What future for the Syrian process in Geneva?

A week after the collapse of Bashar al-Assad’s regime, overthrown by the lightning offensive of a coalition of rebels led by the Islamist group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), diplomacy is running at full speed in the Middle East .

On Saturday, Jordan hosted talks on Syria’s future attended by several of the Arab League organization’s 22 members, including neighboring Iraq and Lebanon, as well as representatives from Turkey, the United States -United States and the European Union. The UN envoy on Syria, the Norwegian Geir Pederson, was also present.

The interim government, set up by HTS, a former Syrian branch of Al-Qaeda which says it has renounced terrorism, was not invited. But several foreign chancelleries, particularly Western ones, which fear a fragmentation of the country and a resurgence of the terrorist threat, have since announced that they have established contacts with the new authorities in Damascus, capital of Syria.

After more than thirteen years of a civil war which left more than half a million dead, ravaged the country, and forced some six million Syrians to flee, the new government promised to “preserve the stability of institutions” and “avoid the disintegration of the State” during the transition period, which lasts until March 1.

New negotiations in Geneva?

“There are not fifty alternatives”, discussions aimed at stabilizing Syria should go through Geneva, believes Souhail Belhadj Klaz, visiting professor at the Geneva Graduate Institute.

Since 2012, Switzerland and Geneva in particular have hosted multiple rounds of negotiations, carried out under the aegis of the United Nations. These talks, which included the creation of a Constitution, brought together government representatives, members of the opposition, as well as Syrian civil society groups. They ended in failure due to differences between the parties as well as the influence of Russia, a powerful supporter of Bashar al-Assad.

The office of the UN envoy on Syria – which had until now taken on the role of mediator – is not currently communicating on a possible resumption of negotiations in Geneva. But for Souhail Belhadj Klaz, the city of Calvin presents many advantages making it the best alternative for holding future meetings.

Without Russian influence

With a significant presence of the United Nations, particularly its humanitarian and human rights bodies, Geneva can boast of housing the expertise necessary to hold this type of negotiations. And most states already have diplomatic representation on site.

Neutral Switzerland could also use its experience in organizing discreet meetings between countries and groups with divergent interests.

According to Souhail Belhadj Klaz, it is also from Geneva that the funds necessary for the reconstruction of the country could be raised, because that is where donors are most likely to go.

As early as 2017, the Geneva talks suffered from the establishment by Russia, with the support of Iran and Turkey, of a competing negotiation process in Astana, Kazakhstan. This had little by little emptied the discussions at the end of the lake of their substance. If this format is still active, it should, according to the professor, be extended to the rest of the international community, because it is only supported by Moscow, Ankara and Tehran.

“The Russians no longer have any real room for maneuver, their protégé [Bachar el-Assad] left Syria. Even if guarantees have been negotiated with Turkey, they are now subject to the decisions of the new Syrian leaders, first and foremost for their military bases,” underlines Souhail Belhadj Klaz, who believes that Russia will not be able to influence future negotiations. As a reminder, Russia has been active militarily in Syria since 2015 where it has two strategic bases – one naval, the other air. “The Russians are more interested in saving the furniture by coming to participate in negotiations,” adds the professor.

Points to be resolved

For Souhail Belhadj Klaz, future negotiations must above all focus on the organization of power in Syria.

The HTS rebel group controls Idlib province, the capital Damascus and several other major cities in western Syria. But large portions of the territory are under the control of other opposition groups and factions. In the northeast of the country, Kurdish forces, who form the country’s largest ethnic minority, control a large part of the land bordering Turkey. An area where the Syrian National Army is also located, a group of rebels supported by Ankara.

“The negotiations will focus on the Constitution and in particular on the form of government to adopt. We will probably not discuss a centralized government, but rather federal or regional, with provincial autonomy,” believes the professor. According to him, this is a precondition for any dialogue between the different actors sharing Syrian territory.

“There will also be the question of the representation of ethnic and religious minorities. Any agreement must guarantee the protection of the Christian and Alawite communities,” adds Souhail Belhadj Klaz. The question of dismantling the Syrian security apparatus and transitional justice will also be central to deciding the fate of the former torturers of the Assad regime. The securing and destruction of chemical weapons in Syria must also be on the menu of what already promises to be a long process requiring several rounds of negotiations.

Asked when such talks could begin, the professor ventures a prediction: “As soon as possible, in January.”

Text reread and verified by Virginie Mangin