Aktham Naissa: Foreign countries' proposals to resolve Syrian crisis do not serve people's interests

The Syrian lawyer and juristic activist Aktham Naissa pointed out that any solution from abroad would be no more than a reproduction and recycling of modern and contemporary history of the region, but in an updated manner. "The Syrian and Turkish regimes are the beneficiaries of prolonging the crisis," he said.

AHMED MOHAMMED / NEWS DESK

The Syrian crisis is about to enter its ninth year, and so far, there have been no efforts to limit the crisis which is worsening day by day. To talk about the Syrian crisis, the absence of a radical solution, whoever is the beneficiary of prolonging the life of the crisis, the failure of the conferences held on Syria till now, and on how to find the appropriate solutions, Hawar news agency interviewed the Syrian lawyer and juristic activist Aktham Naissa.

Betting on foreign countries and Turkish ambitions is of the reasons for not reaching a solution to the Syrian crisis

Naissa said about the reason of not finding a solution to the Syrian crisis, "From the geopolitical-historical perspective, the Middle East is one of the most sensitive areas in the world. Its strategic and geographical history links the North with the South and Europe with Asia, as well as the natural resources and the existence of Israel.  Many thinkers, politicians and others spoke about the importance of the Middle East. Perhaps this simple introduction refers to the importance of Syria as part of this, but perhaps the most important part as history tells us that the conflict over Syria has always taken an international and regional dimension."

Naissa added, "The international and regional rapprochement begins to divide the areas of influence. I think that this rivalry and attraction is the main reason that extends the life of the Syrian crisis, in addition to two additional dimensions; the first is the revival of the Ottoman spirit of Turkey and the awakening of its ambitions registered in its Mulli charter, and the second is subjecting most of the Syrian oppositions is mostly to the major powers and the regional states and submitting to their policies of those countries facing that the path of salvation is betting on those countries, and that the internationalization of the Syrian crisis is the only way to escape the regime, so those positions were subjected to the mercy of the general countries. The Syrian regime was not better when it subjected to the arms of Iran and Russia, and the crisis is no longer among the Syrians. I do not think that it will be solved unless there is an international regional consensus solution that determines the influence and share of each country."

The Syrian regime and Turkey are the beneficiaries to prolong the life of the Syrian crisis

Naissa referred to incidents in Idlib as an example and said that the Syrian regime and Turkey are the beneficiaries of prolonging the life of the Syrian crisis. "It is normal that the Syrian regime would be the primary beneficiary of prolonging the crisis. Since the early sixties of the last century, it has justified its crises and failure of his administration with external causes, and the most dangerous and most hypocritical was Palestine's cause. It repressed the Syrian people, destroyed the democratic structure in the Syrian society, and established its exceptional system and the continues state of emergency, and today the crisis provides it a wide range of populist pretexts and fabricated crises through which it can reproduce itself.  Terrorism, extremism, occupation, conspiracy, and other aspects of the regime are sufficient pretexts to stand behind the only leader and the savior."

Regarding Turkey, Naissa said, "On the other side, there is Turkey which has defined its strategy in Syria on the ground of achieving two goals. The first is to eliminate the Kurdish Movement and thereby reduce its sick feelings towards the Kurdish people, and the Autonomous Administration in particular, and the second is to achieve the greatest extent of its colonial ambitions in Syria, under the pretext of protecting its southern borders. As long as these two demands are not achieved, it will not stop stirring up crises and leaving the Syrian wound open to blackmail the other parties, as it does to the paper of Idlib. The continuing threats to occupy north-east of Syria and so on, and the goal of Erdogan and his party to turn Turkey into a tyranny charged with a religious ideology, which requires the distraction of Turkish society external crises.

External conferences failed because they did not rely on the Syrian people

In response to a question about why the conferences held so far to resolve the Syrian crisis have failed, Naissa said, "The goal of the multiple or other meetings in Geneva was not to resolve the Syrian crisis as much as it aimed at achieving two things; to force the Syrian regime and its various opposition and adapt it to suit the various agendas of the countries involved in Syria, and this objective was achieved through the Geneva Conference, where most of opponents turned into subordinates attached entirely to regional and international agendas, and were distributed according to the extent and level of their subordination, and distributed legitimacy according to the extent and level of dependence, as well as the Syrian regime and its annexes through the conferences of Sochi and some other conferences.

On the same question, he added that these conferences also included a form of negotiation between the parties involved in Syria in an attempt to divide the spheres of influence and political quotas. These conferences were preceded by military attempts to modify the balance of power on the ground and the extent to which this reflects the declared or undeclared negotiation of such conferences and meetings, And the Conference of Astan is a good example of this, with the emergence of States that guarantee the areas of quiet military or demilitarized in any case, these conferences, meetings, etc. were used in the context of confusion and fraud against the Syrian people.

The external solution will not serve the interests of the Syrian people, and creating a Syrian national state is the solution

In the context of talking about a realistic solution to the crisis, Naissa pointed out that the Syrians in their different positions have no longer had any independent will which leaves them unable to provide the ability to resolve the crisis because the solution is now at the hands of the major and regional states involved in Syria. This political fact cannot be overlooked or exceeded, but in an exceptional circumstance, there may be other solutions in which the Syrians can transfer the status of the initiative from those countries to the Syrians.

And Naissa made clear that any solution from the outside will not be more than the reproduction and recycling of modern history and contemporary of the region, but in an updated manner, and this solution will not serve their interests as individuals, peoples and homeland, and will not achieve their aspirations which makes it necessary to create a new Syrian national state, based on new humanitarian and contemporary foundations which meet the status of the peoples, the Syrian components and the Syrian citizen within its democratic framework, and this will not happen unless with forming a serious comprehensive Syrian-Syrian national dialogue that results in an invitation to a national conference that will lay the foundations for a new Syrian social contract that guarantees all the components of the country their rights, individuals and groups in one Syrian homeland, and this is a very difficult but not impossible."

D.H / T.S

ANHA


Other news