More than four years into Syria’s civil war, the massive exodus of refugees who have fled the country or who are displaced within it continues to be one of the biggest humanitarian crises in the Middle East. In what seems to be his first moment of coherence and lucidity since the beginning of the conflict, Syria’s President Bashar Al Assad has admitted military setbacks.
Writing in the pan-Arab daily Al Hayat, Abdelzaziz Al Tuweijri noted that while it was common to hear voices condemning the crimes against humanity committed by the authoritarian regime in Syria, “never have we heard anyone demanding that the head of the Syrian regime, Bashar Al Assad, be brought before the International Criminal Court”. Among Mr Al Assad’s alleged crimes are some committed against the Syrian people, including the destruction of their country and causing the displacement of half of the population.
“At a time when the Syrian people await salvation at the hands of revolutionaries who have taken up arms to fight against a regime which has reached the apex of criminality, we hear calls for a truce with Assad to find a way out of the swamps that Syria has been dragged into, in an attempt to reproduce a sectarian regime that will play a given role over the coming period,” he wrote.
This is the position that has been taken by the secretary general of the Arab League, Nabil Al Arabi, along with Russia, the United States and several European countries that have decided that dealing with the existing regime is far better than dealing with the unknown. He noted that this is particularly the case with ISIL, now that the terrorist organisation has its eye on taking Damascus.
“The most dangerous achievement of the Syrian regime is that it has positioned itself as the only alternative to terrorist organisations and presented itself to the world as a target for terrorists,” he concluded.
In the pan-Arab daily Asharq Al Awsat, Tarik Al Humaid remarked that Mr Al Assad’s televised comments had been a surprise to everyone.
“This is the first time that he has seemed realistic, because he admitted that the regime is in a difficult position and that there is a shortage of troops.”
The writer said that it was hard to believe that Mr Al Assad had finally realised the extent of the crisis. He even admitted that the people of Damascus would not be able to see his speech on television due to power cuts and that his troops were abandoning some parts of the country so they could keep their hold on other areas, noted Humaid.
“Clearly, Assad was not addressing the international community nor the Syrian people but instead his immediate circle of supporters and followers, seeking to convince them that he is still able to fight and survive the crisis that he led them to,” he wrote.
Humaid said that what mattered to Syrians and the international community about Mr Al Assad’s speech was that it highlighted the lack of difference between the regime and ISIL.
“As Assad says, particularly with reference to Hizbollah’s participation in the conflict, ‘a homeland does not belong to those who dwell in it or carry its nationality and passport, but to those who defend and protect it’ – an approach identical to that of ISIL which uses foreign fighters from all over the world to fight in the name of jihad,” he concluded.
Translated by Carla Mirza
CMirza@thenational.ae
