Between the regime of calm and the truce’s provisions

Written by Nasser Kandil,

Moscow and Washington have announced the containment of Aleppo and its countryside within the regime of clam which is implemented in the countryside of Damascus and Latakia since a week, Syria approved this announcement, the Syrian army has cleared that the clam will include Aleppo for 48hours which its similarities in the countryside of Damascus and Latakia are renewed every twenty-four hours or forty-eight hours, it is clear that the regime of calm which entered newly to the vocabularies of the war in Syria is something different from the truce’s provisions which was announced by a common official statement in Washington and Moscow, and it was reaffirmed by a separated resolution by the UN Security Council.

The truce’s provisions are integrated as was cited in the American Russian statement with two concepts that form the center of the American Russian cooperation in Syria, and which form a summary of the politics’ titles in it, these titles are the war on terrorism and launching a political process between the Syrian parties in the govern and the opposition to constitute a unified Syrian government that gets the legitimacy of the admission of its presence from the international and the regional powers which are divided on Syria, thus it becomes a legitimate partner in the international regional alliance for the war on terrorism under UN auspices, and in which participates the participants in Vienna Path among the members of the Security Council, the affective global countries and the active regional countries which are present till now in the war on Syria. This government undertakes the mission of preparing a new constitution and presidential and parliamentary elections on its basis, just for that the truce has been linked with the path of Geneva of the political process on one hand, and the exclusion of ISIS and Al Nusra of its provisions on the other hand, so the truce becomes the consensus on the transition from the military confrontation to the political negotiation between the participants in the path of Geneva as the Russians and the Americans want.

The experience of the truce and Geneva says, as twins of the Russian American efforts the injury of one twin of fever will leads to the injury of the other, so the result is the impossibility to return to the truce and the impossibility of the retuning to Geneva path, the reason is that the concept of going on in both of them requires either American loyalty to the negotiations and this means the American isolation of its main allies Turkey and Saudi Arabia, and the Syrian formations which belong to them, or a Russian retreat of the concept of the political process and the war on terrorism by accepting what satisfies Washington’ allies either concerning the acceptance of the return to make the political process open to the conditions that are related to the Syrian presidency, but the refusal of Moscow was a reason for the military intervention which brought Washington to its concept and has achieved the most important accomplishment, which is the issuance of a UN resolution that meets its concept for the political process, or what is related to the acceptance of excluding Al Nusra Front from the war on terrorism and considering it under the cover of the truce’ provisions, this means either an integration in the political process, its conditions, and its limits then bombing it once again specially at least regarding the future of presidency and the identity of the civil country, and the acceptance of inserting the language of extremism, the sectarian tribalism and others of the formations of Wahhabism which belong to Al Qaeda organization into the identity of the Syrian country, or keeping them away of the political process and the division of Syria by overlooking the Emirate of Al Nusra and the Turkish Canton in the northern of Syria. It is clear that the practical application of the twins of the truce and Geneva path has become restricted to the Russian acceptance of the defeat and the return to what was before the military positioning in Syria, but it is clear that it is impossible, or an American acceptance of the fair application of the understandings including losses and pains.

It is clear that the Russian position is decisive by refusing any modification of the path of the political process and its limits, and refusing any tempering in the truce’s provisions especially excluding Al Nusra Front form it, it sticks to exert pressure on America to take a decision which its participation with Russia is requiring, through launching the path of Geneva and the truce together and within clear understanding. It is clear as well that bombing the truce that excludes Al Nusra, and a political process that excludes the search in the Syrian presidency seem to be the issue of Riyadh and Ankara and who is with them from the opposition. While restricting Washington in understandings with Moscow will neither leave a presence for it in the Syrian territory, nor real allies in the region, but the response to the participation in blasting the efforts of understandings with the illusion of the ability to modify them is a dual impossibility as Washington knows, because neither the return to the confrontation as it was before the paths of truce or Geneva will bring victories, nor modifying the Russian position is in the consideration, therefore Washington stammers, hesitates, and needs longer time to develop its choices while it is under the dual pressure because neither Ankara and Riyadh and who is with them will give it the instrument of the coverage for a war  that ends the presence of Al Nusra and leads to their getting out of the equation of field and geography in Syria, nor Moscow will give it the instrument of destroying Syria, dividing it and giving it to Al Qaeda organization and to the Turkish Saudi craziness after all these sacrifices and accomplishments.

The innovation of the regime of calm is to say that the truce is frozen and that what is going on as ceasing-fire in the regime of calm is occurring among enemies not among negotiators that share a political process as any ceasing-fire in war, that can include terrorist organizations for humanitarian and field necessities, but it is not that truce which was formulated as a vocabulary that translates the combination between the requirements of the Syrian political path in Geneva and the necessities of the war on terrorism. This is the significance of the regime of calm which is applied for a specific time that does exceed forty-eight hours which is extended every time, maybe we can say that the regime of calm as it is a need in Aleppo for the families and for the cure of wounds, it is a Russian term for the Americans to resolve their matter between the failure of the truce and the path of Geneva or their continuation according to the approved terms. The term of hours may become days but it will end according to the clarity of the path of truce and Geneva and in accordance to the terms of their launching, otherwise they will fall together, and thus the decisive word will return to be in the field as it was.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,