After the start of the Syrian revolution, regional and international countries quickly intervened and tried to find tools on Syrian territories in preparation to achieve its goals and ambitions.
These attempts were through the creation of so-called "platforms" that were promoted by informing the countries that formed them that they represented the will of the Syrian people, but in fact these platforms, named after the names of the countries and forces they created, were to cover up the movements of these countries or other projects in Syria.
The Moscow and Cairo platforms are the nucleus of a democratic project but Moscow has exploited them
After Russia intervened directly in the Syrian war as of 2015 and with all its military efforts to achieve a military victory, it was also striving to reap the benefits of it politically, trying in various ways to find Syrian political entities affiliated with it. In fact, Russia has tried to exploit the majority of the Syrian platforms that have been formed.
The Moscow and Cairo platforms, announced in 2014, were formed by Syrian opposition figures who could have been the nucleus of a democratic political project.
The Moscow platform includes several personalities, most notably Qadri Jamil, who currently resides in Moscow, where Moscow worked to exploit it to improve Russia's image in Syria, and officials of this platform considered that Russia is the cornerstone of the political solution to the Syrian crisis.
Upon the announcement of its formation, the Syrian people built their hopes on them, but both Russia and Turkey worked to push these platforms to serve their interests.
The Moscow platform was forced to follow exactly the Russian vision, losing much of its popularity. This platform defended the so-called de-escalation agreement in Syria.
Qadri Jamil believes that the Russian-sponsored "de-escalation" agreements are "strongly" pushing for political transition.
The Cairo platform includes Syrian actor Jamal Suleiman and Jihad Maqdessi, former regime spokesman.
This platform believes that "the national interest if it requires Assad to remain in power so be it" while calling for the exclusion of "armed opposition."
In fact, these platforms could have spearheaded the project inside Syria and served as the nucleus for ending the Syrian crisis if they had reached out to the real opponents inside Syria and formed a strategic alliance with them, but they remained silent on the Russian-Turkish-Iranian vision.
Hameimim platform … Promotion of Russian deals inside Syria
After Russian intervention in the Syrian war, it increased and granted the base of Hameimim a greater role, where Russia began to advance militarily on the ground and to try to give legitimacy to these battles, this platform was involved in holding truces, and the so-called reconciliation in Hameimim, after the Russian planes bombed cities and displaced people from the same base.
Riyadh Platform .. A dispute with Turkey, Russia and Iran
Years after the start of the Syrian crisis, there was a rift and disagreement between the countries that intervened in it, which further complicated the crisis, the most prominent of these differences between Saudi Arabia and Turkey, where Turkey was able to control the leadership of the so-called National Council and later the coalition, but that disturbed Saudi Arabia, especially after the support Turkey to the mercenaries of the Tahrir al-Sham and rapprochement with Russia and Iran and the attempt of this new alliance to end the course of Geneva to serve their interests was the announcement of the formation of the so-called Riyadh platform or the supreme body of negotiations.
But the Moscow platform announced the withdrawal from this body on the direction of Russia and the withdrawal of Tahrir al-Sham from it at the request of Turkey.
Astana Platform: An attempt to end the Geneva process and achieve victory at all costs
The Astana platform, which was set up to serve the interests of an alliance that called itself “the guarantors of Astana” (Russia, Turkey, and Iran), in fact, the mere mention of the alliance's name in front of the majority of Syrians comes to mind that there is a deal at the expense of their interests.
The alliance's archives are full of scourges for the Syrians, ending the so-called opposition and allowing the regime and the Russian and Iranian forces to extend their control over the areas they controlled through the de-escalation agreement signed in May 2017, and displaced a large number of Syrian people from Ghouta Aleppo, Homs, and Daraa to the Idlib and Afrin areas, where they have created the largest terrorist outpost in Syria and the region.
The Russians, the most prominent founders of the Astana platform, talk about the seriousness of the terrorists in Idlib, they actually engineered this outpost, one of the main objectives of this platform is to end the Geneva track and replace it with the Astana track.
What have these platforms achieved?
All of these platforms and entities failed to achieve anything for the Syrian people, but they became obsolete, where those who claimed to represent the opposition, the weapons were in the hands of their enemies to kill themselves, while the Syrian regime ended any role in the political decision by helping to establish platforms belonging to Russia, Iran and Turkey, and if all platforms were unable to discuss the file of 128 thousand Syrian detainees or other files, how can they discuss constitutional files that determine the future of the country.
Autonomous Administration formed by the Syrians
All of these platforms and entities, as well as the regime delegation, met to discuss Syria's constitution.
Observers believe that there is a difference between the views of the regime and the so-called opposition on the committee, the regime sees the need to review the 2012 constitution and amend some of its articles, while the so-called opposition sees the need for a new constitution.
Observers say that the purpose of the formation of the commission and the exclusion of Democratic Autonomous Administration, which represents the population of 30% of the area of Syria, is to prolong the Syrian crisis, because the intervening forces and sponsors of the Constitutional Commission parties have not yet agreed on a solution to the crisis.
It should be noted that the exclusion of Autonomous Administration from the Constitutional Commission based on a Turkish veto and the United Nations' veto of UN Resolution 2254, which affirms that all Syrians must participate in the Constitutional Commission, thus reducing the chances of success of this commission.
Despite the war on ISIS, residents of northern and eastern Syria have been able to establish civilian administrations that have worked hard to implement UN standards and laws, while the parties invited by the United Nations to draft the constitution themselves are confident that they have not applied any law, whether domestic or international, but some of them on their lists to study the constitution were blacklisted, either war criminals or terrorists.