The Future of Syria, From the Opposition’s Perspective
- Bader Jamous, President of the Syrian Negotiation Commission
- Patrick Haenni, Advisor, Humanitarian Dialogue Centre (Moderator)
In this policy debate, which preceded the fall of the Assad regime by ten days, Patrick Haenni, Senior Advisor for Middle East Affairs at the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue and Dr Badir Jamous, President of the Syrian Negotiation Commission, discussed the current developments in Syria, and the prevailing political landscape, diplomatic stagnation, regional and international interventions, and the worsening humanitarian crisis amid escalating regional tensions.
Diplomatic Stalemate and Declining International Attention on Syria
One of the most pressing challenges Syria faced recently was its diminished priority on the international agenda due to escalating global crises such as the war in Ukraine, the conflict in Gaza, and the instability in Lebanon. To Haenni, there was a prevailing diplomatic and media perception that Syria is “frozen,” with little prospect for change despite the cessation of active combats in recent years. However, and despite this, Haenni emphasized that this stagnation is unlikely to persist indefinitely due to mounting internal and external pressures. Syria continuously sustains Israeli airstrikes and from within, the economic crisis and continuous migration of Syrians in search of better living conditions reflects a source of deep-rooted instability in the country.
The Political Landscape and International Interventions
Dr. Badr Jamous underscored that the Syrian Negotiation Commission is the official body recognized by the United Nations to negotiate Syria’s future. This body represents all components of the Syrian people rather than any specific region. Jamous believes that the Syrian crisis has become an international battleground where Russia, Iran, the United States, Turkey and Israeli have developed a stake. This situation has resulted in an implicit but precarious equilibrium among the competing powers. This situation, however, argued Jamous, has controlled the levels of violence without being resolved.
Furthermore, Jamous asserted that this stagnation does not mean the conflict has ended, as social unrest could erupt at any moment due to ongoing economic woes, lack of political solutions, and the absence of a viable exit strategy. He noted that “every Syrian citizen today is looking for a way to leave the country rather than return to it,” indicating the worsening living conditions and lack of trust in the regime’s ability to enact meaningful change.
Diplomatic Initiatives: Arab Normalization and Talks with Turkey
Badir Jamous also discussed recent diplomatic initiatives, particularly the normalization between Damascus and Arab states and the rapprochement talks between Damascus and Ankara. He clarified that engagement with Arab states never ceased, either before or after normalization. However, if the objective of normalization with Syria is merely to restore relations with the regime without any political reforms, then the crisis is likely to persist. Arab states have engaged with Damascus for various reasons: the danger of drug trafficking (Captagon), the refugee crisis, and counterterrorism. However, more than 17 months after Syria’s reintegration into the Arab League, no significant progress has been made on any of these critical issues.
In relation to political settlement, Jamous emphasized that the Syrian regime is not only unwilling to make political concessions but also incapable of doing so, arguing that Syria’s resolution lies in genuine national reconciliation and a comprehensive overhaul to rebuild the state on new foundations inclusive of all components of Syrian society.
Turkey has clear demands from Syria whereby unconditional normalization with the Syrian regime is quite unlikely, according Jamous. Ankara demands steps towards a political solution, a new constitution, elections, as well as doable settlement for the refugees in Turkey.
Political Stalemate and Potential Escalation
Patrick Haenni raised questions about possible scenarios to break Syria’s current political stagnation, noting that the crisis has not only exhausted the Syrian people but also strained the governing authorities in Syria. In support, Jamous referenced the case of Suwayda, which remained largely neutral during the war but witnessed widespread protests following Arab normalization with the Syrian regime, reflecting sustained popular discontent across various Syrian regions. He warned that the Syrian people have reached a point where they have nothing left to lose, and ongoing poverty, lack of education, and the absence of political solutions will inevitably lead to further unrest.
Regional Escalation and Its Impact on Syria
The discussion also tackled the repercussions of Israeli strikes against Iran-backed militias in Syria. Jamous argued that the Syrian regime facilitated the intervention of these militias from the outset, transforming Syria into a battleground for regional power struggles. He noted that while Israel continues to strike targets inside Syria without significant retaliation from the regime, the latter persists in bombing northern Syria. The Syrian opposition has repeatedly urged the United Nations and the international community to pressure for the expulsion of foreign militias from Syria, as the country cannot sustain further armed conflicts.
The session concluded with a warning that the ongoing stagnation threatens further political and humanitarian deterioration unless a comprehensive plan is formulated to resolve the conflict and rebuild Syria under a new social contract that ensures the rights of all its people. Participants also stressed that unilateral regional engagements with the Syrian regime, without linking them to genuine political reforms, would complicate the crisis rather than resolve it.
MERI Forum 2024
The Future of Syria: Prospects for Peace and Recovery