TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 15 °C Saturday 25 May, 2013

Syria says it’s prepared to talk with armed rebels

Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem is the first high-ranking regime official to say the government is prepared to talk with rebels.

Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem speaks at a press conference in Damascus, Syria, Monday, Dec. 19, 2011.
Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem speaks at a press conference in Damascus, Syria, Monday, Dec. 19, 2011.
Image: Bassem Tellawi/AP/Press Association Images

SYRIA HAS SAID it is prepared to hold talks with the armed rebels bent on overthrowing President Bashar Assad, the clearest signal yet that the regime is growing increasingly nervous about its long-term prospects to hold onto power as opposition fighters make slow but persistent headway in the civil war.

The offer, by Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem during a visit to Moscow, came hours before residents of Damascus and state-run TV reported a huge explosion in the capital, followed by gunfire.

The proposal marked the first time that a high-ranking regime official has stated publicly that Damascus would be willing to meet with the armed opposition. But al-Moallem did not spell out whether rebels would first have to lay down their weapons before negotiations could begin — a crucial sticking point in the past.

The regime’s proposal is unlikely to lead to talks. The rebels battling the Syrian military have vowed to stop at nothing less than Assad’s downfall and are unlikely to agree to sit down with a leader they accuse of mass atrocities.

But the timing of the proposal suggests the regime is warming to the idea of a settlement as it struggles to hold territory and claw back ground it has lost to the rebels in the nearly 2-year-old conflict.

Tactical victories

Opposition fighters have scored several tactical victories in recent weeks, capturing the nation’s largest hydroelectric dam and overtaking airbases in the northeast. In Damascus, they have advanced from their strongholds in the suburbs into neighborhoods in the northeast and southern rim of the capital, while peppering the center of the city with mortar rounds for days.

Monday night’s blast, which activists said was most likely a car bomb, exploded about 800 yards from Abbasid Square, a landmark plaza in central Damascus. The explosion and subsequent gunfire caused panic in the capital, although the target was not immediately clear and it was not known if there were any casualties.

On Thursday, a car bomb near the ruling Baath Party headquarters in Damascus killed at least 53 people, according to state media.

While the momentum appears to be shifting in the rebels’ direction, the regime’s grip on Damascus remains firm, and Assad’s fall is far from imminent.

‘Murderous criminals’

Still, Monday’s offer to negotiate with the armed opposition — those whom Assad referred to only in January as “murderous criminals” and refused to talk with — reflects the regime’s realization that in the long run, its chances of keeping its grip on power are slim.

Asked about al-Moallem’s remarks, US State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell said the offer of talks was a positive step “in the context of them raining Scuds down on their own civilians.” But he expressed caution about the seriousness of the offer.

“I don’t know their motivations, other than to say they continue to rain down horrific attacks on their own people,” Ventrell told reporters in Washington. “So that speaks pretty loudly and clearly.”

If the Assad regime is serious, he said, it should inform the U.N. peace envoy, Lakhdar Brahimi of its readiness for talks. Ventrell said the regime hasn’t done that yet.

Andrew Tabler, a fellow at the Washington Institute, said called the offer “a sign of weakness.”

“I think everybody knows, including Bashar Assad, that they (the regime) can’t hang onto the whole country,” Tabler said.

Mustafa Alani, an analyst with the Gulf Research Center in Geneva, said the regime has “reached the conclusion that they are heading toward a major defeat eventually, and this is the right time to negotiate.”

“They are not losing miles every day, but they are losing substantial ground every day. So the regime is not genuine (in its offer) because it has changed, it’s genuine because it is responding to a major shift in the balance of power on the ground,” he added.

Non-lethal aid

Alani cautioned, however, that the regime is also eager to keep the idea of talks alive in order to forestall any Western decision on arming the rebels. As long as the possibility of negotiations is still on the table, the US and the European Union — which have so far provided only non-lethal aid — will be reluctant to open the flood gates on weapons for the opposition, he said.

“The whole regime tactic is to delay supplying arms, to buy time,” Alani said. “The regime can show good will. Whether they’re a viable partner or not is a different story.”

It’s also unclear who exactly the regime would sit across from at the negotiating table.

The dozens of armed groups across Syria fall under no unified command and do not answer to the Syrian National Council, an umbrella group of opposition parties that the West recognizes as the legitimate representative of the Syrian people.

At least one group offered a lukewarm response Monday to al-Moallem’s proposal.

The head of one group, Free Syrian Army chief Gen. Salim Idriss, said he is “ready to take part in dialogue within specific frameworks,” but then rattled off conditions that the regime has rejected in the past.

“There needs to be a clear decision on the resignation of the head of the criminal gang, Bashar Assad, and for those who participated in the killing of the Syrian people to be put on trial,” Idriss told pan-Arab broadcaster Al-Arabiya TV.

More than 70,000 dead

He said the government must agree to stop all kinds of violence and to hand over power, saying that “as rebels, this is our bottom line.”

Syria’s 23-month-old conflict, which has killed more than 70,000 people and destroyed many of the country’s cities, has repeatedly confounded international efforts to bring the parties together to end the bloodshed. Russia, a close ally of Assad and his regime’s chief international advocate, offered Feb. 20, in concert with the Arab League, to broker talks between the rebels and the government.

With the proposal, which the Kremlin would be unlikely to float publicly without first securing Damascus’ word that it would indeed take part, Moscow ratcheted up the pressure on Syria to talk to the opposition.

Russia has shielded Assad’s government from UN action and kept shipping weapons to the military, but it is growing increasingly difficult to protect the regime as the violence grinds on.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov repeated his call Monday for Syria to negotiate with the opposition, saying before meeting al-Moallem that “the situation in Syria is at a crossroads now.” He also warned that further fighting could lead to “the breakup of the Syrian state.”

Past government offers for talks with the opposition have included a host of conditions, such as demanding that the rebels first lay down their arms. Those proposals have been swiftly rejected by both activists outside Syria and rebels on the ground.

Read: Damascus hit by its deadliest bombing in Syria war

Read next:

Comments (44 Comments)

  • Hope it can be worked out. Doubt it though. Only realistic outcome is having Assad exiled to Russia or another ally. I know he deserves justice but many will die before he us captured.

    Reply
    • B Lowe 25/02/13 #

      Re Stephen.
      Why would Assad face justice? It is the right of any sovereign nation to defend itself from terrorism. Syria has been subjected to a proxy invasion.

      Reply
    • @BLowe
      Perhaps he’d face justice for gunning down peaceful Syrian protesters – the very act that sparked this conflict, or are you forgetting that part?

      If that’s not enough maybe he’d face justice for the massacres of civilians which took place at Houla and elsewhere, not to mention the many instances of blanket shelling of civilian residential areas.

      Reply
    • God Help Us. The Syrian Revolution consisted of peaceful protests, sit-ins, and strikes initially. These were met with absolute brute force. It was the regime that militarised the conflict. Bashar should have his toe nails reefed out.

      Reply
    • SteoG 25/02/13 #

      @Khaosan Roche
      Correct, a fact some people choose to conveniiently ignore while they blame other parties of distorting the truth.

      Reply
    • B Lowe 25/02/13 #

      Re Mattoid.
      This conflict was instigated from the outset by external forces. The ex head of Russian Intelligence has said it was instigated by the outset by external forces with alterior motives. Several other commentators have also come to this conclusion after analysis.
      The massacre at Houla was not carried out by Syrian security forces.

      Reply
    • Assad is guilty of war crimes. A majority of his people wanted him gone and he fought back, literally. The opposition are being funded by vested interests but does not change facts. Much as we hated FF we were able to get rid of them. Why can’t Syrians change their government?

      Reply
    • Are you a complete moron?

      Reply
    • mattoid 26/02/13 #

      @BLowe
      The Russian powers have their own agenda for making out that the initial peaceful protests were instigated by external forces – they fear a similar ‘arab spring’ style popular uprising from within their own country. If external influences wanted to instigate a civil war in Syria don’t you think organising peaceful protests was a pretty funny way to go about it?? Just search youtube for citizen videos showing how the regime gunned down these protesters in cold blood on the orders of Assad. That is how this conflict started.

      It is completely disingenuous to state that the Houla massacre was not carried out by Syrian Security Forces. Whilst this may technically be true in that it was pro-Assad militias who were actually pulling the triggers, the UN found that the massacre was carried out with the full knowledge and backing of the Syrian Security Forces, who actually stood and looked on as the massacre was taking place, practically supervising the proceedings. The regime then went on to claim that it was rebel forces who perpetrated this war crime, and RT and other pro-Assad media outlets widely reported this as fact, until the UN managed to acquire proof of what had actually happened.

      Reply
  • B Lowe will be along any minute now to give us his opinion

    Reply
    • You beat me to it, Declan!

      Can’t really expect a lasting or equitable peace settlement but this nation needs to stop. Unimaginably complex , hoping that the killing will stop … Realistically peace is probably a long way off

      Reply
    • B Lowe 25/02/13 #

      Re Deirdre.
      The killing will stop whenever the West and Qatar/Saudi Arabia etc stop training, arming and funding foreign Islamic jihadists and sending them into Syria to cause unmitigated mayhem.
      These ‘rebels’ are made up largely of foreign Islamists. We also know now because of a slip up by a Saudi minister that Saudi Arabia has been releasing prisoners from its jails to go and cause mayhem. The latest report was of up to a 1,000 prisoners in Saudi Arabia bring transported to Turkey for arming before being sent over the border into Syria.
      God help the poor Syrian civilians.

      Reply
    • B Lowe, be careful about using God around this conflict. You might want to say “may Allah protect the Syrian people”. Surely a expert like yourself would know better. ;)

      Reply
    • B Lowe on the wrong side of history again. He seems to be a complete moron. How good is his Arabic anyway?

      Reply
    • @declan. I don’t even read his comments anymore. Once I see his avatar emerging as I’m reading the comments it’s just an automatic red thumb for me as he’s usually spouting the same old drivel

      Reply
  • Would anyone be interested in donating money to buy b Lowe a one way plane ticket to Syria?

    Reply
  • May God protect the Christian community in Syria.

    Reply
  • B Lowe 25/02/13 #

    This article is full of inaccuracies and misconceptions.
    Firstly, the Syrian government has been trying to negotiate with the ‘rebels’ for over a year now. These talks have repeatedly broke down due to the precondition of the ‘rebels’ for the head of the Syrian government to step down and also due to the widely unreported fact that Saudi Arabia and Qatar among others have refused to allow the ‘rebels’ to negotiate with the Syrian government.
    The article also refers to there being dozens of opposition groups and that this could be a problem in trying to unite to agree to negotiations. This is a complete and utter falsity. The ‘rebels’ are made up of over 1,000 different factions according to a recent Red Cross report from Syria. That’s right, and 1,000. It’s a far cry from the few dozen mentioned in the article. The article has to be questioned in its entirety and it’s objevtivity.

    The SNC is not representative of the Syrian people so why would it be recognised by Western governments. The head of the SNC has stated Syria will be an Islamic state with Sharia law. Hmmm…. that’s real representative of the secular Syrian people.

    Reply
    • No wonder the Christians in the region support Assad..

      Reply
    • SteoG 25/02/13 #

      “This article is full of inaccuracies and misconceptions”
      That is referring to your own opinion piece of course, you are now including a warning for people before they read, well done.

      Reply
    • @Jamie

      Some do, some don’t. It ain’t black and white like B Lowe says.

      @B Lowe

      2 questions if I might:

      1. Have you ever been to Syria or anywhere else in the region?
      2. What are the principle sources you use to get your info on Syria?

      Genuine questions, a chara.

      Reply
    • B Lowe 25/02/13 #

      Re SteoG.
      Anyone who is following the conflict and is a critical thinker will see straight off there are several critical flaws and plain propaganda in the article.

      Reply
    • B Low, I’ve been following this conflicts from the beginning and have a very different conclusion.
      It’s opinion and conjecture you express, certainly not facts.

      Reply
    • Stephen Starr lived in Syria for years and wrote a book about the whole thing. He does not agree with B Lowe’s opinion. I’m not saying B Lowe’s opinion means nothing if he’s never been in Syria but when you’re there you gain a much great appreciation of the considerable nuance and complexity involved.

      Reply
    • SteoG 25/02/13 #

      @B Lowe
      Critical thinking indeed, a concept that I am afraid eludes you, spouting one side and dismissing the other is evidence of uncritical thinking. Whatever flaws the article contains they are flaws that you exacerbate with your repeated regurgitated propaganda. I see you are quoting the head of Russian intelligence, and he doesn’t have any ulterior motives then, does he? To a critical thinker he would be a seriously biased source of what is known as disinformation, how convenient.
      Now, you were challenged on a number of occasions over the last year by me and others about the Houla massacre and the use of lethal force by the regimes military against unarmed peaceful protestors, at the beginning of the conflict, you remained deadly silent then, now you quote the head of Russian intelligence, I think that says a lot about your critical thinking. I suppose I am just wasting my time here with you, as you have your own one sided agenda. I see you choose to ignore Khaosan’s questions inconvenient are they?

      Reply
    • @B Lowe

      I’d be interested in your answers.

      Reply
    • SteoG 26/02/13 #

      Silence.

      Reply
    • mattoid 26/02/13 #

      Pretty funny to hear BLowe suddenly talk about critical thinking. This is a post I made to yesterday’s thread on Syria:

      “And the point I’m making is that by dismissing all anti-Assad stories as western propaganda and yet accepting without question the legitimacy of any pro-Assad stories emanating from Syria, Russia, Iran etc.,BLowe is equally as misinformed as someone who blindly accepts the ‘western’ version of events.

      “Looking at alternative media sources which are not ‘corporate’ or ‘mainstream’ and failing to critique them in any way does not give him/her some unique insight into the reality of what is happening in Syria – it just means (s)he is equally as brainwashed and guilty of lack of critical thinking as someone who thinks that all rebels are ‘good guys’ and all Assad supporters are ‘bad guys’.

      “For reasons known only to him/herself, (s)he clearly has an axe to grind with western media and US/France/NATO/UK foreign policy as is evident on all his/her posts to the Journal.”

      Reply
    • If your point of entry in analysing any conflict is trying to identify ‘good guys’ and ‘bad guys’ you’re unlikely to arrive at very interesting or accurate conclusions. This is, I think, particularly the case with Syria. We do not need to choose between uncritical support for Assad and uncritical support for the – diverse and fragmented – opposition. Truth is, both have committed atrocities no decent person could stand over.

      Apologists for the Assad regime need to bear a number of things in mind:

      1. Assad is an autocrat with no mandate to rule Syria. Power was handed to him on the death of his father. You would not tolerate undemocratic dynastic rule in Ireland, so why is it okay for Syrians? Assad, like his father, stays in power through extreme coercion and sectarian scare-mongering; control of the media, and so on. Assad is not a socialist or anti-imperialist but a violent neoliberal looter who deploys tanks and air strikes in heavily populated areas, with predictably bloody results.

      2. While Assad does enjoy some support, the revolution began as a result of the brutal state crackdown on demonstrators who took to the streets, inspired by what was going on in Tunisia and Egypt. And of course there was the now famous incident in March 2011 in which young boys who wrote anti-government graffiti on their school wall were picked up by Assad’s secret service and had their finger nails pulled out for their ‘crime’. After this, demonstrations became widespread. It wasn’t a “foreign plot” as the regime claims. Incidentally, that’s what Mubarak (Egypt) and Ben Ali (Tunisia) said too. They all say it, don’t believe the hype!

      3. People are right to flag the very real meddling of external forces like the US, Saudi, Qatar, NATO etc. However this is not an argument for supporting Assad. Nor is the presence of Islamists (from Syria or elsewhere) an argument for supporting Assad. Islamists are as entitled to fight the regime as other tendencies. It may create problems down the road, but again, it’s not an argument for supporting an oppressive, violent, illegitimate political dynasty that responds to street demonstrations with live rounds, arrests, and torture.

      4. Assad has been the architect of what will eventually be his own downfall. As Stephen Starr writes in his new book, Revolt in Syria: Eye-Witness to the Uprising :

      “The protests forced the regime’s hand. It had to choose between grasping a new future and reverting to the violent tactics that had worked so well under the previous president, albeit in a very different time. In a massive miscalculation, it chose the latter.” [p.5]

      It is indeed now a very different time. Leaders of Assad’s ilk in the region are rapidly becoming acquainted with the dustbin of history. Assad will too at some point; it’s just a question of when and in what circumstances.

      Reply
    • Thank you B Lowe! Well said!

      Reply
  • I’m beginning to think that b Lowe and Assad are one and the same :)

    Reply
  • This is the 3rd time now Assad has proposed peace talks with the rebels and he has been ignored each time. If Assad is such a tyrant why has he proposed these peace talks. I never saw Hilary Clinton going in and trying to come to any solution only back the rebels from afar as in indirect support. This is a westernised agenda on the middle east to further unstable the whole region for a hidden agenda. I believe if it came to a vote in the morning for the Syrian people Assad would win hands down, For example in the war in Iraq he took in a lot of christians from that country for refuge so i dont see how much of a tyrant he is. If this rebel regime was successful every christian in the country would be killed. Most of the rebels are not even fully syrian as for example 16 yr old boy from navan killed other day fighting for rebels was originally from Libya. Other Syrians are forced to join rebellion or death!

    Reply
  • Doe,s that mean that he won’t talk to the people with no arm,s

    Reply

Add New Comment