The European Council on Foreign Relations

Calling Russia’s bluff on Syria?

Date: 2nd February 2012  |  Author: Julien Barnes-Dacey,

Categories: Middle East and North Africa,
Tags: , russia, syria, un

With the ability of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to impose restrictions on Bashar al-Assad apparently blocked in the face of Russian intransigence, the prospect of meaningful international action on Syria appears slim. Meanwhile, President Assad has made clear his unwilling to let up his repressive stance - indeed levels of violence by security forces have only increased in the last week – leaving the fate of Syrian protestors as dark as ever. Although the UNSC may eventually pass a resolution the price of Russian support is likely to be a watered-down motion that will be close to ineffective in exerting any pressuring on Assad.

However, there remains one international option on the table that has yet to be fully considered: Russia's proclaimed willingness to host peace talks between the Syrian government and the opposition. While Damascus has said it would be prepared to enter into this dialogue, opposition groups have understandably rejected the proposal, ruling out any dialogue whatsoever until Assad steps down from power and security forces pull back. The opposition also holds very legitimate concerns about the impartiality of Russian mediation: Moscow has made clear that it remains firmly committed to ensuring the longevity of the Assad regime (if not Assad himself), a key strategic partner in the Middle East.

Nonetheless, perhaps the Russian option should be given greater consideration by both the Syrian opposition and the international community. Rather than rejecting it out of hand, could not the international community embrace the proposal, turning it into an international conference and using it to secure a wider condemnation of the Assad regime that includes Russia?

If certain prerequisites could be imposed upon the Moscow meeting - notably wide opposition and international participation that allow a firm line to be maintained on the necessity of Assad’s departure - the conference could potentially achieve important purposes, serving to either end violence if Assad consents to the demands, or - if as is likely, he rejects them - making Moscow less willing to maintain absolute support for the regime.

By offering sponsorship of the conference Moscow is placing its own credibility on the line. As such the conference could serve to significantly undermine its position by demonstrating the inability of meaningful negotiations with Assad. Despite Moscow's obstinacy to date, it is already facing considerable pressure to reverse position - most notably from the accumulated weight of the wider Arab world, as well as Europe and the US - and may be wary of pushing its position to the brink if a conference of its own sponsorship fails.

To be sure, any dialogue with the regime - particularly one sponsored by Moscow - is anathema to many. And yet as violence deepens, and the prospect of a devastating civil war grows, there is much to be said for any attempted negotiations that might weaken Assad's position. Engaging the Russian proposal - and using it to demonstrate that the Assad regime is beyond redemption - could squeeze Moscow internationally, making it less willing to confront the international consensus on Syria. Indeed, demonstrating willingness to work with Russia’s proposal might incentivise Moscow to ultimately back a more meaningful UNSC resolution on Syria rather than the watered down version now on the table.

Share or like this blog post Print this post