Astana meetings in NES politician's perspective

Politicians in NE Syria agreed that the Astana meetings materialize non-solution and sterility, because they do not seek after the Syrians interests and investigate the process of resolving the Syrian crisis.

23 February, 2021 01:46

NEWSDESK- AHMED MOHAMED

Since the first meeting in Astana, the Kazakh capital on January 23-24, 2017, Syria has witnessed an escalation of violence, an exchange of areas between mercenaries and the forces of the Damascus government, and demographic change on sectarian and national grounds.

On February 17th, in Russia's Sochi, the work of the 15th round of the Astana talks was held between the so-called guarantor countries "Russia, Turkey and Iran", with the participation of Arab countries as observers "Lebanon, Jordan and Iraq."

This last meeting came nothing new with regard to solving the Syrian crisis, but materialized its approach based on taking into account the interests of the so-called guarantor countries and renewed its accusations to the Autonomous Administration of the North and East Syria of trying to secede.

'regime reproduction'

Commenting on the last meeting, the Syrian opposition politician and a member of the General Council of the Arab National Association, Hikmat Habib said: “Astana came to undermine the real political process, and pin the interests of Russia, Turkey and Iran, in order to reproduce the regime according to their agenda."

He went on to say, "Turkey, Iran and Russia want to reproduce the regime. All these interests among the three countries bore fruit to Astana, thus undermining the real political process in Syria."

Member of the General Council of the Future Syria Party, Rajab al-Musharraf, agreed with Al-Habib, and said, "Astana is a conspiracy against the Syrian people and geography, and it increased the destruction, dispersed the Syrian society, and increased the displacement of the Syrian people, and it is not a form of dialogue to solve the Syrian crisis."

'Leaving the solution in the hands of the guarantors of Astana and Sochi is siding with the executioner'

He added," leaving the solution up to the Astana's guarantors is bias towards the executioner, saying, "Leaving the solution in their hands is siding with the executioner, and this led to escalating tension in the country, and the occupation of Tal Abyad, Ras al-Ain, Afrin, Jarablus and other Syrian areas."

"It also led to the Turkification of the region and revving the Neo-Ottoman, and this is not what the Syrian people sought, and certainly will not accept these projects aimed at occupying their lands."

For his part, the activist in the Syriac Olaf Taw Association, Eli Felo, believes that "the meetings and conferences will be a failure, because they establish the special interest's principle of their sponsors. In the event of distancing from their interests and relying on the de facto situation of the country. They may reach a solution to the Syrian crisis."

'Explicit targeting of the AANES'

According to the Astana's final statement, read by the Russian special envoy to Syria Alexander Lavrentiev, it became clear again that the guarantors did not address the reality of the Syrian crisis, and turned a blind eye to the occupation of Syrian lands, foremost, the Turkish occupation of the Syrian geography.

The statement focused on the trio's interests at the expense of the Syrian people, preserving the areas of influence agreed on in the previous meetings, targeting projects aimed at resolving the Syrian crisis and opposing the Autonomous Administration project in northeast Syria.

Al-Habib considered, "Their last statement is a blatant and real assault on the people of Syria, especially NE Syria, noting that the stable region has a democratic project, but their intention was clear after Biden policies getting clearer towards Syria."

'Incitement against the AANES and encouragement for Turkey to continue its occupation'

Al-Habib noted that their recent statement and constant accusations, "want to incite the Syrian people against this democratic project, and give justifications for Turkey to intervene in the Syrian lands in the next stage with a Russian green light, under the pretext of preserving the Syrian territorial integrity."

Al-Habib pointed out that the three sponsors of Astana seek to "undermine the democratic process and the nucleus of a political solution emanating from NE Syria, and for the Syrians' realization that no project but the AANES and the SDC may lead to the solution, and for these reasons they are fighting this project is according to their agendas."

Al-Habib affirmed that “Astana, Sochi and Geneva will not lead to a real political solution,” referring to “the lack of participation of the real forces on the ground, and lack of seriousness by the conflicting parties to end the conflict in Syria."

In turn, Al-Musharraf affirmed that “the people of NES believe in a solution on the basis of decentralization, pluralism and cultural diversity, he said,“ We strive for Syria to be united not as in Sochi and Astana."

He added, "These Sochi and Astana meetings complicate the crisis and prolong it as long as possible, and not to reach a solution to the crisis in its human and consensual form on the basis of pluralism and decentralization."

'False accusations'

As for Elie Filo, he said in this regard, "Autonomous administration regions are not governed by one party at the expense of another, but by their sons of the components, and the accusations of Astana's guarantors are nothing but a repetition of ungrounded accusations, and not from a single political party that controls the fate of the people of NE Syria."

He pointed out that the solution lies in the recognition of each party to the other party, and accurate knowledge of the reality of the Syrian crisis, and its causes in an emotional sense, and through the United Nations through the implementation of Resolution 2254, and the meeting of all components in the Constitutional Committee.

(A)

ANHA