Syrian Politician: Syria needs radical change, national democratic front

Syrian political researcher Ghayath Naissa believes that “the recent agreement between the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) and the interim government did not result from free national dialogue. Rather, it came after a brutal military attack by factions affiliated with the ruling authority, under U.S. cover, following the Paris meeting at the beginning of last month. In that meeting, the Damascus authorities made major sovereign concessions in exchange for political cover for themselves and for Turkey in its attack on the Autonomous Administration and the Kurdish people.”

Naissa emphasizes that “the factors that halted this attack and led to the signing of the agreement were not the goodwill of the authorities or their sponsoring states. What imposed the cessation of the attack and then the agreement was, first and foremost, the valiant resistance and steadfastness of the Syrian Democratic Forces, accompanied by a broad and exceptional Kurdish popular uprising in defense of the Autonomous Administration and Rojava, in addition to solidarity movements with Rojava across the world, and the firm and supportive stance of the KRG of Iraq toward the Kurdish people in Syria.”

Unreliable Promises and a Record of Broken Commitments

From this perspective, Naissa considers that “the promises of the interim government and Decree No. 13 remain unreliable, especially since the authority has reneged, since assuming power nearly a year ago, on all its commitments and promises, particularly those related to the components, pluralism, and rights of the Syrian people.”

Halting the Attack as an Opportunity for National Political Action

At the same time, he sees that stopping the attack and the bloodshed in itself is a positive development that opens space for political action at the national level in an attempt to pull the country out of a deepening crisis.

He notes that securing a number of Kurdish people’s rights, along with the gains of the Autonomous Administration and its experience of ethnic and religious coexistence, makes it a cornerstone for any national project that transcends religions, sects, and ethnicities. This places upon it the responsibility of overcoming the crisis and building Syria as a decentralized, pluralistic democratic republic for all its sons and daughters.

The Need to Review Strategies and Build New Tools

Naissa stresses that this path requires, first, a reassessment of previous national and democratic strategies, drawing lessons both positive and negative from past experiences, benefiting from the positives, discarding the negatives, and devising new, participatory mechanisms of action that are aligned with reality.

Given that the agreement in question “appears to be transitional and temporary,” the greatest challenge, according to Naissa, lies in how to move from the current moment marked by confusion and an uneasy balance toward a moment of conscious initiative to begin building a comprehensive national, democratic political and social project capable of mobilizing energies for the required democratic change.

Fragility of Recognition of the Kurdish Issue

He points out that although the agreement acknowledges albeit somewhat indirectly the reality and specificity of the Kurdish issue and the regions of northeast Syria and their role in shaping a new Syria, this acknowledgment remains extremely fragile.

Toward a National Political–Popular Front

Naissa argues that “escaping the labyrinth of an agreement followed by war, as practiced by the government, requires building a political–popular front network that brings together political and social groupings and forces carrying a project for a pluralistic, independent democratic Syria based on equality and social justice. Such a front must be capable of confronting the authority’s authoritarian and violent tendencies and of imposing democratic change through mass action.”

He believes that building such a front constitutes a necessary prelude to transitioning from negotiation and dialogue by force of arms to political negotiation and dialogue.

Failure of Previous Alliances and the Need for a New Approach

Naissa stresses that “previous forms of alliances have proven their incapacity and failure at all critical junctures the country has experienced, especially since Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham assumed power in Damascus, as their activities were limited to issuing statements and holding conferences without any real impact on the ground.” Therefore, he emphasizes the need for a new strategic and structural approach that aligns with transformations on the ground and responds to the struggles, needs, and demands of the people.

No Solution Without Radical Change in the Authority’s Policies

Naissa asserts that “partial or transitional agreements cannot lead to a comprehensive, inclusive solution that meets the demands of all Syrians in the absence of sincere and serious will on the part of the government. What is required is a change in exclusionary policies in favor of the participation of all Syrian political and social currents in a peaceful transition toward a participatory democracy that respects the pluralism of the Syrian people.”

An Authority Without Reformist Will and an Open Horizon of Conflict

He points out that such will does not appear to be present in Syria’s interim government, whose first year in power has been marked by massacres, the squandering of national sovereignty, and subordination to the agendas of major and regional powers; especially Turkey at the expense of the needs and interests of the Syrian people.

He believes that “Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham’s monopolization of power and its establishment of one-man rule cloaked in a regressive sectarian ideology will deepen the Syrian crisis and push the country toward endless internal and external wars.”

A Broad Democratic Front

Naissa concludes that “the necessity of building a national democratic and popular front has become urgent one that includes all political and social forces calling for peace and the reunification of the country through the establishment of a pluralistic democratic system in which every Syrian finds a place in a new Syria that provides equality, justice, and human dignity.”

He emphasizes that this front should serve as a space for organization, linkage, and coordination of the struggles of Syrian men and women who are victims of oppression, authoritarianism, exploitation, and exclusion from communities subjected to massacres and genocide, to Sunni Damascene sects suffering marginalization and humiliation, to Syrian women whose rights are violated daily, in addition to the majority of Syrians living under poverty and deprivation, and democratic political and social forces despite their fragility.

He stresses that unifying these struggles around shared goals, a common strategy, and participatory, reality-based mechanisms of action is the central task of this front, underscoring that such an approach requires a central role for the Autonomous Administration and its political forces that have drawn lessons from past experiences.

Naissa concludes by saying: “This is the crux of the matter in the current Syrian situation.”

ANHA