Geneva 3: rebellion against De Mistura within Syrian Coalition
Geneva 3: rebellion against De Mistura within Syrian Coalition
On the eve of Geneva 3, Syrian opposition figures raise their concerns on the political intentions of UN Special Envoy to Syria, Staffan De Mistura.
6 min read
De Mistura replaced Lakhdar Brahimi as the international mediator to end Syria's war
The Syrian opposition, represented by the National Coalition for Syrian Revolution and Opposition Forces, has been apprehensive and cautious about participating in the Geneva consultations.
This position further escalated when the opposition openly announced its dissatisfaction the UN Syria Envoy Staffa De Mistura, questioning his intentions, to the extent that one of the Coalition’s main blocs announced its refusal to participate in the talks.
The Syrian National Assembly (SNA), a member of the Coalition, with Michel Kilo and the Muslim Brotherhood as its main members, issued a statement on Wednesday, warning against “drifting” behind the De Mistura’s plan and dealing with it lightly.
The statement also called everyone who was invited to participate in the talks to “hold on to the demands of the people and the revolution for a democratic solution, which the Geneva Accord considered the basis of any fair and accepted international solution stipulating the departure of Bashar al-Assad and his criminal associate, as well as the establishment of a full-power transitional governing body”.
In addition, the statement pointed out that De Mistura did not seem “convinced that these were the Syrian people’s real demands, otherwise he would not have called for talks without a programme, agenda, declared purpose, or any basis in the Geneva Accords and its mechanisms for the solution”.
Through its statement, the SNA accused De Mistura of attempting to deny the Coalition as a legitimate representative of the Syrian people, which had already been recognised by 114 states.
The SNA also questioned “the plans and intentions of the Syria Envoy, as well as his personal stances on the revolution and its institutions”, adding, however, that this stance towards De Mistura “does not mean the Coalition will cut its relations with the UN and its bodies”.
Preparations for Geneva 3
De Mistura had announced the participation of more than 40 groups, the Syrian government and several countries in the region, as well as military representatives, and Syrian religious leaders, in the Geneva consultations. He also said that there will be an evaluation of the outcomes of the talks by the end of July.
A number of the Coalition members had announced that they did not want to participate in the Geneva talks, namely the head of the Coalition’s Muslim Brotherhood bloc Farouk Taifour, who said that the Coalition had not made up its mind yet on whether to attend the Geneva talks.
Syrian opposition sources told al-Araby al-Jadeed that the Coalition’s leader Khaled Khoja sent a message to De Mistura’s team to inform them that its delegation would include 12 people, who will arrive in Geneva on 11 May to attend their assigned sessions on 12, 13 and 14 May.
“Whether De Mistura was serious about implementing the first Geneva declaration to achieve progress regarding the political solution, it is not showing in the meetings, as he invited dozens of Syrian opposition bodies, including emerging parties, civil society organisations, and various institutions. It is as if he wants to send a message that they will never agree on one opinion”, Hisham Marwah, deputy head of the Syrian Coalition, told al-Araby al-Jadeed.
“On the other hand, the UN Envoy is aware that there are international resolutions presenting a certain body to negotiate. On 12 December 2012, the Coalition was recognised by more than 100 states as the only legitimate representative of the Syrian people, besides the 2013 Arab League resolution that recognised the Coalition as the main negotiator and the only legitimate representative of the Syrian people”, Marwah added.
“The Coalition insisted on representing the different forces of the Syrian revolution, and it remains open to the different opposition powers, which participated alongside the Coalition in the previous Geneva negotiations”.
Perhaps the Coalition’s apprehension towards the talks is similar to its concerns about the Moscow and Cairo conferences, which it considered as attempts to circumvent the first Geneva declaration under the pretext of uniting the Syrian opposition or “consulting with all parties”.
The Coalition believes the conferences attempted to create a loophole for the regime to evade its commitment to the legally-binding Geneva declaration by turning the second party (opposition) from one entity supposedly represented by the Coalition to several unspecified entities.
By reviewing the Geneva document, which assumes the presence of two negotiating parties to reach any political solution, it shows that the regime was specific and clear as the first partly, while the second party to the political process was not specified by its name.
Despite the large progress achieved by the issuing of UN General Assembly resolution 67/262 on 15 May 2013, article 26 of which “welcomes the establishment of the National Coalition for Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces […] as effective representative interlocutors needed for a political transition”, the resolution is merely a non-binding recommendation.
Leaked Conspiracy against the Syrian National Coalition
The Coalition boycotted the Moscow and Cairo conferences because it believed they aimed to give the Syrian regime a tailor-made political opposition and present it as a negotiating body in any future political process.
Perhaps this is what raised the Coalition’s concerns in the Geneva talks, pushing it towards boycott, especially after what a Coalition source told al-Araby al-Jadeed regarding leaks on the nature of the bilateral Geneva talks.
According to the source, the leaks confirmed that the UN Syria Envoy aims to embarrass the Syrian opposition through the consultations, revealing its lack of vision for the coming phase in order to force it to lower its demands and accept local truces.
“De Mistura will ask the Syrian opposition representatives critical and embarrassing questions on their vision for the transitional phase, the state institutions (army and ministries), and the Assad regime figures they would agree to include”, the source added.
“The embarrassing questions that the opposition will not be able to answer come along with De Mistura’s invitation of 40 parties (mostly from the opposition) to participate in the bilateral consultations in Geneva, which shows how divided the Syrian opposition is, and how it does not have any real representation”.
However, the call for consultations today is made by the UN, not Moscow or Cairo, which encourages the Coalition to attend, but under the condition of not accusing it of hindering any political negotiations. This is why the Coalition may attend, not out of realising the importance of such consultations for the Syrian revolution.
In a press conference held in Geneva on Tuesday, De Mistura said, “the talks launched today, and there is no deadline. This could last for weeks, and many parties may be added. By the end of July, we will evaluate the outcomes”.
He also stressed that the Geneva consultations were “not peace talks, but aim to open serious discussions with the relevant bodies to find a solution for the Syrian crisis”.
This position further escalated when the opposition openly announced its dissatisfaction the UN Syria Envoy Staffa De Mistura, questioning his intentions, to the extent that one of the Coalition’s main blocs announced its refusal to participate in the talks.
The Syrian National Assembly (SNA), a member of the Coalition, with Michel Kilo and the Muslim Brotherhood as its main members, issued a statement on Wednesday, warning against “drifting” behind the De Mistura’s plan and dealing with it lightly.
The statement also called everyone who was invited to participate in the talks to “hold on to the demands of the people and the revolution for a democratic solution, which the Geneva Accord considered the basis of any fair and accepted international solution stipulating the departure of Bashar al-Assad and his criminal associate, as well as the establishment of a full-power transitional governing body”.
In addition, the statement pointed out that De Mistura did not seem “convinced that these were the Syrian people’s real demands, otherwise he would not have called for talks without a programme, agenda, declared purpose, or any basis in the Geneva Accords and its mechanisms for the solution”.
Through its statement, the SNA accused De Mistura of attempting to deny the Coalition as a legitimate representative of the Syrian people, which had already been recognised by 114 states.
The SNA also questioned “the plans and intentions of the Syria Envoy, as well as his personal stances on the revolution and its institutions”, adding, however, that this stance towards De Mistura “does not mean the Coalition will cut its relations with the UN and its bodies”.
Preparations for Geneva 3
De Mistura had announced the participation of more than 40 groups, the Syrian government and several countries in the region, as well as military representatives, and Syrian religious leaders, in the Geneva consultations. He also said that there will be an evaluation of the outcomes of the talks by the end of July.
A number of the Coalition members had announced that they did not want to participate in the Geneva talks, namely the head of the Coalition’s Muslim Brotherhood bloc Farouk Taifour, who said that the Coalition had not made up its mind yet on whether to attend the Geneva talks.
Syrian opposition sources told al-Araby al-Jadeed that the Coalition’s leader Khaled Khoja sent a message to De Mistura’s team to inform them that its delegation would include 12 people, who will arrive in Geneva on 11 May to attend their assigned sessions on 12, 13 and 14 May.
“Whether De Mistura was serious about implementing the first Geneva declaration to achieve progress regarding the political solution, it is not showing in the meetings, as he invited dozens of Syrian opposition bodies, including emerging parties, civil society organisations, and various institutions. It is as if he wants to send a message that they will never agree on one opinion”, Hisham Marwah, deputy head of the Syrian Coalition, told al-Araby al-Jadeed.
“On the other hand, the UN Envoy is aware that there are international resolutions presenting a certain body to negotiate. On 12 December 2012, the Coalition was recognised by more than 100 states as the only legitimate representative of the Syrian people, besides the 2013 Arab League resolution that recognised the Coalition as the main negotiator and the only legitimate representative of the Syrian people”, Marwah added.
“The Coalition insisted on representing the different forces of the Syrian revolution, and it remains open to the different opposition powers, which participated alongside the Coalition in the previous Geneva negotiations”.
Perhaps the Coalition’s apprehension towards the talks is similar to its concerns about the Moscow and Cairo conferences, which it considered as attempts to circumvent the first Geneva declaration under the pretext of uniting the Syrian opposition or “consulting with all parties”.
The Coalition believes the conferences attempted to create a loophole for the regime to evade its commitment to the legally-binding Geneva declaration by turning the second party (opposition) from one entity supposedly represented by the Coalition to several unspecified entities.
By reviewing the Geneva document, which assumes the presence of two negotiating parties to reach any political solution, it shows that the regime was specific and clear as the first partly, while the second party to the political process was not specified by its name.
Despite the large progress achieved by the issuing of UN General Assembly resolution 67/262 on 15 May 2013, article 26 of which “welcomes the establishment of the National Coalition for Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces […] as effective representative interlocutors needed for a political transition”, the resolution is merely a non-binding recommendation.
Leaked Conspiracy against the Syrian National Coalition
The Coalition boycotted the Moscow and Cairo conferences because it believed they aimed to give the Syrian regime a tailor-made political opposition and present it as a negotiating body in any future political process.
Perhaps this is what raised the Coalition’s concerns in the Geneva talks, pushing it towards boycott, especially after what a Coalition source told al-Araby al-Jadeed regarding leaks on the nature of the bilateral Geneva talks.
According to the source, the leaks confirmed that the UN Syria Envoy aims to embarrass the Syrian opposition through the consultations, revealing its lack of vision for the coming phase in order to force it to lower its demands and accept local truces.
“De Mistura will ask the Syrian opposition representatives critical and embarrassing questions on their vision for the transitional phase, the state institutions (army and ministries), and the Assad regime figures they would agree to include”, the source added.
“The embarrassing questions that the opposition will not be able to answer come along with De Mistura’s invitation of 40 parties (mostly from the opposition) to participate in the bilateral consultations in Geneva, which shows how divided the Syrian opposition is, and how it does not have any real representation”.
However, the call for consultations today is made by the UN, not Moscow or Cairo, which encourages the Coalition to attend, but under the condition of not accusing it of hindering any political negotiations. This is why the Coalition may attend, not out of realising the importance of such consultations for the Syrian revolution.
In a press conference held in Geneva on Tuesday, De Mistura said, “the talks launched today, and there is no deadline. This could last for weeks, and many parties may be added. By the end of July, we will evaluate the outcomes”.
He also stressed that the Geneva consultations were “not peace talks, but aim to open serious discussions with the relevant bodies to find a solution for the Syrian crisis”.
More In News
