Syrian Kurd or Christian likely to head the SNC

Abdelbaset Sida, George Sabra and Burhan Ghalioun

By week’s end, an activist from Syria’s Kurdish or Christian minorities will most likely succeed Burhan Ghalioun as leader of Syria’s main opposition umbrella, the Syrian National Council (SNC).

Either a Syrian Kurdish native, Abdelbaset Sida, or a Syrian Christian, George Sabra, will probably be named to replace Muslim Sunnite Ghalioun at the June 9-10 meeting of the SNC executive bureau in Istanbul. Both are members of the SNC executive bureau.

Many in the opposition view Sida or Sabra's appointment as a way to convince minorities they are partners in the revolution and in shaping Syria's future. The move would also allay concerns over the Muslim Brotherhood’s hegemony in the SNC.

Ghalioun has led the SNC by consensus since its formation last October and was elected chairman in a vote held in Rome in mid-May, when Sabra came second in the ballot.

Based in Paris since the 1970s, the 67-year-old Ghalioun is the author of numerous books dealing with sociological and political issues of the Islamic world. He is director of the Centre d'Etudes sur l'Orient Contemporain (CEOC) in Paris and a professor of recycling sociology at the Université de Paris III (Sorbonne Nouvelle).

Sida, 56, is a native of al-Hasakah in Syria’s northeastern corner sandwiched between the borders with Turkey and Iraq. He holds a PhD in Philosophy and has been living in self-exile in Sweden since 1994. His book – “The Kurdish Question in Syria” – was published in 2003.

He told KurdWatch organization, which reports on human rights violations against Kurds in Syria, in an interview last November, “I try (at the SNC) to bring the Kurdish question to the fore, because it is in Syria's interest to find a just and democratic solution to this question.

“To the Syrian opposition, I say again and again: If you solve the Kurdish question, you will win as new friends more than 20 million Kurds in Northern Kurdistan, seven million Kurds in Southern Kurdistan, and up to 10 million Kurds in Eastern Kurdistan… But our main objective (for the moment) must be to overthrow the regime.”

Sabra, 65, is a working-class liberal Christian and longtime dissident now based in Paris. He spent two years in solitary confinement and only left Syria, crossing to Jordan on foot, last October following a brief spell in detention.

He is a founder member of the Damascus Declaration for National Democratic Change and an ally of Syria’s top dissident Riad al-Turk.

Turk, an 81-year-old former leftist who spent 25 years as a political prisoner, operates underground inside Syria. The opposition looks to him for moral guidance.

In a televised interview aired by Alarabiya news channel earlier this year, Sabra blamed the diffidence of Church leaders for the lack of Syrian Christian presence on the streets. He said Christians should not draw parallels with their coreligionists in post-Saddam’s Iraq and refuted remarks by Aleppo’s Roman Catholic Archbishop Jean-Clément Jeanbart that Christians don’t trust Sunnite governance.

“The history of independent Syria tells another story,” he said. He was referring to Syria of the 1950s, when the Godfather of modern Syrian politics was a Presbyterian Christian statesman, Faris el-Khoury, who served as minister, prime minister, speaker of Parliament, and represented his country at the inauguration of the United Nations.

A vote to choose between Sida and Sabra might be abandoned if there is a “consensus” agreement on one of them or on a third “dark horse.”

The case for arming the Syrian Free Army

Latest defector, Brig. Gen. Qaddour (photo from aljazeera.net)

In a sign of growing momentum, last month’s defection of Brig. Gen. Mustafa Ahmed al-Sheikh, was followed this week by the flight of Brig. Gen. Fayez Omar Qaddour, head of the Military Pilot School in Aleppo.

According to the SFA, soldiers and officers are defecting every day and are continuously being organized and assigned tasks by the group.

In its founding statement last August, the group said it wanted to "work hand in hand with the people to achieve freedom and dignity, topple the regime, protect the revolution and the country's resources and stand up to the irresponsible military machine protecting the regime.”

The strength of the SFA is unknown. But the group is now operating openly in places like Idlib province and the cities of Homs, Hama and Zabadani. It has also established control over some small pockets of resistance here and there.

The group denies any political affiliation.

The opposition umbrella known as the Syrian National Council (SNC) is close to the SFA. SNC Chairman Burhan Ghalioun says the SFA could not be ignored but should limit its activities to defending unarmed civilians.

However, the Beirut daily Assafir today quotes another leading opposition voice within the National Coordination Committee, Haytham Manna, as saying he was sticking to his three nays: no to sectarianism, no to taking up arms against the regime and no to foreign military intervention.

With the opposition yet to unify its positions ahead of next week’s “Friends of Syria” conference in Tunisia, Dr. Mahmoud al-Mubarak, a prominent Saudi professor of international law at King Feisal University, today argues the case for arming and funding the SFA.

Here is what he writes in Arabic in his think piece for Aljazeera:

From a legal perspective, the Arabs’ diplomatic breakthrough at the United Nations General Assembly on Thursday night was not exactly a victory.

Although an overwhelming majority approved the Syria resolution proposed by the Arab states, its wording was purely political. The resolution was not drafted in the frame of international law.

What the Arab states won was a nonbinding General Assembly resolution that fails to meet the minimum demands of the beleaguered Syrian people.

The resolution’s censuring of the Syrian regime and its call on the Syrian president to step aside and empower his deputy are political measures, no more.

It doesn’t take much imagination to know what the Syrian people want at the moment. They want the uninterrupted brutal and barbaric attacks against them to stop and the Syrian Free Army to be supported with weapons and funds.

The General Assembly resolution cut the Syrian peoples’ tragedy down to the person of the president and his transfer of power to his vice-president. It seemed like the General Assembly was unaware or incognizant of the Syrian people’s daily calls for regime change, not for a change of president.

Regrettably, the resolution made no reference to helping the Syrian Free Army and totally ignored the Syrian people’s legitimate right to self-defense against the inexcusable and savage attacks to which they are subjected every day.

While Syrian regime violence against Syrian civilians continues unabated, the pace of defections from the regular Syrian army is growing by the day. Defection in this case is not so much a political or military “phenomenon” but a security option for civilians and a serious political threat to survival of the regime.

Understandably, Syrian civilians are in desperate need of “legal protection” against attacks by the regular Syrian army that have been well documented by international legal bodies and human rights watchdogs.

Under international law, anyone participating in the killing, torture, rape or siege of civilians in violation of International Humanitarian Law is liable to prosecution without time limits. That applies to military people executing orders and to state officials giving the orders. Moreover, servicemen, irrespective of their rank, cannot invoke the pretext of “executing commander orders.” The “superior-subordinate” argument used by the German military during the Nuremberg Trials was refuted altogether and the matter is now enshrined in international law.

The Syrian regime’s previous and present criminal acts are not only “Crimes Against Humanity” as often mentioned in UN corridors, but “War Crimes” and “Genocide.”

The shelling of residential homes and places of worship, attacks on ambulances and hospital patients, withholding food, water and medicine from civilians and power cuts – all these are classified as "War Crimes" under the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, and Article VIII of the International Criminal Court (ICC) Statute.

Syrian regime measures to subdue Homs and other cities by deliberately targeting living conditions and citizens’ lives there is classified as “Genocide” by virtue of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and Article VI of the ICC Statute.

The Syrian Free Army, consisting of military defectors and other volunteers, has simply assumed the role of protector of civilians’ lives and rights. It is legitimate under international law to defend unarmed civilians and refuse to execute orders that contravene International Humanitarian Law.

Armed resistance against any “aggression” by a foreign country or an occupying power or a government pitted against its own people is a form of self-defense by virtue of international conventions and agreements, such as the Hague Convention of 1907, the UN Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, the four 1949 Geneva Conventions and their 1977 Additional Protocols, the 1960 Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, and numerous other Security Council, General Assembly and ICC provisions, resolutions and statements.

For all the above reasons, the Arab governments would be well-advised to ask the UN Security Council to endorse the Syrian people’s “Right of Resistance” to defend themselves by legitimate means as provided in international law. The Arab governments should also support the Syrian resistance embodied in the Syrian Free Army with weapons and funds.

In turn, the Syrian Free Army should undertake not to breach international law, to respect the Geneva Conventions and the ICC statute, and to treat humanely all those it takes captive – whether they are officials, Syrian army officers or soldiers or so-called shabiha (thugs). 

Unite and win Kurds’ hearts, Syria uprising told

Kurdish leader Massoud Barzani (photo from cbc.ca)

Three political analysts flash three signal lights in today’s regional press – one red, one yellow and one green.

***

The “red” comes from Abdul Rahman al-Rashed, head of Alarabiya TV new channel. He says the Syrian opposition risks disappointing its people and aborting the Syrian revolution if it did not team up and unite.

“The scene before us looks odd. People are struggling to bring down the regime, but there is no heir,” he writes for the Saudi daily Asharq Alawsat. Disunity within opposition ranks “allowed the regime to trick and unnerve all nations, including governments eager to see the Damascus regime evaporate. Absence of a unified opposition allowed the regime to de-structure the population’s social fabric, isolate the insurgency, intensify its crackdown and frustrate the Arab League…”

Rashed says, “Russia, China and even the United States have all declined to recognize the opposition, saying they didn’t know which opposition to recognize.

“The Russians defied the Arab side backing the Syrian people to name a replacement (to the regime in place) agreed by Syrians in the opposition. The Arab states refused to boot out the regime from the Arab League because of the lack of a consensual substitute. Calls by organizations, groups and world figures, such as Senator John McCain, to arm the opposition failed…”

Rashed says the avowed intention of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) member-states, which risked challenging the vicious Damascus regime and its ally in Tehran, is “to extend all forms of financial and material (including military) support to the opposition." Problem is they don't know "to which opposition: that in Doha, Ankara, Paris or elsewhere?”

“Were the opposition’s inability to unite continue in the coming weeks,” Rashed warns, “the opposition would have killed off the revolution and betrayed millions of Syrians” who look forward to the day when this “evil regime” passes through the gates of death.

***

The “yellow” light comes Lebanese political analyst Hazem Saghiyeh, writing for the Saudi-owned daily al-Hayat.

After the Syria resolution passed by Arab League foreign ministers at their meeting in Cairo on Sunday, he says, chances of the Syrian-Turkish front heating up have increased. This would complement regionalization of the Syrian crisis that has already brought in armed clashes in northern Lebanon, flows of Iranian and perhaps Lebanese combatants to fight alongside the Damascus regime and of Iraqi and other combatants to fight back alongside the insurgents.

Prospects of the Syrian-Turkish frontier igniting raise the issue of Syrian Kurds and their interconnection with the opposition. They also underscore the importance for the opposition to address and court the Syrian Kurds, “not only for national reasons, but for purposeful and practical reasons as well. Because Syria’s Kurdish district is close to the frontier with Turkey, Syrian Kurds could have an immeasurable influence on what happens there and in Syria’s second largest city, Aleppo.”

In other words, says Saghiyeh, co-opting the Syrian Kurds to invigorate the uprising requires “major concessions and assurances from both sides to overcome their mutual fears and suspicions.” It goes without saying, he adds, the (Syrian Arab) opposition majority needs to reassure the (Syrian Kurdish) minority first and not the other way round.

***

Dr. Othman Ali, who heads the Turkish-Kurdish Studies Center in Erbil, Iraq, flickers a “green” light in his centerpiece for Turkey’s English-language daily Today’s Zaman appropriately titled: “The struggle for the hearts of Kurds in Syria.”

He writes in part:

This new gain for the Syrian opposition was achieved after months of behind-the-scenes opposition diplomacy, intra-Kurdish negotiations and intervention from the U.S. and regional countries. This has resulted in the triumph of pro-U.S. and pro Massoud Barzani diplomacy over a pro-Iranian alternative supported by the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK).

On Dec. 3, 2011, Salah Bayaziddi wrote in The Kurdish Globe: “Syrian Kurds have enough potential to play a major role in upcoming changes in this country and their political leverage should not be ignored.” Michael Weiss of the Henry Jackson Society, a London-based foreign policy think tank, wrote, “Kurds are to determine the success of Syria’s revolution.” He clearly pointed out, “It’s only with the support of Syria’s Kurds that the Syrian National Council (SNC) will be capable of earning the allegiance of a critical mass of the Syrian population.”

There is no exact data on the size of the Kurdish population in Syria, but the most conservative estimate puts their number at two million -- around 10 percent of the total population. This makes them as important as the Alawite minority, which has ruled Syria for decades. Kurds reside mostly in the north and northeast of the country, in proximity to the Kurdish population of Iraq and Turkey. Besides, both Aleppo and Damascus have a strong Kurdish presence. Their geographical location adds to their political weight in the country.

Syrian Kurds have the potential to be a revolutionary force against Assad’s regime… Nevertheless, for a multitude of reasons, the Kurds’ participation in the Syrian uprising over the last nine months has not been as strong as that of the Sunni Arabs, and their regions have remained relatively calm.

The groups representing Syria’s Kurds are divided among themselves, with some factions backed by Iraqi Kurds and others by Turkish Kurd members of the PKK. This division is very deep…

The PKK, fearing the growing influence of Turkey in the SNC and encouraged by Iran, has decided to repair its old alliance with the Syrian regime… According to confidential sources, it was the PKK’s armed group that killed Mishal Timo, a leading member of the SNC. The presence of strong pro-PKK elements in Aleppo accounts, for instance, for the lack of major opposition activities in the city. However, the PKK’s activities and policies seem to be running against strong resentment and resistance by local Kurds who have no sympathy for Assad’s regime.

Moreover, the alliance between the U.S., Turkey and the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) in northern Iraq has managed to mitigate the impact of the PKK among the Kurds in Syria to a considerable degree. During the last month, Iran invited top KRG officials to Iran and warned them against assisting the Syrian opposition. Nevertheless, Iraqi Kurdish leaders had to heed a much stronger pressure coming from Turkey and pro-U.S. allies. Massoud Barzani, president of the KRG, was the focus of this pressure. He met with Joe Biden, vice president of the US, Burhan Ghalioun, president of the SNC, and pro-Saudi Arab leaders from Lebanon, such as Samir Geagea and Walid Jumblatt. In addition, Barzani received several letters and telephone calls from regional leaders. All these visits and contacts were urging him to use his influence to encourage Syrian Kurds not to heed the PKK and Iran’s advice and to join the Syrian opposition in their struggle to topple the government.

Eventually Barzani was convinced to take the initiative of calling Syrian Kurdish parties to a meeting in Erbil in order to formulate a policy of coordination within the Syrian opposition. This meeting was held on January 28. The Conference of Syrian Kurdish Groups and Communities… agreed as a group to switch to a pro-Barzani stance and call for the fall of the regime. However, the final communiqué makes no reference to autonomy or a federation and has merely called to settle the Kurdish question in the post-Assad era through peaceful means and democratic, secular and decentralized government processes. Some analysts have attributed the moderate tone of the communiqué to Turkish influences and a deal that Barzani struck with SNC President Burhan Ghalioun, who preempted the conference by declaring for the first time, in a televised speech, “Syria’s new constitution will protect minorities and their rights, including the Kurds, who have suffered from discrimination…” 

Probing the mind of the Syrian opposition

Burhan Ghalioun (from al-Hayat)

Syrian National Council head Burhan Ghalioun, who is New York lobbying for a UN Security Council resolution backing an Arab plan for power transfer in Syria, talking exclusively to Raghida Dergham about Russia’s stance, the chances of civil war, the Free Syrian Army, Syria's Moslem Brotherhood, Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Hezbollah:  

On the UN Syria resolution

The SNC and Syrian people don’t count on resolutions, whether coming from the Security Council or even the Arab League. This does not mean we shun political battles (in international forums). It only means our foremost battle is on the ground, on Syrian soil. The SNC’s sole purpose in fighting political battles is to bolster the Syrian revolution on the ground.

On Russia

We want Russia to change its position, to condemn the regime’s violence against the Syrian people and to recognize that people’s rights to freedom, dignity and democracy. The Russians are getting there. They used to dwell on foreign conspiracies and gangs etc… But for the first time in our meetings, they have started to talk of the people’s rights. They recognize that people (in Syria) are struggling for their rights and freedom. But they (Russians) insist on a solution being reached through dialogue.

We’re not against dialogue. But we can’t be here today mustering UN Security Council support for the Arab League peace blueprint and leave suddenly for Russia to negotiate with the regime. We told them (Russians) so. I told (Russia's Ambassador to the United Nations) Vitaly Churkin if Russia did not wield its veto and were to let the Security Council resolution pass, we could have (all-Syria) negotiations in Moscow on the transfer of power as stipulated in the Arab peace plan. We don’t have a problem with the venue, except that any initiative has to fulfill the transfer of power to the people. Thus, possible negotiations in Moscow would have to be about the transfer of power. There won’t be negotiations with the regime, but negotiations on transfer of power procedures.

On the U.S. and UN

We did not seek U.S. assistance in our meetings with either (U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs) Jeffrey Feltman or (U.S. Special Middle East Peace Envoy's assistant, Frederick) Hoff. We discussed UN Security Council options. I said there were two choices. One is to stand our ground with the Russians and accept their veto. That would give the regime another two- or three-week breathing space to continue the killings. The second option is to try and convince India, Pakistan, South Africa and perhaps Russia to back a resolution that would save Russia’s face but would not erode the essence of the resolution.

That’s what we discussed with them (Americans). We did not seek or discuss any sort of assistance. We asked the European Union to set up a fund that would extend material and humanitarian aid to the Syrian people. That’s what we asked of the Arabs and will be asking of the United States and everyone else in the world. I don’t think the Americans wish to do more than that.

In my meeting here at the UN with the Assistant Secretary-General for Political Affairs, I also requested humanitarian and relief aid to the Syrian people at this stage.

On the chances of civil war

I think sectarian tensions have increased substantially. There have been clashes here and there. And there will be more of them. But I am certain the Syrian people will steer clear of internecine strife. Proof is that the regime tried but failed to ignite one.

On Assad standing down

We unequivocally and unhesitatingly want Assad to stand down. His regime is crumbling already. The regime is crippled. There is no regime left in Syria. There is chaos being exploited by a president trying to remain in office… (Assad’s deputy) Farouk al-Sharaa won’t head a (new) regime. He will be a cover-up for the transfer of power. He will be an implement for burying the regime.

On the Moslem Brotherhood

You cannot compare Egypt’s Moslem Brothers, for instance, with Syria’s. Egypt’s Moslem Brothers remained a cohesive and strong party throughout the recent past when the Moslem Brotherhood in Syria was practically nonexistent. Syria’s Moslem Brothers are now rebuilding their ranks. But I don’t think Syria’s Moslem Brotherhood is after Islamist rule in Syria. They are calling for multiparty cooperation with other political forces in a democratic government. It’s not in their interest to play the hegemonic card either during or after the revolution. Syrian public opinion aspires for freedom and not for a new dictatorship.

On recognition of the SNC

The SNC is a council, not a state. Unlike a state, it lacks a foothold on the national soil. We are a complementary component of the Syrian revolution. We are not a substitute to the regime. The regime’s replacement will emerge from the ballot box and through new state institutions.

On the Free Syrian Army

Recourse to arms by the army defectors was quintessential because civilians are lacking protection. They (army defectors) assumed part of a role that was shunned by the international community.

My fear is not the recourse to arms. My worry is failure to gather and organize the emerging military force so it can stay under political orders. We don’t want the emerging military force to operate, after the regime’s fall, independently of an organized political structure. That’s my fear. Hence the SNC drive to build relations with the SFA. We want the SFA to submit to a chain and command political structure and become the nucleus of the anticipated Syrian national army instead of a militia.

On Turkey and Iran

Rivalry between Turkey and Iran is far from being sectarian. They are the region’s heavyweights. They are sparring for a strategic trophy, which is Syria.

The SNC does not have relations with the Iranians. They tried building bridges and initiating a dialogue with us. We said we recognized Iran as a great regional power but we would not negotiate with any side opposing our people’s aspirations. We will negotiate with the Iranians once they issue a statement upholding the right of the Syrian people to a democratic regime.

On Hezbollah

There has been a marked change in the tone of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah’s speeches. In his early speeches he always talked of U.S. or foreign conspiracies and accused me of wanting to sever relations with Hezbollah. That’s not true. I said Hezbollah wouldn’t be the same after change in Syria. Hezbollah changed the tone of its rhetoric even before the regime’s exit. It will tone it down further after the Assad regime’s exit.

On Iraq

I am aware there are Iraqi sides solidly behind the Syrian regime. Where Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is concerned, he sent us messages to meet so he can declare his support of the Syrian people. We said we were waiting to hear such support, in which case we would head to Baghdad, meet with the Iraqi government and pave the way for new relations between Iraq and the anticipated democratic Syria. We are also waiting for the political situation in Iraq to clear. We don’t want to get involved in it.

(Raghida Dergham’s 4,000-word interview with Burhan Ghalioun is published in Arabic today in al-Hayat)

All-Syria talks in Moscow could break UN impasse

Wahhab with Assad in Damascus yesterday (photo from www.champress.net)

A call for all-Syria talks in Moscow sounds like the panacea likely to break the impasse in ongoing UN talks on Syria.

Ms Raghida Dergham, pan-Arab daily al-Hayat’s senior diplomatic correspondent in Washington and New York, reports this morning:

“The focal point of negotiations with Russia is a tradeoff whereby Russia agrees to back the Arab initiative enshrined in the Security Council resolution and the opposition Syrian National Council accepts Russia’s invitation for talks with the regime in Moscow.”

She says SNC leader Burhan Ghalioun told her in an exclusive interview to be released tomorrow, Friday, “If Russia is prepared to let the Security Council resolution pass by withholding its veto, there could be some rounds of negotiations in Moscow on the transfer of power as specified in the Arab initiative… We have no problem with the venue” so long as it leads to the transfer of power.

Russia’s UN envoy to Vitaly Churkin Tuesday urged the parties to the Syrian conflict to start dialogue. He said his country invited “the Syrian authorities and all opposition groups [to send their representatives to Moscow within mutually acceptable time periods to hold informal contacts without preconditions.

“It is very important to start a dialogue now, during which the necessary agreements on the country’s political future will be specified.”

A day earlier, the Russian foreign ministry said, "Our offer has already received a positive response from the Syrian authorities."
 But Ghalioun rejected the offer, telling AFP President Bashar al-Assad’s “resignation is the condition for any negotiation on the transition to a democratic government in Syria."

The foreign ministry said talks in Moscow were "acutely necessary for the immediate cessation of all violence in Syria and preventing a bloody split in society."

They would also help ensure the "success for profound democratic changes in the country, in keeping with the aspirations of all Syrians."

Russia said its offer to host talks was aimed at ending the crisis "through a peaceful mechanism worked out by the Syrians themselves, without international interference."

In Beirut, Wiam Wahhab, Lebanon’s one-time cabinet minister who heads the Druze-dominated Arab Tawhid Party, says in the wake of his three-hour one-on-one meeting with Assad in Damascus on Wednesday: “I found him (Assad) reassured and unperturbed. He trusts Russia’s stand, saying Moscow’s tackling of the Syria File is not circumstantial or ephemeral as some people imagine.” Wahhab also quoted Assad as telling him: ”The decisive phase has begun, but that won’t hamper planned reform. At the end of the day, chaos is much more costly than decisiveness.”

Saudi Arabia talks tough on Syria & Arab League

Syria has dismissed -- as an infringement on its sovereignty -- a peace roadmap hammered out by the Arab League foreign ministers while Saudi Arabia suggests the plan is stillborn and the League itself is incurable.

Saudi Arabia pulled out of the League's Syria observer mission, whose mandate was renewed for another month on Sunday, saying Damascus had broken promises on the earlier Arab peace protocol.

The new League proposal, to be presented to the United Nations Security Council for endorsement, mirrors the Gulf plan on Yemen that saw President Ali Abdullah Saleh agree to leave office. It calls on President Bashar al-Assad to delegate power to his vice-president to engage in proper dialogue with the opposition within two weeks, and form a national unity government in two months, followed by presidential and parliamentary elections.

Tariq Alhomayed, chief editor of the leading Saudi daily Asharq Alawsat, which reflects and articulates official Saudi thinking, wonders if there are other Arab takers of the kingdom’s position on Syria.

He writes this Monday morning:

Saudi Arabia has shut out all procrastinators, dawdlers and conspirators against the Syrian people and their revolution. It has shut out all those trying to bail out the tyrant Assad when its foreign minister announced the withdrawal of Saudi monitors from Syria and appealed to the international, Arab and Islamic communities to exert all efforts possible to spare Syrian blood.

Foreign Minister Saud al-Feisal went further. He received a Syrian opposition delegation led by Burhan Ghalioun while the Arab League’s ministerial panel on Syria was in conference. This means he sought to bring down the curtain on dilly-dallying in the Arab League. He showed Saudi Arabia was determined to exercise its leadership role in the Arab and Moslem worlds in order to safeguard Syrian blood. His meeting with the Syrian opposition effectively tore up Gen. Mohammed al-Dabi’s progress report on the observer mission he headed in Syria.

Dabi’s report comes across as being submitted to Assad, confirming that the Arab League is irremediable. The Arab League’s role is bound to become worse when Nouri al-Maliki’s Iraq assumes the League’s rotating chairmanship. A lifeline would be thrown to Assad then, since Tehran is now openly declaring that Iraq is in Iran’s sphere of influence.

Having said that, the way forward is (1) to set up a regional alliance comprising Saudi Arabia and its Gulf partners, Turkey and other willing Arab and non-Arab states to take charge of the Syria file, and (2) for the five other members of the GCC to follow in Saudi Arabia’s footsteps and meet with Burhan Ghalioun and co-opt the Syrian opposition.