By Vestnik Kavkaza
When the UN Secretary General stated that the international conference on a settlement in Syria Geneva-2 would take place on January 22nd, the leader of the Syrian Free Army, Salim Idris, said that the SFA would not only eject participation in the conference, but also wouldn’t cease fire while it was being held. He says that the situation in the country is not suitable for peaceful negotiation: “We won’t stop fighting during Geneva-2 or after it. We are much more concerned about getting sufficient amount of arms for our fighters.”
President Assad won’t go to Geneva as well. The foreign minister of France, Laurant Fabius, stated that the aim of the conference is “finding a mutual agreement between representatives of the regime – without Bashar – and the moderate opposition to form a transactional government which would obtain all powers. It is a fair position. America supports it and it is good.”
Vladimir Yevseyev, Director of the Socio-Political Studies Center, told Vestnik Kavkaza that “it is reasonable to hold the conference in late January. It seems the reason for it is that they fail to gather a serious delegation from the opposition. The conference will be intermediate because there is no whip-hand on the battle field in Syria. In this context Bashar Assad won’t accept forming a transitional government, it could be only an imitation. Thus, to say that Geneva-2 can solve the Syrian problem is absolutely wrong. Moreover, the situation over elimination of Syrian chemical weapon is not clear. The U.S. plans on the destruction of the weapons, using some mobile vehicles or on shipboard seem unreal, I think. It is impossible to destroy 1300 tones of chemical weapons in this way.”
Yevseyev doesn’t wait for a breakthrough from Geneva-2: “Only a beginning of a difficult dialogue between representatives of Bashar Assad and the opposition is possible. I wish the opposition came to the conference. It would be more effective for success of Geneva-2, if Iran didn’t participate in the conference. I am not against Iran, but it would be better for the conference. When Geneva-2 is ended, Geneva-3 should be organized. I think in the spring there will be more favorable conditions for this. If a decision on holding presidential elections in July 2014 is made, it will be very important to organize early parliamentary elections before this. Today we can speak only about stepping toward a settlement of the Syrian crisis, forming a road map. It seems decisions will be made later.”
“I don’t believe in crucial success of the conference; it will be intermediate,” Yevseyev said. “I think Bashar Assad thought about this as well, when he made his decision not to participate in Geneva-2. There is another factor – an absence of an opponent. Bashar Assad sees nobody to talk to. If there were a person who could unite the opposition, who could present demands, probably Bashar Assad would take part in the conference, but there is nobody to talk to. And that’s why there is no need for Assad’s participation in Geneva-2. This is my personal point of view.”
