Geneva and the negotiation on the item of the terrorism

Written by Nasser Kandil,

Formally, the conflict between the Syrian country and the opposition revolves about describing the war in Syria as a necessary entry to determine the destination, the task, and the priorities of the political solution, whether it is a civil conflict about the identity of the regime or a war on terrorism. Just for that the opposition which is supported by an international regional camp puts the priority of the negotiation on the item of the political transition, while the Syrian country along with its allies put the priority of the negotiation on the item of the terrorism.

The negotiation does not resolve the conflict, but it translates its balances which are determined by the field as long as we are in a state of war. The round which was formed by Aleppo’s battles made out of the position of the country the strongest, and granted its concept more of power. It succeeded in imposing the item of the terrorism in the previous round of Geneva despite the ignorance of the UN envoy in his three suggested items for the war on terrorism as a negotiating item, and because the negotiating delegations which are against the country try to enter the new round of negotiation in order to improve their opportunities and cards so the escalation was one of the functions witnessed by Syria.

Due to the situation in the field the Syrian country seems satisfied to discuss the events in the negotiating round, therefore, the Syrian military resolving seems postponed for after Geneva, being sufficient with the response as needed during the negotiations. The battles and the attacks are waged by Al Nusra front which is classified according to the regulations of the United Nations as terrorist organizations. The mission of the negotiation is not to define organizations and to exclude others, however only to measure their relation with the terrorism classified by the UN, and the work according the descriptions of the United Nations and its classifications. The opposing delegation will be not affect neither the American nor the Israeli if it puts the name of Hezbollah or if it talks a lot about Iran, since among the involved forces in the fight in Syria there are ISIS and Al Nusra which were classified as terrorists. The outstanding issue of negotiation is the issue of Al Nusra despite the claim of every one of separating their relation with it.

Geneva and the coincidence with the escalation which is led publicly by Al Nusra is a precious opportunity for the Syrian negotiator to put his attitude toward Al Nusra at the very moment and in a clear language according to who is with it and who is against it starting from the UN envoy and ending with the negotiating delegations, those who consider the war of Al Nusra front from Jobar to Hama terrorist acts and the participation in them is an announcement of the joining to the terrorism’s camp, and those who are opposite to that, because the negotiations based on the resolution 2254 which calls to fight Al Nusra as a terrorist organization.

The acceptance and the refusal of the negotiating delegation in the name of the opposition to condemn the attacks of Al Nusra is a political diplomatic victory to Syria, and because the refusal is probable, so the operator is one and the fate is one, there will be the suspension of the negotiations, because the party which must be negotiated with is a part of the terrorism camp. Therefore, the Syrian negotiating delegation will be called to say the word of Al Nusra repeatedly with every sentence who is with Al Nusra and who is against it, we will hear it dozens of times in media, in the statements, and on the table of negotiations, De Mistura will be obliged to announce the condemnation of the attacks which are waged by Al Nusra front, and to confuse those whom he incited to escalate, since he knows that they cannot do anything without Al Nusra.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,