The opposition which became a farce

Written by Nasser Kandil,

It does not matter how many and who has attended the Riyadh Conference of the Syrian opposition, how much the preparations of the conference have cost such as alternate budgets of the participants to ensure every agreement, or the magnitude of the participated political forces, and the magnitude of the satisfaction toward them by the  countries of the West and the region, it is neither important the size of the armed presence which  is represented by the involved factions and the degree of  its farness of Al Nusra Front and Al-Qaeda Organization, all of these deserve to be discussed, but there are those who involved in its discussion from the site of putting criteria that should not be compromised or be neglected, concerning the search in the terms of the success of any political process in Syria that escorts the war on terrorism, and respects it as a priority as the terms of Vienna Statement have stated.

What is important is the speech of the opposition today while it is assembled, there is no plea for any team if what was mentioned of positions of the opposition did not concern or represent it, we do not intend surely those who were absent of the Riyadh Conference, because those represent by joint liability and solidarity a collective mind which will bear the mental reactions of what was stated of positions. Here it is not intended the political and the national consequences, but the real mentality of the natural human standards, what was stated mentally at the trial means a judicial proceeding for every participated individual and every faction on behalf of its leaders and its members as individuals, when the results of their mental checking are proven, as a result of what they have said and what they issued; that it was a crazy statement then we will be in front of a crazy party entitled Riyadh Conference or in front of a farce entitled the opposition.

The Conference stated that it believes in the political solution and it suggests conceptions of this solution that will be held upon a pivotal title which the question about them will be a matter of a mental checking for its presenters, it is the call for the departure of the Syrian President, despite the fact that in Riyadh there is another statement of the Gulf Cooperation Council that ignored the departure of the Syrian President, although the statement of the opposition has adopted this call even with stammering, so it neither consider it a condition for a dialogue nor a gateway for a solution nor has hopeful end but a culmination of the solution with the end of the transitional phase, this is a generosity and an intellectual creativity by its creators , provided that they must tell us how ?

The supposed solution is negotiated. But which is the party that the attendees want to negotiate with it on the departure of the Syrian President, and which is the party they demand from it to present procedures of trust to start the negotiations which are supposed that end with the departure of the President. It is logical that those who formulate the statement and articulate the statement are Syrians because they know that they talk about nothing, they talk to themselves nothing else, only if it was an unattainable offer to liberate themselves in order to say that we have tried, so no one blame us for resorting to another behavior, this is the last offer and the last opportunity for negotiation otherwise, otherwise what? Otherwise what the Saudi Minister of Foreign Affairs Adel Al-Jubeir has told them about a peaceful departure by a negotiated solution or the departure by the military force, so is this the matter?.

Al-Jubeir has said explaining his genius theory to prevent the interpretation, that the military solution is not the Decisive Storm which his country has launched against Yemen and has foreshadowed the same in Syria, while now it searches for a straw to seize it as a wet ant in order to get out of the Yemeni swamp, Al-Jubeir has answered explaining the military way which will impose the departure on the Syrian President that it will be by the opposition while it fights and will not allow him to stay. Hence the opposition will present, and if the Syrian President does not respond, it will resort to the military solution. Despite the fact that this is contradictory with its speech that there is no solution for the crisis in Syria but by the political solution, the normal question becomes that the opposition from the beginning of the crisis was raising this slogan, so neither the appeal nor the intimidation, nor the pressures have succeeded, nor the military way seems to be available if there are still minds at the assembled heads. Here are their international sponsors turn a blind eye and say there is no choice but to coexist with the stay of the Syrian President because there is no possible alternative realistically , the opposition which could not win through military solution within passed years and its military and political conditions are getting worse day by day, how does it have a natural mind and talks about a military solution, while the supporters of this opposition are afraid that it will be  the victim of the military solution if it was left running its own affairs with its foolish mind.

The opposition can save its mind form the charge of the insanity if it neutralizes itself from the theories of Al-Jubeir despite the hospitality in Riyadh, it says that its statement did not include a reference to the military solution, in this case there was left one way for the departure of the Syrian President it is to win at the ballot boxes, so did the opposition intend in its statement the call for a transitional phase that ends with the judgment of the ballot boxes. Frankly this content is possible in Vienna Statement and in the maneuver of the Syrian President for the dialogue and the political solution for three years ago, if this was the intention then its utterance publicly and directly is the shortest ways to confirm the authenticity of the claim of the opposition since it represents the majority of the Syrian people, and it would say simply that it calls for an immediate dialogue with the Syrian government that produces a government of national unity that stood behind the army in the war on terrorism and merges the armed factions which fight the terrorism within suitable forms within the context of the army’s processes, in case this stage will end with fair and transparent elections that the opposition plans to win in it, since it trusts of the magnitude of its popularity from achieving this goal, so why it did not say that?

Simply because this opposition knows that no one will believe it, and it knows that it will be terminated if it did that, it is a product that it is expiry date has ended, so it must be turn into a lesson for those who considered, and an example for whom is thinking of selling his homeland for the foreigners, and a farce for the coming generation about a tale of characters and forces who lost their minds but they did not know how or do not want to confess.

In view of the statement of the opposition there was no reference of any phrase about the priority of the war on terrorism, which has formed according to Vienna Statement a condition for the participation those who are claiming the representation of the opposition in any political process.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,