Brahimi’s update to UN Security Council – full text

Credit to Nabil Abi Saab’s “UN Report” for releasing this April 19 briefing to the Security Council by Lakhdar Brahimi, the joint special representative of the United Nations and League of Arab States for Syria:

Mr. President, Distinguished Members of the Security Council,

1. I thank you Mr. President for giving me the opportunity to brief the Council once again on Syria. This is an honor indeed and I am very much aware that I’ll be speaking under the Chair of the Distinguished Ambassador of Rwanda, a country where people know a thing or two about repression, injustice and suffering, all things we shall be saying much about during our conversation this morning.

2. Yesterday, the Council held an open session and heard from Valerie Amos, Antonio Gueterres, Zainab Bangura and Leila Zerrougui, who described the dire humanitarian situation in all its manifestations. They spoke with the authority of their respective high positions and the intimate knowledge they have acquired of the situation. They spoke with eloquence and emotion about the sufferings of millions of Syrians inside and outside their country. They highlighted for you in particular the unbearable conditions under which children live and die and the many humiliations women and girls have to endure.

3. To what you heard yesterday, there is nothing I can add – except perhaps the following remarks:

a) Let us spare a thought for the tens of thousands of prisoners and detainees held in official prisons and secret detention centers, most of who are routinely subjected to torture and humiliating and degrading treatment. And let us once again call for their immediate release.

b) Let us remember that even when they still have a roof over their head, and some income, practically every man, woman and child in Syria, except the very privileged few, live in constant fear; fear that the next car bomb may go off in front of their home; fear that their workplace may be blown up or forced to close; fear that the bakery of the neighborhood will be destroyed; fear of being arrested by one of the many security branches; fear that one’s child will be kidnapped. In short, everyone in Syria today lives with terror in their hearts that a catastrophe is waiting to affect their shattered lives.

c) Let me express once again my appreciation of, and my gratitude for the generosity of those governments, organizations and individuals who have given so much to help needy Syrians at home and abroad. The same appreciation and gratitude go to tireless workers -- Syrians and foreigners -- who, at considerable risk some of the time, work around the clock to try to bring aid and comfort to those same, needy Syrians.

d) And last but not least, let me underline the important point made yesterday to the effect that we cannot expect the generosity of donors and the dedication of aid workers to solve Syria’s problem: you all know better than I do that the generosity of donors and the dedication of aid workers is not the solution.

Mr. President, Distinguished Members of the Council,

4. All in this room are aware that efforts to bring the violence to an end and to restore peace have not been successful so far. I am personally, profoundly sorry that that my own efforts have produced so little. I apologize to the Syrian people for having, in the end, done so little for them during these past eight months and to you, in this Council, for having had only sad news to report to you, each of the four times I have addressed the Council.

Mr. President,

5. It may be useful, for our purpose today, to rapidly look back at the past efforts to tackle the Syrian conflict. There may be a lesson or two that can be usefully learned for the future.

6. It is generally agreed by all, including in circles that are very close to the heart of power in Damascus, that the crisis could have been solved in its prime infancy -- indeed in its first few days, when those kids wrote graffiti on some Walls in the Southern city of Deraa. It is said that President Bashar al-Assad was advised to travel to Deraa, apologize to the victims and their families, offer generous compensation, dismiss the governor and those who were responsible with him for the brutality and hold them to account, announce there and then a comprehensive package of reforms that would be diligently and honestly implemented. That did not happen. In his long TV interview two days ago, President Bashar al-Assad made a reference to this episode and said “he was right NOT to have followed that advice”!!

7. The Arab League then tried to help. Its efforts culminated in the Arab observer mission led by Gen. Al-Dabi from the Sudan. It is said that the mission was doing reasonably well but the cooperation from the parties was not apparently meeting the expectations of Arab States; the conflict was expanding much faster than the efforts to end it.

8. Kofi Annan was then brought on as Joint Special Envoy of the Secretaries-General of the United Nations and the League of Arab States. The Security Council immediately endorsed his 6-point plan and the necessary UN observer mission, UNSMIS, was deployed to monitor implementation.

9. Kofi Annan then brought together the now famous Action Group of Countries whose Foreign Ministers met in Geneva and produced another remarkable document: the Declaration of 30 June, followed by its Action Plan. Unfortunately, Kofi’s creativity and diligence also fell short: the steps needed to implement the plan were not taken.

10. Kofi’s admirable and creative ideas were defeated by the determination and confidence of each party to the conflict that they can win on the ground and, as Kofi himself said, by the lack of unity in the international community, and especially inside this Council to give his plan the necessary support to overcome the strong resistance he was encountering on the ground.

11. When I arrived on the scene, I thought I should try to overcome the difficulties Kofi encountered by concentrating my efforts in two directions: (i) talk to the parties to the conflict inside and outside Syria, as well as to their respective regional and international backers and; (ii) see if the Security Council would unite again to effectively support the Geneva communiqué and Action Plan and my own work aimed at creating the conditions conducive to its implementation.

12. I was constantly asked to produce a Brahimi plan. But what l was working on was how to help produce a Syrian plan to implement Geneva, which specifically said that what was needed was a Syrian-led process. Unfortunately, progress at the local and regional levels was almost nil and, at the international level, progress was both far too slow and too modest.

13. Then, on 30 January, came the surprising initiative of Moaz al-Khatib, the president of the National Coalition of Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces (NCSROF), the opposition organization set up in November 2012. As you will recall this initiative came soon after my previous briefing to this Council on 29 January 2013. In that briefing, l had said, amongst other things, that there were no prospects that Syrians could accept to talk to one another to put an end to the violence and agree on a process for a political, peaceful solution.

14. Moaz al-Khatib’s initiative seemed to prove me wrong on that particular point. Indeed, that initiative, in its simple, almost naïve form, was a breath of fresh air and a ray of hope in a profoundly bleak situation. It was, as a French expression puts it: “un coup de pied dans la fourmilière”, a stir in the pot, a stone thrown in dormant waters, a vigorous shout to all concerned that said, “Yes, peace is possible. Let us make it happen.”

15. Sheikh Moaz asked nothing more of the government than to deliver passports to Syrian expatriates who needed them and to release the tens of thousands of political prisoners. He later lowered his demand to the immediate release of women prisoners only. These were not really preconditions: a simple reminder of purely humanitarian problems and demands that were unanimously made by Syrians of all walks of life and political and religious persuasion as well as by people the world over.

16. The government in Damascus was surprised and embarrassed; its reaction was slow and confused. After some contradictory declarations and a Visit by Foreign Minister Walid Muallem to Moscow, the government at long last, declared it was ready to meet with a delegation representing the opposition in what they called a “pre-dialogue” in Moscow, Geneva or Vienna. Meanwhile, Moaz al­Khatib’s own colleagues in the Coalition took a different direction. Meeting in Cairo, in February, they rejected their chairman’s proposal and decided that, in the future, no initiative would come out from their organization except from the general assembly -- all 70 or so members of them.

17. The next step came from the League of Arab States, whose Council of Ministers adopted a resolution on 6 March 2013 inviting the Coalition to form what they called an Executive Body, to attend the Arab Summit on 26 and 27 March and represent Syria in all the agencies of the League of Arab States system, until elections are held in Syria. The ministerial resolution was endorsed by the Arab Summit.

18. If the language of that resolution is to be taken literally, this means that, for the League of Arab States, the Geneva process is to be considered obsolete; no dialogue or negotiations are possible or necessary.

19. If in this depressing environment, we want to nonetheless find some hopeful signs, l would point out to the acceptance by the Coalition, for the first time that, under some conditions, they would consider a political process. And also the fact that the government has at long last moved from the position that the vague dialogue they were promoting would have to take place in Damascus and agreed to meet the other side outside of the country.

20. Even these meager, positive elements were soon put in question by Mr. (Ghassan) Hitto, the premier-designate of the government that the Coalition is trying to form, when he solemnly declared that his side wouldn’t participate in any dialogue with Damascus. On his part, President Bashar al-Assad in his long television interview two days ago again spoke of the opposition and of his understanding of dialogue in terms that are hardly encouraging.

21. On the ground, fighting has intensified, causing more victims, more destruction and more dislocation of society. That is why Valerie Amos told you yesterday there are now 6.8 million people who need aid inside Syria and Antonio Gueterres that the number of refugees will go up to 3.5 million by the end of the year. If you add to those already staggering numbers, that of hundreds of thousands of Syrians who left their country but are not officially registered as refugees, we would be saying that almost 50% of the Syrian population is being gravely affected by the conflict. I wonder if this is not a depressing record in the history of conflict, reminiscent perhaps of the exodus of Palestinians from their land in 1948 and 1967.

Mr. President,

22. Over the last few Weeks, a great deal of attention has been focused on al-Qaeda, Jabhat Al-Nusra and other similar groups fighting the regime in Syria. Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri, the leader of al-Qaeda International, and Jabhat Al-Nusra itself have confirmed what was already common knowledge and that is that Jabhat Al-Nusra and other like-minded groups were formally affiliated to al-Qaeda or shared in its ideology and practices.

23. Equally confirmed is the fact that al-Nusra and its sister organizations were more important than originally thought. The Financial Times yesterday seemed to know that they represent only 10% of those who are engaged in the armed struggle against the regime. There also is more talk than ever about non-Syrians participating in the fighting in Syria, mostly Arabs but also other nationalities from Asia and Europe, East and West. Are all these foreign volunteers fighting in the ranks of al-Nusra and its sisters or are they spread more or less evenly among various armed groups? I don’t know. Nor do l know how credible are the numbers of those foreign fighters that vary considerably from one source to another. Four months ago, a reliable source close to the regime estimated the number of foreign fighters at a few hundred men and Jabhat al-Nusra at 3,000 to 5,000. Another source, now speaks of no less than 30,000 to 40,000 foreign fighters.

24. Foreign presence on the side of the government is also a reality. Both Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, the secretary-general of Hezbollah, and an official spokesperson in Tehran have confirmed that they were militarily present in Syria. How many; where; and doing what? There again, I do not know for certain. And again, these numbers vary widely from one source to the other; with some saying Hezbollah is only protecting religious Shiite shrines and the Iranians providing a few military advisors, and others claiming that the well-coordinated Hezbollah-lran presence counts thousands of fighters actively engaged alongside Government forces, plus advisers helping the regime form what they call the “People’s Army”, a decentralized militia force acting locally to replace or support the shadowy and much feared Shabiha gangs.

Mr. President

25. Until recently, the debate was moving back and forth from prediction of imminent fall of the regime to claims that the armed opposition was loosing momentum. I fear the debate may now shift to arguments about the importance of al-Qaeda and associated groups and how that will, or should, affect the attitude of regional and international players.

26. I hope the tree is not going to hide the wood. To learn who is who in the confrontation in and about Syria is necessary and important. I think it is fairly certain the regional dimension of the conflict in Syria is growing: features of a proxy war are more and more apparent but the conflict remains essentially a savage civil war between Syrians, and the sectarian dimensions of the crisis are perhaps more important to watch and understand than the participation of foreigners in the struggle. As for extremism, Syrians and international partners have every reason to be concerned over its effects on the present situation and on its possible long-term influence. The way to contain extremisms and reduce its influence is to more actively act to end the conflict.

27. Going forward, the choice for Syrian parties and for the international community has not changed and will not change: Is it going to be a deadly, destructive fight to the finish because each party and its supporters are convinced that total victory is not only possible but certain for them, or are these parties and their supporters going to agree, at long last, that there is no military solution to this conflict and that a serious negotiation is urgently needed to work out a political solution?

28. Many worthy ideas are floated around and discussed in many quarters on how to move forward. From the Quartet set up at the initiative of President Mohamed Morsi of Egypt, to Russia, to China, to the Friends of Syria and to many learned academics and journalists. All have in common a demand for an urgent end to the violence and a negotiated process, mediated by a qualified and accepted party.

Mr. President,

29. Antonio Guterres spoke to you yesterday with the authority of his office and the intimate knowledge he has of the present situation in Syria. His speech also drew on his experience as a former political leader in his country, Portugal. Permit me to remind you of a few of his words. I quote:  “helping Syria’s neighbors deal with the human fallout of this terrible conflict is crucial for preserving the stability of the entire region. This is not just another refugee crisis -- what happens in Syria and in the neighboring countries potentially has much wider, even global, implications... Failure to give these countries [Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey and others] the support they need to continue providing sanctuary to so many suffering Syrians would not only mean to abandon a people, and a whole region. It would be the world blindness to its own best interest” End of quote.

30. Antonio Guterres also said and I quote again: “There is no humanitarian solution for the Syrian crisis. That is why it is so dramatic that we are not even seeing an inch of progress towards a political solution.” And he asks: “Isn’t there any way to stop this fighting to open the door for a political solution?”

31. That last question was addressed to you, Mr. President, and to your colleagues, the members of the Security Council. Are you not the court of last appeal when peace and security are at risk? And where are peace and security more at risk today than in Syria, a country that is literally drowning and taking down an entire region down with it?

32. Yes, the problem is difficult, the situation becomes more complex by the day, the regime is not quite ready to listen, the opposition not as united as it should be around an established leadership and a credible, constructive political program. Yes, this situation appears to be totally hopeless, with no light to be seen at the end of a long tunnel Syria is lost in.

33. In an article written with Sarah Birke and published only three days ago, Peter Harling of ICG, a very perceptive observer of the Syria and the Middle East scene, says and I quote: “Given a chance, (Syrian) society may pull through; it might fare better still of the conflict draws to a close and the aftermath is skillfully handled. With each day of the conflict – today is day 763 – those chances become slimmer, diminishing Syrians’ sense of national identity and their pride in their society… With incremental indecisive interference from all sides, further escalation is almost inevitable. Syria’s all-out civil war, if it comes to that, will no doubt go down in conventional wisdom as an outburst of communal hatred, inevitable within a mixed society. Nothing could be further from the truth. It is product of an international standoff. However Syrians suffer, the war in their country is not in their hands: it is conflict that disfigures Syrian society more than reflects it” End of quote.

34. Might it be said -- Mr. President -- that the solution of that war is in your hands, members of the Security Council?

35. That does not mean, of course that Syrians have no role to play in the search for a solution to the crisis in their country. Important developments need to take place before a decisive shift away from the existing violence towards a political process can be credibly initiated. In particular, on the side of the opposition, a more consistent and sustained effort to reinforce and expand unity and discipline in their ranks inside and outside the country, among civilians, among armed groups, and between civilians and the military.

36. Also on the side of the opposition and some – not all – of their supporters, an understanding that external military intervention is neither likely or desirable; nor can such an intervention be provoked. Furthermore, it is perfectly legitimate for them to demand that President Bashar al-Assad leave office and his regime be dismantled. But, these are objectives, and processes needed to be elaborated to achieve them. Every conflict needs at a certain stage to be politically addressed. It is high time, after two long years, to start working, with others on such a political process for Syria. Moaz al-Khatib’s initiative in February should be further developed not discarded.

37. On the side of the regime, it is equally urgent to give up the dream of a military victory. That is not going to happen. Nor is it realistic to expect that somehow, because of the perceived growing importance of al-Nusra, a spectacular shift is to going to push the regime and the West into an unholy alliance to fight Islamic terrorism. President Assad, two days ago, said very clearly that what is taking place in his country is war. He does not agree that this is a civil war (nor does the opposition, in fact). But surely, a war cannot be brought to an end through a vague dialogue with mainly the supporters of one’s own side. It needs a negotiation between the warring parties. Nor should the dialogue be expected to lead to limited or cosmetic reforms. That has been tried and did not work.

38. In this context, I will venture to add this: President Assad consistently insisted that, as a Syrian citizen, it was his right to run for election if he wished. As far as I know, he does not say that he shall run after the end of his current mandate. Could an appeal be made him to voluntarily forego that right and undertake not to run? This would not be a defeat for him but a huge constructive and honorable contribution to save Syria.

39. Much debate has taken place about the flow of arms and how it can be checked. Two years on this conflict, it is unrealistic to expect that the flow of arms can be stopped to one side but not to the other. The way to go is to respond to the repeated pleas of the Secretary-General that the flow of arms be stopped to all sides in Syria.

40. Nor would it be reasonable to expect a total embargo on the delivery of arms to be effective for any length of time if a political process that includes a viable and verifiable ceasefire is not crafted and accepted by all shortly thereafter.

Mr. President,

41. May I finally remind the Council of the suggestions I made during my last briefing on 29 January. I believe these suggestions remain valid and there is even more urgency today for the Council to consider acting on them.  

The horrors after the Doha summit picture

Suhair Atassi (top) seen fronting for Moaz al-Khatib (above) at the Arab summit 

Symbolism was the memorable part of the just-concluded Arab summit in Doha.

The symbolism of Syrian opposition leader Moaz al-Khatib being asked to take over President Bashar al-Assad’s seat and address the Arab heads of state in the name of the Syrian people.

And the symbolism of Suhair Atassi briefly deputizing for Khatib later and becoming the first Arab woman to chair an Arab League summit delegation.

Writing in Arabic on what was real and what was metaphorical in Doha, Ghassan Charbel, editor-in-chief of pan-Arab al-Hayat, says the image summed up the summit. And yesterday’s image was “unmatched, conclusive and cruel.”

Charbel explains:

Seeing the Syrian opposition delegation meet huge applause as it made its way to its country’s seat at the summit was unusual.

Witnessing Moaz al-Khatib seated behind the revolution flag, instead of the decades-old Syrian Republic flag we knew, was extraordinary.

Seeing no walkout from the conference room by any delegation leader was equally remarkable.

It is not in the habit of Arab summits to send that sort of message to a member-state’s regime. The Doha summit did not suffice with keeping Syria’s seat vacant but went further and gave it to a delegation representing the Syrian revolution.

The remarkable thing is that the image pertains to an Arab League heavyweight and founding member-state that used to have the last word on matters concerning Lebanon and Palestine.

The image carried a few connotations.

It was a sharp response to Lakhdar Brahimi’s last visit to Damascus.

It evoked the unimaginable human and material losses inflicting by the regime’s military machine on cities and villages and their residents.

And it recalled Russia and Iran’s persistent backing of the regime at the risk of triggering regional and international face-offs liable to dismember or destroy what remains of Syria.

The image came in the context of a growing belief among Arab and Western decision-makers that the Syrian regime will turn down any political settlement unless forced. This explains the (summit) resolve to redress the balance of forces in favor of the revolution. The resolve translates into resuming the funding and arming of opposition forces and continuing to de-legitimize the regime. That’s what can be read into yesterday’s image.

The image came as the Free Syrian Army (FSA) was launching increasingly audacious attacks on regime forces in the country’s south, thus knocking at the door of the regime’s capital, and shelling the heart of Damascus almost daily.

What did the other sides read into yesterday’s image?

We have to wait and see what Damascus infers from Khatib heading the Syria delegation to the summit. Does Damascus have options other than the one it is using?

What will Tehran deduce from the image coming, as it did, when the Saudis were saying they had arrested a spy ring linked to Iran’s intelligence services? Will it perceive the image as a relentless drive to root out its position in Syria and block its route to Lebanon? Will it deduce that retreat or a change of course is behind time?

And what is Hezbollah reading into the image? Does it feel Lebanon can take more meddling by its men in the Syria fighting?

What does Nouri al-Maliki notice in the image after choosing to watch it from Baghdad?

And what will Moscow detect in the image after Khatib said the opposition is looking forward to claim Syria’s seat at the United Nations and other international organizations?

Another warranted question is: How will the Syrian opposition build on yesterday’s success? Will it be tempted to go for the kill and try a knockout against the regime? Or will it choose to redress the balance on the ground and keep alive the chance of Syria’s components continuing to coexist? And will the revolution amplify yesterday’s achievement by closing ranks, ending internal splits and shutting out roving fighters?

Syria watchers are seriously worried lest the next image turns out to be bleaker than the one that preceded yesterday’s.

Some of them are anticipating a terrible and ruinous battle in Damascus that would set off a new wave of refugees and rivers of blood and funerals. They say what we’ve seen so far, which is terrible, is only a small sample of what’s in store.

That will most likely be the case. The Syrian revolution has entered its most difficult and dangerous phase. The neighboring countries are buckling up in expectation of the tremor.

In face of the pending horrors, the adversaries would be well-advised to keep the phone numbers of Lakhdar Brahimi handy.

They might need him to certify the change and check the losses and outrages.

Khatib: I asked Kerry for Patriots to shield N. Syria

From top, Qatar's emir, Khatib leading the opposition delegation, and seated in Syria's chair 

Talking today from Bashar al-Assad’s seat at the Arab summit in Doha, Syrian opposition leader Moaz al-Khatib said he asked Secretary of State John Kerry for U.S. forces “not to fight but to defend northern Syria” with Patriot surface-to-air missiles.

Kerry “promised to consider the matter,” Khatib said without elaborating.

Qatar's emir, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, opened the two-day summit by naming Khatib and Interim Prime Minister Ghassan Hitto to lead their combined team to Syria’s assigned seats at the conference.

Khatib went in front and sat in what would have been Syrian President Assad’s chair before addressing the heads of state in the Syrian people’s name.

His address came within an hour or so of a stirring opening speech by Sheikh Hamad in which he pledged to contribute $250 million to a US$1 billion fund for the preservation of (East) Jerusalem as a capital for the future Palestinian state.

The Qatari head of state also proposed an Arab mini-summit in Cairo for the sole purpose of spawning a Palestinian reconciliation between Gaza and the West Bank.

On Syria specifically, Sheikh Hamad said:

We welcome the participation of the Syrian National Coalition of Revolutionary and Opposition Forces and the Syrian Interim Government in our summit.

They are undoubtedly worthy of this representation after earning popular legitimacy at home and wide support abroad, and for the reason that they have assumed a historic role in leading the revolution and preparing to build a New Syria.

Grave and tragic conditions in sisterly Syria have taken a catastrophic turn over the past two years, leading to indescribable tragedies and crimes. Holding one’s tongue about these and about the suffering of the Syrian people in Syria and of the refugees in host countries is in itself a crime.

From the outset, we in the State of Qatar built our position on a set of constants:

-- The immediate cessation of killings and violence against civilians the safeguarding of sisterly Syria’s territorial integrity and popular unity

-- Fulfillment of the will of the Syrian people on the transfer of the power

-- Support Arab and international efforts and political solutions that achieve the Syrian people’s willpower and legitimate aspirations.

(…)

It is unfortunate the Syrian regime chose to enter into a military confrontation with its people, turning down all appeals for serious reform and all Arab political initiatives until the catastrophe reached the stage where the much-loved Syrian people would accept nothing less than a peaceful transition of power, as endorsed by the Arab League resolution dated July 22, 2012.

History will attest as to who stood by the Syrian people in their ordeal and who let them down.

We reiterate our call on the UN Security Council to uphold rights and justice, and pass a resolution ordering an immediate cessation of the bloodshed in Syria and bringing to international justice those responsible for the crimes committed against its people.

We renew our commitment to keep providing humanitarian assistance to the Syrian people, and urge all countries of the world to do so.

We underscore the importance of convening an international conference under UN auspices for the reconstruction of Syria right after the transfer of power as willed by the Syrian people.

I find it important to repeat that we are in favor of a political solution that spares peoples’ blood and lives, presuming that a solution does not put the clock back.

I see the great Syria rising from the rubble soon to rebuild its glory.

Speaking about half-an-hour later, Khatib told the summit:

• Ours started as a peaceful revolution, but it was met by a heartless man’s hellfire... Syrians are the only people on earth whose breadlines are bombed by warplanes.
• The Syrian people cannot coexist with the Assad mafia.
• Whereas we welcome a peace settlement, the regime rejects any solution to the Syria crisis. I suggested talking to Syrian regime representatives in return for the release of prisoners, but the regime shot down the offer.
• The Syrian people initiated their revolution. They alone will determine its course.
• Does it take years to recognize our people’s right to self-defense?
• Occupying Syria’s seat (at the summit) is part of the recovery of the Syrian people’s legitimate rights. We also demand regaining Syria’s seat at the United Nations and other international organizations and the repossession of Syrian (regime’s frozen) assets.
• Interim Prime Minister Hitto has our full confidence… We also plan to transform the Syrian National Coalition into an all-inclusive National Congress.
• The Syrian revolution is being undermined on three pretenses: minorities, terrorism and fear of the unknown.
• The pretense of minorities does not hold water. You need to ask the Lebanese about how the Syrian regime divided all Lebanese sects to rule Lebanon (for 30 years). And who killed Ghazi Kanaan (Syria’s long-time Alawite security chief in Lebanon)? Haven’t Syrian Alawites just concluded a two-day conference in Cairo, which accused the regime of working on turning sectarian zealotry into bloodshed?
• Regarding the pretense of terrorists being in rebel ranks, what do you call the Russians, Iranians and Hezbollah men fighting in regime ranks? And what about the regime’s two-year reign of terror?
• A propos fears as to who rules Syria after regime change, my answer is that Syrians alone will decide who rules them and how. It is no one else’s decision.
• The United States should play a bigger role in helping stop the bloodletting in Syria. I asked Mr. Kerry to extend the Patriots’ umbrella to cover the Syrian north and he promised to consider the matter. We are still waiting for a NATO decision to protect people's lives -- not to fight, but to protect lives.

Syria coalition names seven envoys to Arab summit

But is Moaz al-Khatib cut to lead the opposition?

The Council of Arab Foreign Ministers transferred Syria’s vacant seat at the Arab League to the Syrian opposition coalition a day ahead of the two-day Arab League summit beginning tomorrow in Doha.

The coalition today named as many as seven envoys to the gathering.

They will presumably be asked to join summit proceedings once the heads of state get the summit formally underway.

The seven opposition envoys are:

1. Moaz al-Khatib, who resigned Sunday as head of the Syrian National Coalition of Revolutionary and Opposition forces (SNA). He has since written on his personal Facebook page: “Dear brothers, after relying on God, doing the acknowledged Istikharah (or special prayer seeking divine guidance) and taking advise from trusted friends, chiefly Mr. Nizar Haraki (the SNA’s envoy in Qatar), I decided to address the Doha conference in the name of the Syrian people. I solicit your prayers and good wishes. This decision is unrelated to my resignation, which will be broached later.”
2. Ghassan Hitto, the Syrian-born American who this month became prime minister of the SNA’s interim government.
3. Suhair Atassi, who resigned in the wake of Hitto election, then retracted her resignation as deputy head of the SNA.
4. Brig. Gen. Salim Idriss, chief of staff of the Free Syrian Army.
5. George Sabra, head of the Syrian National Council (SNC), which is the pivotal component of the SNA.
6. Mustafa Sabbagh, the SNA’s secretary-general.
7. Khaled Saleh, head of the SNA media committee.

I hope Moaz al-Khatib does not pull another rabbit out of his hat (more than he has already) when he addresses the summit tomorrow.

I equally hope the SNA would let his resignation stand after the summit.

I honestly believe the millions of beleaguered Syrians deserve better than an amateurish, whimsical and bungling opposition leader who has no idea of collective endeavor and teamwork.

He is simply not cut to be the beleaguered Syrian people’s motivating, calculating and perceptive opposition leader.

I do not doubt Moaz al-Khatib’s integrity for a moment. But I deeply doubt his sense of timing and his political acumen.

I am a believer as well, but Istikharah has no place in the Syrian people’s struggle for life, freedom and democracy.

Moaz al-Khatib quits Syrian opposition coalition!

My quick translation of the statement in Arabic by Moaz al-Khatib announcing his resignation from the Syrian National Coalition of Revolutionary and Opposition Forces he has been heading since its formation last November:

O Syria’s beleaguered and resilient people, Peace be upon you!

We are being slaughtered by a savage regime while the world is all eyes and ears.

Many are those who lent us a purely humanitarian helping hand. We thank them all.

But there is the bitter irony of those trying to tame the Syrian people, lay siege to their revolution and attempt to control it.

All that befell the Syrian people -- including devastation of their infrastructure, the arrest of tens of thousands of their lot, the uprooting of hundreds of thousands more and other outrages – seems not to have justified an international resolve allowing the people to defend themselves.

They will support whoever is willing to be compliant. But anyone who is unwilling faces starvation and blockade. We won’t beseech anyone’s endorsement. If the Syrian people have been sentenced to death, we wish to choose the way we die. The door to freedom has been forced open. And it won’t be forced shut -- neither in the face of Syrians nor in other peoples’ faces.

The regime, by its arrogance, squandered the most valuable opportunity of a comprehensive national reconciliation. Many international and regional players tried pulling the Syrian ship to their side.

Our message to all concerned is that Syrians, and Syrians only, shall take the Syrian decision.

I had promised the sons and daughters of the great Syrian people, and pledged before the Almighty, to resign if matters reached certain red lines.

I am fulfilling my promise today and announcing my resignation from the National Coalition in order to work independently of the constraints of official institutions.

We take official positions to mean a quest for noble objectives rather than goals to be sought and kept.

We will forge ahead together with those brethren seeking freedom for our people. There will be messages and understandings with all the parties sharing our pains and aspirations.

People, a bit of patience as dawn is near! Peace and God’s mercy be upon you.

Hitto election unsettles Syrian opposition coalition

SNA deputy leader Suhair Atassi

Key members of the Syrian National Coalition (SNA) -- including deputy leader Suhair Atassi -- have suspended their membership of the opposition umbrella group, a day after the election of Ghassan Hitto as opposition prime minister (see yesterday's post).

Joining Atassi in the protest move are prominent activists and opposition campaigners Dr. Walid al-Bunni and Kamal al-Labwani.

Bunni and Labwani walked out of the SNA meeting in Istanbul prior to Hitto’s election by 35 votes of 48 ballots cast.

Atassi, who is SNA leader Moaz al-Khatib’s deputy, wrote on her Facebook page a while ago: “I am the one who insisted on having a clause in the bylaws banning any SNA member from assuming a position in the interim government. Let it be known I was asked to resign from the SNA to be part of the government and I refused. I said we couldn’t just flout the rules we set… The revolution deserves better than this…”

She was saying Hitto is within, not outwith, the SNA, which broke the rule.

Al Mayadeen TV, which speaks for the axis of Iran, the Syrian regime and Hezbollah, quoted Dr. Bunni as saying, “Hitto was not elected but appointed to head the interim government.”

AFP later quoted Dr. Bunni as saying, "We Coalition members weren't elected to represent the Syrians. So the only persons Hitto represents are the 35 Coalition members who voted for him. This government is a gift to Bashar al-Assad's regime.

"The key issue is the timing and way in which the voting took place. The Coalition pushed for a majority in a group that was not elected.

"Each of us had different reasons for freezing our membership. We will release a statement that represents us all in the coming days.”

Speculation is rife that other SNA members might follow in Atassi, Bunni and Labwani’s suit.

Pointers of Washington going soft on Assad

Haytam Manna' (right) who met Lavrov in Moscow March 11 is now in the U.S.

The oscillating compass needle of Washington’s Syria policy stabilized this week on seven signals.

I singled out one.

Raghida Dergham today lists the other six in her weekly think piece for pan-Arab al-Hayat.

So let me start with hers.

Filing for al-Hayat from New York, the American-Lebanese seasoned political analyst high spots her six:

1. A reversal of Obama One’s interpretation of the June 2012 Geneva framework concerning Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s role in a political transition. Obama Two’s new Secretary of State John Kerry is now saying, “We want to see Assad and the Syrian opposition come to the table for the creation of a transitional government according to the framework that was created in Geneva.”

2. A preemptive blow to the GCC partners in the countdown to the March 26-27 Arab summit in Doha after the Saudi-Qatari push to describe Assad as having lost his legitimacy and chosen to destroy the country in order to hang on to power.

3.  A submission to the Russian position that Assad is a “red line.” The hope is that Kerry’s concession to the Russians will be counterbalanced by concessions they can win from the Syrian regime.

4. A dawn of contradictions, rashness or a distribution of roles involving the United States, the United Kingdom and France. Kerry designating Assad by name as kosher interlocutor is irreconcilable with the positions of his British and French counterparts and allies in the UN Security Council. Kerry’s position is equally at odds with Hillary Clinton’s.

5. A shot in the arm to the mission of Syria troubleshooter Lakhdar Brahimi, who wants to dissociate the Assad Gordian knot from the commencement of dialogue and negotiation.

6. A pull of the rug from under the Syrian National Coalition’s feet in that Kerry’s bolt out of the blue risks splintering SNC ranks and forcing the resignation or dismissal of its leader Moaz al-Khatib.

My seventh signal of the U.S. policy shift:

Within 72 hours of his talks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Moscow, Syrian dissident Haytham Manna’ – who is outwith the SNC and is a strong critic of the Free Syrian Army -- landed in the United States for presumed talks with its National Security Council and State Department officials.

Here’s how State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland handled questions about Manna’s visit in her press briefing yesterday:

Q.: There’s a Syrian opposition delegation --

MS. NULAND: (Sneezes.) Excuse me.

Q.: Bless you.

Q.: Bless you.

Q.: -- that will be in town later this week, or maybe next week, with – headed by Mr. Manna’. Any meetings they are holding here at this building?

MS. NULAND: This is a different Syrian opposition group, or this is some – or representatives from the SOC [Syrian Opposition Coalition]? I’m not sure I know which meeting we’re talking about.

Q: He – no, no. Mr. Manna’ is not with the SOC.

MS. NULAND: I will have to check on that one. I don’t know about that meeting.

Q.: Is there a delegation of the SOC?

MS. NULAND: No. We haven’t yet, as we said yesterday, set dates with them for their visit to Washington.

Q.: I just wanted to follow up. Are you in contact with Mr. Haytham Manna’? He’s a quite a national figure in Syria – resides in France, I think.

MS. NULAND: I would guess that Ambassador Ford and his team do have contact with him. If that is not the case, we’ll let you know.

But overnight Manna’ himself posted the following on his Facebook page:

A delegation of Syrians will be visiting New York on March 13-15 and Washington on March 17-20 in pursuit of peace. The delegation, associated with The Democratic Civil Alliance (DCA) that emerged as a follow up to the “Geneva Declaration” of January 29. It represents a broad coalition committed to non-violence, democracy, pluralism and non-sectarianism and unites around a clear political plan for a negotiated solution in Syria based on the Geneva Communiqué of June 2012. Delegation members are seeking meetings with policymakers, experts, diplomats, UN staff, media and NGOs.

The DCA, considered to be one of the largest and most influential within Syria, brings together well-known Syrian human rights activists, professionals, political parties, and civil society groups, many of who have worked within the National Coordination Body for Democratic Change and Building The Syrian State current. Sharply critical of the dictatorship of Bashar al-Assad and his violent repression, these Syrians are also critical of the increasingly militarized rebellion, the foreign arms flowing to both sides of the military conflict, and the Islamic fundamentalist influence within the rebel military forces. The Democratic Civil Alliance brought together all these forces around very solid and clear plan for negotiated political solution. They are reaching out to all Syrian players, political, civil society or even military players to join this alliance to find a safe solution for the country that puts an end to the violence that started spilling over the borders and is forming the perfect nurturing environment for extremism.

The mainstream international media tend to ignore the large secular and democratic movement within Syrian society and the complex multi-religious and multi-cultural nature of Syria, where there is broad opposition to a post-conflict Islamic government and fear of reprisals and of ongoing conflict after the fall of the dictatorship. The delegation reflects this perspective and aspires to find the broadest international support for its political plans. The three-member team has important political roles in the Syrian internal political scene.

Delegation members:

Dr. Haytham Manna’ has been a Syrian human rights advocate for over three decades. Manna was born in Syria and studied medicine at the University of Damascus. He now lives in Paris where he practices medicine and is the lead external spokesperson for The Democratic Civil Alliance. He has won awards for his human rights work from, among others, Human Rights Watch and the U.S. National Academy of Sciences. He is co-founder of the Arab Commission for Human Rights and has served in leading roles in several other human rights organizations. He is the president of the National Coordination Body for Democratic Change in exile and the vice-president of the Syrian-based branch of the organization.

Dr Rim Turkmani is a founding member of the Building The Syrian State current which has made prominent cease-fire plans, worked to organize peacemaking groups at the local level and cooperated with UN Special Representatives Kofi Annan and Lakhdar Brahimi to promote a negotiated political solution. She is also a member of the executive committee of The Democratic Civil Alliance

She is an Astrophysicist at the Imperial College in London and is a specialist in the history of Arabic/Islamic science and its influence on the West. She has published many papers and books both on scientific and historical topics. She is the founder and co-chair of The Damask Rose Trust, a UK-based charity that supports development and education in Syria.

James Paul, senior advisor at Global Policy Forum and author of Syria Unmasked (Yale Press), and Mel Duncan, advocacy director of Nonviolent Peace Force, will host the visit. Both attended the Geneva Conference on Syria in January.