The European Council on Foreign Relations

Time to talk to Assad?

Date: 8th February 2012  |  Author: Julien Barnes-Dacey,

Categories: Middle East and North Africa,
Tags: , diplomacy, syria, violence, assad

Syria is seeing a significant escalation in violence, and unfortunately much of it points to the military superiority of the Assad regime. Short of foreign military intervention or the arming of the opposition – both of which have significant dangers of their own - it is increasingly hard to see how Assad can be pulled from power any time soon.

As such perhaps it is time for a change in diplomatic tack on the part of the international community, which continues its diplomatic manoeuvrings with few tangible results on the ground. As distasteful as it might sound, it may be time to recognise the ongoing might (and some domestic support) of the Assad regime, and be prepared to enter into negotiation with him in the hope of ending the brutal violence now unfolding. This will be anathema to much of the opposition(which will understandably have to be pushed to the table), but with its options narrowing and the death toll mounting it may be the best way forward. Moreover, with the regime as neutered as it already is, and any negotiations likely to involve significant concession on its part (even if it does not accept its immediate removal from power) this could mark an alternative way of cementing its eventual demise, though the time frame would not be as rapid as many would hope.

Accordingly, the West should consider abandoning any absolute aim of immediately deposing Assad, and should refocus its efforts on finding a negotiated solution led by neutral third parties, with an end to violence and regional stability as its core goals.

To reach such an end goal, it might be worth revisiting the Friends of Syria group currently under discussion.  Instead, an international contact group that includes Russia and which is expressly committed to securing a political solution, should be set up that moves the crisis away from the poisoned chalice of the UN. The contact group could be led by states perceived as neutral – perhaps India or Brazil (or even Turkey, which though it has turned on the regime may nonetheless maintain important leverage) – but must have full international backing and will need to reach out in equal measure to both the regime and the opposition, positioning itself as an arbiter rather then the firm backer of the opposition.

Importantly – and contrary to wider opinion - the wider Arab League (AL) should not lead this process. Although the Arab world must be involved, Syria’s position as the focus of a broader regional conflict centred on Iran, means that the AL, which has effectively become a diplomatic tool of the Gulf states, will struggle to assume leadership of any meaningful attempt at negotiations.

If negotiations, which would have to be preceded by a complete end to all violence, were to proceed they would be likely to lead down a (long) path towards a new constitution and a reform committee that could manage the eventual transition from Assad’s already severely weakened regime. While Assad would likely see this as a victory, he would be hard pressed in a neutral setting – and Russia would have to take the lead on this which is why its involvement is key – to make very significant political concessions. In a climate where he has already lostmost national legitimacy this could serve as his final death knoll, though the political process would take longer to play out.  To ensure compliance the international community would have to use both carrots (lifting of sanctions) and sticks including the very real prospect of a militarisation of the opposition if violence does not end. Intervention should remain firmly on the table as the price that Assad will pay if negotiations fail.

Syria is already in a civil war, so the real choice is to intensify or pull back. The former means either military intervention or the complicated dangers of supporting the opposition. The latter involves holding one’s nose and trying to cut a deal that includes the regime in the name of an end to violence and avoiding another situation akin to Iraq. 

Share or like this blog post Print this post