Even though UN-Arab League envoy Lakhdar Brahimi announced on the first day of talks on Syria, in Geneva, that Damascus and the opposition had accepted the June 2012 communiqué, issued at the time of the first round of talks in this Swiss town, as the basis for convening the Geneva II conference, there are no visible signs yet that the two embattled sides did in fact agree to it.
Evidence of Damascus’ refusal to endorse the principles of Geneva I is its presenting, for negotiations, of a document that does not mention a transition of power.
The “declaration of basic principles”, submitted by the Syrian official delegation on the fifth day of talks under Brahimi’s auspices as its own counter-offer for conducting peace negotiations, said that Syrians would choose a political system without formulas imposed from abroad, a clear reference to Western and regional demands that Bashar Assad step down.
The Monday session was scheduled to address the Geneva I basis for peace talks between the two sides, but it never got to even touch upon its criteria, much less deal with the implementation of its principles.
Departure from the principles of Geneva I is self defeating and renders Geneva II pointless.
With both sides adopting unshakeable positions, Brahimi’s statement, “once again, I tell you we never expected any miracle, there are no miracles here”, could not ring truer.
That does not seem to deter efforts to “see if progress can be made and when”, as the envoy said, but neither does it give reason for much hope that a solution to the three-year-old war in Syria will be arrived at any time soon.
The first five days of mediated talks between the two parties made no headway. They did not even secure the opening of corridors for humanitarian aid to the starving inhabitants of Homs.
This stalemate requires the direct intervention of influential powers.
Moscow should apply pressure on Damascus to yield to the objectives of Geneva I, by word and deed, and the powers that carry weight with the motley groups that form the opposition need to make them understand that change can only come when fighting stops and when the population’s needs are attended to as a matter of priority.
