Prospects of Solution to Syrian Crisis

Li GUoFUResearch Fellow and Director，Center for Middle East Studies，China Institute of International Studies



Prospects of Solution to Syrian Crisis

Li GUoFU
Research Fellow and Director，
Center for Middle East Studies，
China Institute of International Studies

At present， political solution to the Syrian Crisis has become an important international issue attracting extensive attention of the international community and the international opinions. Various types of contradictions involved in the crisis are complex， all issues being intertwined and difficult to deal with. More important， it is directly related to the reshaping of pattern of geo-political forces in the Middle East how to solve the Syrian Crisis. Therefore， it involves the interest of all major countries within and without the region， and the process of Geneva talks on political solution to the crisis is necessarily a repeated and long one.

On January 29， 2016， Staffan de Mistura， Secretary-General's Special Envoy for Syria， held talks with the Syrian government delegation in Geneva， which marked the opening of a new round of Syrian peace talks. However， the main opposition group didn't show up on the day. The picture shows Mr. Mistura（second from right， back row）spoke to the media after talking with the Syrian government delegation on the same day.

ScoURGE oF SYRiAN WAs REAcHEs A “TURNiNG PoiNT”

According to incomplete statistics， the fighting in Syria has taken away nearly 270000 civilian lives， wounding over a million and reducing about 4.8 million people to international refugees. Economic losses are beyond estimation. At the same time， the continued scourge of war has produced fertile ground to breed terrorism and extremism. At present， Syria has become the nest of the international terrorist organization of Islamic State， attracting tens of thousands “Jihadists” from all over the world to take part in the holy war. Since 2015， the “wave of Syrian refugees”，the frequent incidence of terrorist attacks in Europe and Russia’s military actions against terrorism in Syrian have led the Syrian situation of war scourge to a “turning point”，changing the track of developments in the situation.

First， the “wave of Syrian refugees” has seriously eroded the process of integration that Europe takes pride for and the values of human rights and democracy that it has long advertised， intensifying all contradictions of the European society. According to the UN Refugee Agency and the International Refugee Organization， the number of refugee to seek refuge in Europe from the Mediterranean and land routes totaled over a million in 2015， becoming the most serious refugee crisis in Europe since the end of the World War II. In recent years， European economic recovery has been slow， with high unemployment. In face of surging wave of refugees， the concerned European countries have set up barbered wires and partition walls to stop the refugees in spite of the principles of “human rights” and “freedom”. Such measures have not only seriously set back the process of EU integration but also intensified internal contradictions between EU countries， giving rise to all forms of Euro-skeptic and Euro-exit forces.

Second， as the “Islamic State” frequently launches terrorist attack on Europe， counter-terrorism has been a security，diplomatic and political priority of Europe. According the estimates of European Police Organization， the number of returned European citizens after being trained in the Middle East totals between 3500 and 5000， “Europe is facing the greatest terrorist threat in the decade”. European countries apprehend danger in every sound and have respectively taken most severe counter-measures， leading to intensification of already intense racial and ethnic relations， the“right-turn” of European politics and the rise of populism. Europe can no longer stay away from intervention of the chaos in the Middle-Eastern and North African countries.

Third， Russian military actions to strike the “Islamic State” in Syria have left political solution to the Syrian Crisis the “only viable” option. Objectively， Russian military intervention in the Syrian war has resulted in reversing the decline of Bashir Al-Assad regime besides heavily damaging the “Islamic State”and other terrorist organizations. With Russian air support， the Syrian government forces have launched frequent counter-attacks on terrorist organizations， recovering a lot of lost territories and regaining control of initiative in the battleground. Against the backdrop of US reluctance in large-scale military intervention in Syria， other countries， in face of powerful Russian military might， are unable to do what they want very much to do， the plot to overthrow Bashir Al-Assad regime by military means going by the board. More seriously， if the opposition forces continue to refuse to take part in the negotiations， they will face the possibility of being thoroughly defeated.

SYRiAN CRisis ENTERs A NEW STAGE oF PoliTicAl SolUTioN

The overlapping spillover effects and changes in the domestic battle ground in the Syrian Crisis have precipitated the US and Russia to join hands again for a political solution to the crisis. On November 14， 2015，cosponsored by the US and Russia，the foreign ministerial meeting of the International Syria Support Group（ISSG） held its first session in Geneva，a group made of three international organizations and the P-5 of the UN Security Council with participation of 17 countries to seriously discuss a solution to the Syrian Crisis. Insisted by the US， Iran was invited to take part in such a meeting for the first time as a major regional country， making the meeting the most representative and authoritative one of the international community since the beginning of fighting in Syria.

After fierce debate， the meeting reached a milestone consensus on political solution to the Syrian Crisis， laying down guiding principles for Syrian political transition and working out timetable and roadmap for the period of political transition. It is worth noting that， such an important consensus does not touch upon the stay or leave of Syrian President Bashir Al-Assad，which is considered a major compromise between the US and Russia. On December 18， 2015， the UN Security Council unanimously adopted the Resolution 2254 （2015） on political solution to the Syrian Crisis， reconfirming the “roadmap” for political solution of the Syrian Crisis and the consensuspreviously reached. The special envoy of the UN Secretary-General for Syria Staffan de Mistura declared that the Syrian Peace Negotiations would begin by January 25， 2016. The Syrian Peace Negotiations are indirect talks， with UN Special Envoy de Mistura holding separate talks with representatives of the Syrian Government and representatives of the oppositions. During the first round of talks， both sides reached consensus on providing humanitarian assistance to civilians in the surrounding areas， an issue that had attracted the attention of the international community. On February 22， the US and Russia reached agreement on detailed rules and regulations on ceasefire in Syria and its control mechanisms，which became effective by 00:00 of February 27. Under the forceful pressures of the US and Russia， the Syrian Government and over thirty opposition forces respectively tendered applications for ceasefire， whereby after more than five years of fighting most of the areas in Syria have achieved a state of relative “peace”.

PRospEcTs oF SolUTioN To SYRiAN CRisis

Political solution to the Syrian Crisis has increasingly become a consensus of the international community. However， the prospects of a solution are not forthright， developments being treacherous and changeable， particularly the fate of Bashir Al-Assad going far beyond Syria’s boundary. To a large extent， his fate is considered an important viable deciding the future geopolitical pattern of the Middle East，the reshaping of political and sectarian forces in countries all across the region， and the construction of security environment of concerned countries. More important， it is related to the rise and decline of spheres of influence of major countries beyond the region and， at the same time， affects the tendency of “counter-terrorism” struggle of the international community. At present， on the Syrian issues， major countries within and without the region are divided into two camps， the pro-Bashir camp and the anti-Bashir camp， the former including Russia and Iran and the latter， the US， the EU，Saudi Arabia and Turkey. However， a closer observation reveals that within the two camps， there are nuanced differences in attitudes between major countries beyond the region and major regional countries out of differences in interest， particularly over the fate of Bashir.

At the outset， the US and Europe believe that under the torrential tide of “Arab Spring” the Bashir regime could only be soon toppled like a dead branch broken from a tree. Therefore，one after another， they alleged that the Bashir regime had “lost legitimacy”and came to the support of the opposition forces vigorously for establishing the image of supporting “freedom”and “democracy” and for squeezing the strategic space of Russia and Iran. However， the Syrian situation has not turned out the way they wished， the opposition forces failing to be the order of the day and terrorism availing itself of the opportunity to run rampant. More fearful， the overlapping spillover effects of the continued chaos in Syria have posed a serious threat to the security and stability of Europe. On the Syrian issue， the US and Europe are riding on the back of a tiger， it being difficult either to sustain they established Syrian policy or to eat their words there， and they can do nothing but readjust their tactics and adopt a more flexible and pragmatic policy. At present， the US and Europe have not loosened their position on that Bashir must go but they no longer insist on his departure during the transition period， trying to reach with Russia a consensus that is mutually facesaving and acceptable. To this end，the US and Europe have sent frequent signals， to which Russia has responded positively. Russia has had strained relations with the US and Europe over the Ukrainian issue， the US and European sanctions having rendered it economic difficulties and made it necessary to improve relations with the US and Europe. It should be noted that though Russia has important strategic interest in Syria， it does not have core interest there. Given that its leading position in Syria is maintained， it is willing to bargain with major Western countries. It gives some food for thought that Russian intervention in Syria has strengthened the hand of Bashir， but at the same time it would not like to see the total defeat of Syrian oppositions，seeming to desire the Syrian issue to be a platform in the interest of both Russia and the US and for interaction between the two countries. Recently，the increasingly close cooperation between Russia and the US on the Syrian issue seemingly gives proof to the above speculations.

According to incomplete statistics， the fighting in Syria has takken away nearly 270000 civilian lives， wounding over a million and reducing about 4.8 million people to international refugees. The picture shows three children of Syria from a refuggee camp of the ancient city of Aleppo were walking pass a puddle.

In both of the camps， major regional countries take fundamentally opposition positions over the solution to the Syrian issue and that of stay or leave of Bashir in particular and there have been no signs of loosening their positions， which becomes a major obstacle to any breakthrough in the progress of the Syrian peace talks. Comparing to major countries beyond the region，major regional countries have found themselves falling deep into a vicious circle of zero-sum game with limited room for maneuver. Syria is indispensable in Iran’s regional security strategy， seen by Iran as its core strategic interest. In preserving the Bashir regime，Iran has spared no efforts， putting in a lot of financial and material resources and even sending its Revolutionary Guards to take part in the war with its ally the Hezbollah， bearing a casualty of approaching to 10000. Therefore， it is the bottom-line for Iran on the Syrian issue to preserve the Bashir regime or to guarantee a pro-Iranian Syrian regime. Conversely， Saudi Arabia takes Iran for the greatest external threat，and to topple the Bashir regime will weaken the Iranian influence， exclude Iran from the Arabian heartland and enhance Saudi security and political prestige. Such an opportunity for Saudi Arabia has only come out by accident so much so that the country is determined to have its will done. Owing to misjudgment of the Syrian situation，Turkish President Erdogan has led his country into dilemma and has paid a heavy cost. One can go as far as to say that Erdogan has tied his political fate to the stay or leave of Bashir and he has no retreat on this issue. The energy of major regional countries rests with their capability to both effectively tie down the interaction between the major countries beyond the region and to directly influence the development of Syrian situation. Therefore， without the interaction of major regional countries， it is next to impossibility to find a solution to the Syrian issue.

In February 2016， appearing to be in anticipation of the arduousness of the Syrian peace talks and the difficulty to seek a comprise between all parties， US Secretary of State John Kerry remarked that should the peace talks fail， the US would carry out a “Plan B” including the partition of Syria. Though he did not elaborate on the “Plan B”， the media generally believe that the US “Plan B” is to partition Syria into four parts under the control of different political forces，area controlled by the Syrian Government， area controlled by the Kurdish forces， area controlled by oppositions and area controlled by the “Islamic State”. It is worth noting that not long after Kerry’s proposal of the “Plan B” to partition the country， Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabokov declared surprisingly that if a federal system serves Syria， Syria can become a federal country. Almost at the same time， the US and Russia put forward an optional plan to replace present model of Syrian peace talks. Although there is no evidence that the US and Russia have come to a secret agreement on the issue in private，it is certain that the two countries have had prior consultations.

At present， it seems that the solution to the Syrian crisis will be a long and repeated process， requiring interaction not only between major countries beyond the region but also between major regional countries， finding common ground in interaction which takes consideration of the interest of all parties and achieving a win-win situation. The zero-sum and winner taking all thinking does not serve to find a solution to the Syrian issue. It needs patience， time and wisdom to solve the Syrian Crisis.