh labelled the continuing stalemate in negotiations a result of the government's "continuous effort to not talk and not to discuss the issue of the transitional governing body." The unconfirmable death toll has reached 140,000 from three years of violence, with more than 3,400 reportedly killed this month while the peace talks were being held in Geneva. The UN's human rights office said in January it has stopped updating the death toll from Syria's civil war, confirming that it can no longer verify the sources of information that led to its last count of at least 100,000 in late July. ~~~~~ Dear readers, if we consider the comments coming out of the Geneva 2 talks, it is clear that the discussions are still focused on setting the agenda items. There have been no substantive negotiations, with the exception of the evacuation of starving rebel families from Homs, and the motives behind the al-Assad regime's agreeing to this are still far from clear. What we know is that the evacuees, under the protection of the Red Cross, have been questioned by al-Assad representatives. And, vis-à-vis yesterday's blog -- we all know that Vladimir Putin is on the wrong side in Iran, Ukraine abd Syria, to name several of many, and that these political realities are not to be forgotten by his use of the Sochi Games to improve his public image, something that has been going on since the 1936 Munich Games -- but one might point out to Mr. Putin that he could have gained immeasurably greater worldwide stature by going to Damascus to demand that al-Assad stop his butchering and get on with serious negotiations to give Syria back to its people...for Syria belongs to them - not to the al-Assad regime.

8 comments:

  1. This entire process is beginning to take on the look of the Paris Peace Talks during the Vietnam Nam War.

    Getting 2 sides that have been engaged in a brutal conflict for years to suddenly drop all their lack if trust and suddenly feel all warn and fuzzy towards one another is pipe dream. Such an adventure is traveling a road that is 99% potholes and each side needs needs to bring a full compliment if spare tires.

    One side of a conflict much like Syria and the Rebels needs to create a NEED for the other to negotiate. There is so much distrust and animosity towards the sides in this war that when one side reaches that command level - they are intent to simply eradicate the enemy and have "peace" solely on their terms.

    So do I expect any positive preigress via peace talks and an eventual peace accord between the 2 parties that will hold more than a week ... NO. Sadly no.

    I'm not sure even that the likes if Putin can force the government of Syria to set aside the costly, gruesome advances made and "talk" with the rebels.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Why are the talks in Geneva moving a potential political settlement and therefore much needed basic help for the most remote private citizen in Syria , who may or may not be associated with either Assad or the Rebel forces.

    The pain and suffering, the displacement, the disruption of normal daily family life, and even the contribution to the death toll falls squarely on the heads of the suffering citizen masses.

    Why is the United States relying only on Russia to turn Assad towards a negotiated settlement when Assad's value to Russia is his continued head is state for Syria?

    Can Obama and John Kerry be that inferior in foreign affairs and the art of negotiating that their best plan is housed in the Kremlin?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The first paragraph should read:

      Why are the talks in Geneva moving a potential political settlement between Syrians and therefore costing much needed basic help for the most remote private citizen in Syria , who may or may not be associated with either Assad or the Rebel forces.

      Delete
  3. The weakest president in US history and his secretary of state that has NO idea what he is doing, has put themselves in a position (in order to save face) where they have to as an ex-KGB agent/director to come to their aide and intervene with one of the evilest, murderous men to ever exist to go the the bargaining table in Geneva to deal away his (Putin) influence over Assad to end the violence in Syria.

    All this so Obama and Kerry can take credit.

    Is it me or do others see that this scenario is not going to happen?

    ReplyDelete
  4. The solution to Syria is in two pieces and both pieces are in Syria:

    1. The quick ERADICATION of Assad

    2. W. Al-Molate, B. Shaaban, F. Mekdad, O. Zoabi, and B. Jaafari of the present Syrian government. And A.Al-jarba, A. Al-Aben, M. Kilo, B. Ghalion, ans S. Al-Atassi of the present Opposition Front in Syria sit down and work out their own solution. they must understand that negotiating & concessions will be the order of the day.

    The UN has again proved to be useless in settling a world problem. The USA, Russia, China, Britian, and France don't seem to be able to get to first base. If any of the major country (other than what appears to be a Russian attempt at nation building in Syria) was a Nation Builder then the solution is simple - military take over.

    But Syrians have a right and a responsibility to solve their own problems based on their own needs and wants.

    ReplyDelete
  5. If you go back in history (1975-1992), Lebanon went through very similar situation, at the time Lebanese felt helpless and betrayed watching massacres happen by different factions influenced by external and regional powers ironically Syria was one of them. Sorry to see this happening in Syria now, but the root cause of all these rebellions unfortunately is the cultural/religious intolerance in the entire region of the Middle East; partly created by the vacuum of strong leaders to preach moderations.

    Before this stupid Arab spring started was not the Shias and Sunnis in Syria, Egypt, and Libya were somewhat living in peace. They were they allowed to pray, go to work and all shops were opened for business? They need to learn how to co-exist somehow. And the solution would best be to their liking and needs if it came from them rather than from outside parties with special interests.

    Why fault the big 5 countries for not being able to reach a conclusion if the region wants to self-destruct itself with their strong 4,000 year old religious convictions? Empires, countries, governments at times collapse and vanish, and sometimes it has been for the best in the past.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Obama’s presidency (with the help of inept State Department Secretaries and foreign policy experts) has been marked by continued failure and the total lack of any real policy is scurrying to get remaining U.S. troops out of the war torn region and is winding down their presence in Afghanistan, has declined to use U.S. military force in Syria and has been cautious about arming the moderate opposition.

    This hesitation is all due to not wanting to fail and not being able to put together a plan or policy that last longer that a few weeks at best. Fear is a great motivator to do nothing.

    At a news conference with French President Francois Hollande in Washington on Tuesday, Obama said "nobody is going to deny that there's enormous frustration here" over events in Syria and he suggested that he might be rethinking his policy.

    My question is … “WHAT POLICY” The lack of a defensible US policy is part of the problem in the region.

    Obama, Clinton and Kerry exemplifies the saying … “If you never make a decision you’ll never be accused of making a mistake”

    ReplyDelete
  7. "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
    Edmund Burke

    And this is what we have going on in Syria (and in fact in most of the region where people are trying to gain an little bit of freedom and decency in the lives) NOTHING.

    My stance on Syria is based on nothing more than the inhuman treatment that people are being subjected to by Assad and his military & police forces. But it's time for a change there.

    ReplyDelete