Vienna’s path

Written by Nasser Kandil,

The frequent intersecting information respectively from more than a source signify that the two Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergei Lavrov and John Kerry were rhythm controllers in Vienna’s meeting not as opponents, that each one of them is leading an alliance on a negotiation front. The American Secretary of State was interested in absorbing and containing the Saudi extremism which tried to drive the meeting into a sterile debate that will lead to its explosion and preventing it from achieving any violation under the slogan of the priority of the departure of the Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad as a condition for the success of any political path about Syria, while Lavrov was interested in ensuring the important and the exceptional aspect of the Iranian participation in the meeting, and what it added of value and effectiveness to the talks in order to achieve the success of the political path, to let the Iranian Minister engage into the confrontation under a Russian fiery attribution  announcing the adherence to the Syrian President on one hand, and that it is not a right for anyone to discuss the Syrian Presidency on behalf of the Syrians on the other hand.

The magnitude of the Russian American understanding which is based on items that were formulated in the final statement was not possible to be an outcome of the discussions of Vienna’s Meeting unless these items were drafted before with a prior carefulness, since they emerged as a summary of political relevant principles that abbreviate an understanding on the type of the dealing with the consequences of the war and the crisis in Syria, and the two issues of war and the political solution through an integration between them. Who is reading the statement will find a resolving for the unity of Syria against the calls of federalism which many American politicians and officials said that the type of the new Syrian country will become at its best conditions if the victory on terrorism is accomplished, while the most extremists among them talked about the division of Syria on a demographic basis, towards the speech of the director of the American intelligence Agency that the unity of Syria which we knew as the unity of Iraq has become something from the past. Therefore the statement is not important because of its verbal commitment, it is like the resolution 425 regarding the liberation of the Southern of Lebanon, it will remain without value except for the presence of the resistance which in return has gone to war to achieve the liberation without permitting of anyone to say about the illegitimacy of the action. The issuance of the statement of Vienna’s meeting about the adherence to the unity of Syria as a legitimate cover for a real war through which the Syrian Army is progressing supported by a Russian airy coverage accompanied with  the support and attribution of its Iranian ally and its closer ally of the resistance forces. But the most important in the statement is the focus on the form of the Syrian country as a political regime that sticks to the non-sectarianism of the country and its secularity according to some of the formations, and its respect of the religious and sectarian plurality, without depending on it as valid basis to reestablish the country. It is a terminal collapse of John Kerry’s theory, which he repeated with Saud Al-Faisal in the conference of what is so- called “The Friends of Syria” in Doha on 30th of June 2012 when he called for a rule in which the sectarian majority takes over the presidency of the country. Therefore the statement was as an announcement of the death of the Saudi formula which was adopted by the UN Envoy Steffan de Mistura, by saying that the Lebanese example forms a source of inspiration for Syria tomorrow, the clear intension here is Al Taif Agreement and the sectarian distribution of the positions of the country and its institutions. The unified secular Syria is a Syrian condition that becomes Russian and Iranian for any political path which its applying constitutes an accomplishment of half of the way to develop what is going to be as an identity of Syria for after the victory on the terrorism, because it means in addition to the coherent country a preservation of the conditions of its independence by preventing its dividing in regional share under the name of the sectarian distribution.

Vienna’s statement states on the priority of the war on terrorism on one hand, and on the going out of classifying the terrorism between good and bad on the other hand, so it ends the lie of purifying Al-Nusra Front, so it joined it with ISIS as targets of the war, this means it has put a specific criteria for the regional concerned countries and for the parties which affiliated under the title of the Syrian opposition to participate in any political process by the necessity of participating in the war on Al-Nusra and ISIS and breaking any relations between them, this can be applied on Saudi Arabia and Turkey, moreover it is so good for the leaders of the opposing coalition.

Despite the continuation of the verbal shouting, Vienna’s statement ends practically the issue of the transitional governing body and the mechanism of transition from the war to the peace,  so it resolved it through the ballot boxes, and  providing the necessary guarantees for a representation that expresses of all the Syrian segments, and achieving a wider equal participation in the nomination and in the polling for all the components, but there is no longer a search in the equation that suggests implicitly the trustee which no body or no party can practice it by claiming its right to interfere in determining who will occupy the leading positions in the Syrian country, so the resorting to the ballot boxes means the ending of the Saudi and the Turkish titles to approach the war and the political solution in Syria.

The American will continue his relation with his two allies the Saudi and the Turkish after Vienna according to two equations; militarily, that based on the call to mobilize the efforts in a race with the Syrian army and the Russian coverage to wage the war on ISIS as long as Syria and Russia are fighting Al- Nusra, because it is the only way to set a kind of field balance that is necessary for the negotiation. Politically, the American will say; prepare yourself for a presidential parliamentary electoral competition, organize the ranks of the opposition for this purpose after making it understand that there is no possibility to justify any kind of relation with Al-Nusra after today, thus the task of the American will not be easy to have a Saudi Turkish consensus because the choices of America’s allies originally are due to the absence of the opposition away from Al-Nusra , ISIS and Al-Qaeda nominations, since they can wade a military or an electoral competition. But the American who realizes the magnitude of the change resulting from the Russian entry in the war and the transition which is related to the field successively, knows that he has effective papers started from what he has happened in the Turkish elections and restricting the interest of the new government after the wining of the Justice and the development Party in what could be called as the Turkish national security, in addition to the relation with the Kurds and not re-forming Syria according to the logic of the new Ottoman, and the joining under the American protection in the paths of the war and the political solution. According to Saudi Arabia the American left the Yemeni attrition doing its action till Saudi Arabia screams, and this can be seen trough the repetitive announcements of the completion of the military process which once was uttered by the Saudi Minister of Foreign Affairs, and once by the Secretary General of the Gulf Cooperation Council.

Vienna’s path is a nucleus for drawing a new regional system from the Syrian gate.