The Syrian government has repeatedly dragged its feet when it comes to peace talks to end the six-year civil war. The latest assault on the country’s peaceful neogtiations was captured best by Bashar Al Jaafari, a negotiator for Bashar Al Assad’s government at the latest round of talks in Astana.
After opposition rebels announced they would not attend a round of negotiations in Astana, Mr Al Jaafari said that the only reason the regime sent a delegation to Kazahkstan was to meet Russian and Iranian delegates. These comments confirm one of the central arguments the opposition has been making for years: the Syrian government is not actually interested in the peaceful resolution of the civil war but only in the maintenance of its own power. For the Assad regime, the talks in Astana are not an end in themselves, but rather a pantomime of diplomacy.
This newspaper has made its views on the Assad regime clear, but we do not have a preference when it comes to the composition of the opposition groups that will attend peace talks. We do, however, recognise that genuine peace talks require both an opposition and regime supporters – and, crucially, goodwill on both sides. If the regime is not going to send representatives who are serious about negotiation, then what is the point of peace talks in the first place?
Moreover, given the outsized diplomatic and military role that Russia and Iran have already played in the civil war, Mr Al Jaafari’s assertion that his government needed to speak with these countries borders on farce. Surely Mr Al Assad has no difficultly speaking directly with Iranian and Russian diplomats and commanders operating in his country?
The latest rounds of talks in Geneva and Astana have not been without fault on both sides, but that doesn’t change the fact that the talks are vital to the future of the country. The longer the regime stalls in putting forward credible positions for discussion, the more Syrians will die in the world’s worst humanitarian disaster.
