Editor in Chief: Moh. Reza Huwaida Sunday, May 24th, 2020

The failure of Peace Plan in Syria


The failure of Peace Plan in Syria

Violence has hit the height in Syria as the international community blames the regime for violence in the country, and Mr. Gen Mod, United Nations peace keeping force said they have come under fire indirectly from close distances. He also said that mission has failed and there is increasing civil war in the country.

The deadline for UN's monitors in the country would end on June 21, and it is not clear whether the deadline would be reset or not. His remarks show blunt failure of truce-plan brokered by UN-Arab envoy, Mr. Kofi Annan, the former secretarygeneral to United Nations on April 12.

Seemingly, the Arab spring before it flower in Syria has been hardly hit because the country is exposed to much more regional rivalry as many countries have large at stack. When the uprising started more than a year and half ago, it got the global attention. Everybody around the world was (perhaps, are) feeling sympathy with demonstrators. As well as, the time was ripe and much exposed to change, because the wave of the so-called spring was tough enough to challenge the pillars of all regional authoritarian regimes.

The success of demonstrators in Tunisia, Egypt and their superiority in Bahrain, Yemen, and Libya all were good source of psychological fuels to set the Syrian demonstrators on the roller-coaster of opposition to Bashar-al-Assad regime.

Thanks to NATO-led a kind of military intervention in Libya which sparked criticisms of human rights activists but remained generally unheard because the outcome of the intervention supported the status of anti-Moammar Gaddafi regime's oppositions.

While in the two other countries—Yemen and Bahrian—the movements took a different path due to regional differences. Initially, in Bahrain protestors marched to streets to ask for socio-economic and political reforms, with no visible bias to particular sect. but unfortunately, the regional arrangement of power that also on the basis of clear sectarian line turned the movement upside down. Demands got stinky and one sect just retreated back and the other put step ahead.

A similar story was repeated with minor differences as in the case of Yemen tribal bondage was far stronger then religious ties and the demonstrator failed to form an uprising with national characteristic. As a result, civil uprising receded with no visible achievements. So, the failure of civil unrest in the three above mentioned countries indeed caused Mr. President Bashar al-Assad to a see a glimpse of light at the end of long tunnel of the time. From the very start, the regime responded with clenched fist and branded them as terrorists. The regime showed no flexibility against demonstrators and used all its force to suppress them.

The situation became gruesomely dangerous when the international community failed to take a joint front against Damascus. Drafts prepared mostly European countries for tougher action two times were vetoed in the United Nations Security Council by China and Russia which feared about the consequences. In another word, after both countries—China and Russia—grudgingly accepted to avoid exercising their veto right in the UNSC in the case of Libya. The resolution paved the way for foreign military intervention. The mission from protecting civilians was changed into outstation of Moammar Gaddafi.

So, in order not to be undergo to similar situation, Chinese and Russian officials dealt with Syrian regime with much more caution. They refused to approve drafts which indirectly paved the way for military intervention. Moreover, the Libyan mission was not carried completely with visible victory. It continued for months and imposed cost on the already economic-slowdown stroke military budget. So, it is clear that comparing Libya with Syria is a blunt mistake because the regime of President Assad is far powerful and also interconnected with countries like Iran and groups like Hezbollah.

Thus, considering the challenges, it is far likely for anti-Assad countries to start a war against Damascus. In another word, the United States is engaged in a corrosive war against Taliban-led militants in Afghanistan and just pulled out of Iraq; clearly, it does not have the will to start another war in such crisis ridden region. Without the US, it is far likely that its European allies embark to such financially and humanitarianly costly war. The regional rivalry among countries is also something that cannot be neglected assessing the ongoing situation in Syria.

Tehran has been supporting President since the very start of civil uprising. The supreme leader who is the ultimate decision maker in the country, Mr. Ayatollah Ali Khamenae often openly voiced out support for Damascus regime while condemning other regimes reacted similarly in the case of uprising breakout. While insisting that Arab countries are affected by more than 30-years old Islamic revolution in Iran, he links civil unrest in Syria to foreign intervention.

Therefore, the so-called proxy war and the dominant presence of Allawites, a minor who can hardly be branded as part of Shiite group, have further complicated the situation. According to the United Nations reports, around 9000 people are killed since the start of uprising more than a year ago, and around 800 people killed in period after ceasefire accord mediated by joint Arab-UNs representative, Mr. Kofi Annan. The ceasefire has not helped least to peace and instability.

With the presence of Arab monitoring mission, available reports denote on severe clashes between minor armed opposition and security forces. Seemingly, all stakeholders are tittering up and down to find a solution to the deadlock but there is nothing to count on much. But this is Syrian people who ultimately shoulder all the burdens of continuous instability and unrest.

Masood Korosh is the staff writer of Daily Outlook Afghanistan. He can be reached at outlookafghanistan@gmial.com

Go Top