THE FIRST SUCCESS OF "TROIKA"

It is the first time in almost 6 years of conflict in Syria for a real chance to achieve peace in the country and establish sustainable political dialogue about the future of her government. This is the result of a fairly complex but encouraging two-day talks in Astana on the settlement of the situation in Syria with the participation of officials from Damascus and the delegation of the armed opposition.

An event of historic significance

It was also the first time that delegations representing both the official Syrian government and the armed opposition sat down at the negotiating table at a meeting held in the capital of Kazakhstan. However, detailed discussions were held with each party separately. The mediators were Russia, Turkey and Iran, who have managed to virtually establish a trilateral format of external political influence on the situation in this war-torn Arab country.

The initiative to create yet another platform on Syrian peace talks in Astana (apart from Geneva) belongs to the Russian president Vladimir Putin. But while the most influential forces of Syrian opposition in Geneva were the representatives of the emigre community, who did not have enough in-situ influence, then the Astana summit, according to the Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, was "a meeting with the participation of people who are confronting each other “on the ground” and supervise specific areas in Syria."

Negotiations in Astana were largely possible due to the influence of Moscow and Tehran on the government of the Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, and Ankara – on the moderate Syrian opposition. It was an unprecedented evidence that the opposing sides in Syria agreed to make compromises. Damascus has acknowledged the fact that there were other real forces within the country, which should be negotiated also. In turn, the armed Syrian opposition has accepted that it was inevitable to hold a dialogue not only with the government of President Bashar Assad, whom they declared illegitimate since the beginning of the armed conflict but also with the supporters of the Syrian official authorities, namely Russia and Iran. The behavior of intermediaries has also changed - Russia, Turkey and Iran have taken a responsibility to guarantee peace in the country. Surprisingly, yhe representatives of the Russian Armed Forces have made public comments on the Syrian military, which has never been the case previously. Namely, the leadership of the Syrian army was harshly reminded about the need to respect ceasefire agreements, which is periodically disturbed by individual commanders, thus sparking concerns of the Russian Centre for reconciliation.

It is noteworthy to mention Turkey’s position, which has never thought of negotiating with the Assad regime for the past several years. However, the negotiations in Astana confirmed that Ankara’s priority is the establishment of peace in Syria. In such a situation declaring Assad "an outlaw" is not practical any more. The chief advisor to the Turkish President Yalcin Topcu has described the Astana summit as a historic event, which would be an incentive to restore the peace and stability in Syria, Iraq and throughout the Middle East.

The communiqué of guarantees

The delegation of the Syrian government was headed by Permanent Representative to the UN Bashar al-Jaafari. The delegation of the Syrian opposition included representatives of 14 armed groups, including the Jaish al-Islam, which Russia has repeatedly requested the UN Security Council to include in the list of terrorist organizations. However, late last year, the group expressed its willingness to join the ceasefire process in Syria agreed by the end of 2016 thanks to the mediation of Russia, Turkey and Iran.

The representatives of Russia, Turkey and Iran were represented at the summit as guarantors of the ceasefire in Syria. The UN Secretary General was represented by the special envoy for Syria Staffan de Mistura. The possibility of participation of a representative of the new US administration in the Astana consultations remained vague up until the last moment. The decision was taken only after the inauguration of Donald Trump as the President of the United States. As a result, the US Ambassador to Kazakhstan George Krol was able to attend the meeting in Astana.

Following the meeting, the Kazakh Foreign Minister Kairat Abdrakhmanov read the communiqué of the guarantor countries on the Syrian settlement. The key point of the document is the establishment of trilateral mechanism between Russia, Turkey and Iran to monitor compliance with the ceasefire in Syria, "to prevent any provocations and determine the modalities of the ceasefire." The communiqué also expressed the desire to continue the fight against terrorist groups such as Islamic State and Jabhat al-Nusra. This confirms the intention of guarantor countries to cut off gradually the most extremist forces from the rest, moderate opponents of the Syrian government. Moscow, Ankara and Tehran also called for the reduction of violence, providing immediate humanitarian access and protection of the civil population of Syria.

The guarantor countries agreed to cooperate with the assistance of the United Nations and the Astana platform for the settlement of the Syrian crisis and reaffirmed the "commitment to the sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity of the Syrian Arab Republic," which is a "multi-ethnic, multicultural, secular and democratic state". "There is no military solution to the Syrian conflict," it can be resolved "only through a political process based on the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 2254," reads the joint communiqué.

Another important outcome of the meeting was the introduction of the draft Syrian constitution prepared by Russian experts to the Syrian armed opposition. The delegations have expressed the urgency to begin works on the elaboration of this document and its subsequent acceptance, possibly through a referendum, as well as the parliamentary and presidential elections, which will be held in Syria soon. These topics were discussed in the days following the Astana talks in Moscow, between the Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and the representatives of the major groups of the Syrian opposition.

Constitutional ideas

The Syrian National Coalition of opposition and revolutionary forces based mainly outside Syria rejected the invitation to take part at the meeting in Moscow. However, the negotiations in Moscow can be regarded as another important step towards the establishment of peace in Syria. During the discussions, a special case was the question of the Syrian draft constitution, which was introduced to the opposition by Russia and summarized, according to Lavrov, as "the proposals of the government and opposition of the Arab Republic in recent years."

However, the Syrian authorities and the opposition opposed the draft constitution. For example, Russia proposed to transfer legislative powers from the president to parliament and the government, which is opposed by Assad. In turn, the draft constitution has not received support of opposition representatives either.

"We told them [Russian] that the only one who had the right to write the Constitution of Syria was the Syrian people. When the Constitution is written by another country, it will not work", - said a member of the rebel group Yahya al-Aridi.

The representatives of organizations of the Syrian Kurds have commented on the subject more extensively making it clear that they would not be guided by the decisions taken in Astana. Thus, Khaled Issa, a representative of the Kurdish Democratic Union Party (PDS), considered by Turkey as a terrorist group, mentioned the urgency to improve the Russian draft of the Syrian Constitution. Kurdish representatives supported the deletion of the word "Arab" from the name of the Syrian Republic, as well as the clause on the dominant religion but stressed that "the project did not meet all the needs and expectations of the Syrian people."

In essence, these 'needs and expectations’ mentioned by the Kurdish leaders reveals the very idea of ​​federalization of Syria, which confirms the desire of PDS and other groups of the Syrian Kurds to create a Kurdish autonomy in the north of the country. No doubt that Russia, Turkey and Iran, as well as those Syrian forces that express the commitment to the unity and territorial integrity of Syria cannot regard this idea as a productive proposal.

The positions of Russia and Turkey also disagree because of the Kurdish question. Ankara strongly opposes territorial entities of the Kurds in Syria while Moscow tolerates the establishment of the Kurdish autonomy and supports a secular state.

Nevertheless, the Syrian participants of the meeting with the Russian Foreign Minister in Moscow have expressed their readiness to study the Russian proposals submitted on the future constitution of Syria. But even more serious outcome of the meeting was their desire to create a unified opposition delegation to the upcoming talks in Geneva scheduled at the end of February.

The encouraging results

So, the negotiations in Astana and the follow-up meeting in Moscow, though not marked by the convergence of cardinal point of the official Damascus and the forces opposing it, bring hopes for consolidation of the peace process, ensuring the ceasefire and the preservation of the unity of Syria. The results of consultations in Astana allow us to count on the continuation of the Geneva process aimed at achieving peace in Syria. The Russian President Vladimir Putin has also expressed his hope that the talks in Astana might become the basis for the follow-up summit in Geneva.

According to the head of the Syrian government delegation, Bashar al-Jaafari, the parties have discussed specific items and achieved certain results. In this sense, one of the most significant results is that the opposing sides are moving away from unrealistic and unacceptable to more practical requirements.

Meanwhile, the Astana summit can be considered as the resounding diplomatic success for Russia, Turkey and Iran, who have taken on the responsibility of guarantors of the Syrian settlement. Above all, this mission is due to the resumption of partnership between Moscow and Ankara, and confirmed in a joint effort for the liberation of the Syrian city of Aleppo. Accompanied by the actual displacement of the US from a position of the №1 moderator of the Middle East policy, the activities of guarantor countries promises to further increase their regional influence.

However, it is not unlikely that the unpredictability of further developments in Syria being more obvious in view of the resistance of some Arab monarchies to the plans on Syrian armistice may result in the failure of diplomatic efforts of Russia, Turkey and Iran. Therefore, Moscow as a major player of the Troika does not risk assuming full responsibility for the Syrian settlement. Hence the repeated calls of Russia to increase the number of guarantor countries, primarily including the US. Such a perspective does exist, particularly after the election of Donald Trump, who has abandoned the idea of ​​the former US administration to overthrow the Assad regime and expressed the readiness of his country to focus on the destruction of the so-called Islamic Terrorism.