What does it mean, why does it used, and from where

Written by Nasser Kandil,

For many successive days, the foreign ministers of many countries which were active members in the alliance against Syria have repeated a sentence “No for Al-Assad, however he can be a part of the transitional phase”. Before discussing the content of what this repetition has meant and its function in politics, we need for a logical and political analysis of the meaning of this sentence and its position in the war, in addition to its expression of a transformation that has a value in its context and the limits of this transformation on one hand, and why now, and what is the thing which has changed and which can explain the issuance of a unified sentence about diverged countries in geography, in addition to the role towards Syria from Australia to Turkey on the other hand.

When we hear the speech about a transitional phase in Syria, we remember the sentence which refers to the content of the political solution which the common statement of the two ministers of Foreign Affairs of America and Russia John Kerry and Sergei Lavrov has called for three years ago, it assured the replacement of seeking for a military solution between the government and opposition with a political one, that includes unifying the efforts in the war against terrorism, it based on constitutional consensual reforms that got the satisfaction of the Syrians under the power of referendum , moreover, on its basis there will be parliamentary and presidential elections. The talk remained about directing the transitional phase from the military solution which is based on confronting the opposition fractions with the Syrian army to the constitutional elections phase, through which the mystery prevails and its understanding varies internationally and regionally, in addition that the explanation of the special paragraph about it in Geneva Statement varies about a transitional governing crops between the two partners of the Geneva Statement the Russian and the American, so the attitudes are ranging between clear two camps, a camp that is led by Washington, it said that the transitional phase starts with the resignation of the Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad and his exit of the political equation of Syria as a condition for starting the political solution, towards putting Syria under the Chapter VII and suspending the work under the Syrian constitution, moreover assigning a body with specific names of some of the ruling figures, and some of the opposition’s figures that by the power of the international mandate, it takes over the directing of this transition, and an opposite  camp that includes Russia, Iran and others based on considering the entry of the political solution is by following the constitutional methods by the acceptance of the opposition to coexist with the current constitutional institutions, and changing them according to the mechanisms provided by the constitution, so a government of the national unity will be established from the supporters and the oppositions that is directed by the Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad and under his constitutional presidency, there will be constitutional amendments which will be presented to the people to have their referendum, the Syrians will fill their constitutional institutions through the ballot boxes and through parliamentary and presidential elections in accordance with the new constitution. Years have passed on this dispute, the political solution has stopped at this point, so Geneva Statement has failed and the disruption of the solution remained at its state till now for this reason.

The source of the power of the international and regional attitude towards this point is because the rootedness of terrorism in Syria has grasped the armed structures of the opposition and its factions, so the talking about an armed conflict between a government and an opposition has become a full exceeding of the truth, so the media means which use this description when reciting detailed names of these factions, show that Al Nusra Front which announced it’s a branch of Al-Qaeda Organization, and the movement of Free-Sham which described Mullah Omar with the inspiring commander. Al-Qaeda and Mullah Omar are classified within the lists of the United Nations for terrorism, thus the political conciliation between the government and the political titles of the opposition has one mission, it is to open the door to accept the involved countries in the war against Syria to  cooperate in the war against terrorism and performing their obligations provided by the international resolutions, to stop the arming, funding and closing the borders in front of the flow of militants, in favor of groups that are known to be terrorists, and have got the attribution and the support as opposed factions, when this commitment is completed by stopping the support of the terrorist factions, then the victory will be accessible including ISIS which survives on Turkey and the financing through Turkey’s facilities to sell the stolen oil and the remittances of the donors of the Gulf countries.

It is clear that the secret of concern of the conditions which can be agreed upon about the concept of the transitional phase as an announcement of the opportunity to launch a political process that starts with a dialogue, produces either a government of a national unity under the presidency of the President Al-Assad and followed with constitutional amendments, then with parliamentary and presidential elections, or a dialogue that produces  an appeal to the Security Council with  an implicit satisfaction of its components, in addition to lifting the Russian and the Chinese veto as a prelude to issue a resolution that puts Syria under the Chapter VII and makes it get a body to take over the directing of the govern and the preparation of parliamentary and presidential elections without any role of the President Al-Assad after suspending the work under its constitution. It is known that two tracks will mean that Syria will be different after the end of the transitional phase, and it is known means it is well known for all the involved in the Syrian affairs, just for that the key of agreement and disagreement about Syria is how the transitional phase will be? Because a constitutional formula under the presidency of Al-Assad represented by a government of a national unity means opening the door to legislate the subsequent presidency of Al-Assad after two guaranteed mandates under the awareness of all. The opponents of Al-Assad confess that he will win under any submission to the ballot boxes along with the devotion of the position of Syria as an independent country that is ally to Russia, Iran and Hezbollah and within the alliance of the resistance, while the designated body internationally according to the Chapter VII means Syria without Al-Assad and without the independence but an ally of the West and the Gulf.

The fighting to impose the concept of the two concepts of the transitional phase was summarizing the battle on the future of Syria after the transitional phase, because what all the parties want to say about the post- transitional phase was summarized in their speech about the transitional phase. Those who said that there is no role for the President Al-Assad in the transitional phase were knowing that they indented that there is no role at all for Al-Assad after it, there is no independence or constitution or a resisting choice in Syria which they were paving the way for its emergence, they ensure if they succeed in imposing their conception of the transitional phase they will win Syria and they will transform it from a regional international camp into an opposed one, and those who insist on the constitutional way to manage the transitional phase know that they ensure that if  the matters are according to what they want in Syria after the transitional phase then Al-Assad will be the title of the coming Syria along with its independent resisting choice and its regional and international alliances.

All of what the decision –makers have concerning the regional and the international issues about the future of Syria was one of two options, it summarizes in one word the position of the President Al-Assad in the transitional phase and ends with their role. The acceptance of a role of Al-Assad in the transitional phase means his imperative role after it and his remaining as a title for the future of Syria, in other words, putting the train of war against terrorism on the launching rail, in addition to stopping the arming and the funding, closing the borders, stopping the media war, and paving the way for lifting the sanctions and the embargo which are imposed on Syria. While the refusal means the remaining of Syria in the attrition war and continuation of the forces of war against Syria its support of terrorism as a bet on its weakening, and a hope to grant opportunities for the other opposite option.

The sentence “No for Al-Assad, but he can have a role in the transitional phase” is a big lie. Here ( No ) becomes trivial, silly and meaningless, because its speaker knows that the role of Al-Assad in the transitional phase is surely an introduction of his coming bigger role later, and the speech no role for Al-Assad in the future of Syria is a sarcasm at the stupid idiot opposition and who is supporting it from the Gulf rulers, in order to pass an equation “ Yes for the role of Al-Assad in the transitional phase and the moving towards the equation “ We accept what the Syrian accept” it is known in advance that Al-Assad will be its title.

This international and regional crowd has participated in saying the golden equation “ Al-Assad can have a role in the transitional phase” means opening a door for the political solution which is invaluable in terminating the military confrontations, but by creating regional and international conditions  to ensure the victory of the Syrian country in the war against terrorism, and readmitting of the institutions of the country, lifting the sanctions and the embargo, the admission of the failure of the war, surrendering to the Russian Iranian recipe in ending its issue, and the announcement of the withdrawal from the intervention which was closer to mobile a global war against Syria and its president.

The succession and the repetition of the equation are not in need of any analysis or interpretation, there are not specific reasons that can explain this meeting of all these countries in repeating the same sentence at the same time, whatever they use justifications or logical explanations such as the pressure of the issue of the refugees, and the danger of terrorism, all of them are current and right, but this synchronization and acceleration are not explained by unified awakening or by an inspiration as far as it is interpreted by issuance an American password, that has shown after the Russian military action in Syria, and which has prevented the hypothesis of continuing the attrition war, it means announcing the surrender of the alliance of war and its admission of its full defeat in Syria, waiting for face-saving or the compassionate defeat. These matters are available at the opponents as in the Iranian nuclear file. Thus the slogan of Russia, Iran and Al-Assad is “Defeat, however you can say that we have won”.