Syria: Can Lavrov and Kerry agree?
Published in Le Nouvel Observateur
(France) on 26 February 2013
by Céline Lussato (link to
original)
Almost two years after the beginning of the Syrian rebellion, the country has reached a deadlock. Violent clashes have not ceased and no serious inter-Syrian negotiations are on the table. International diplomacy continues to be hampered by a UN Security Council that is sharply divided into two camps. While the Syrian regime is backed militarily by Russia, the Western countries are reluctant to provide arms to rebel forces. Meanwhile, the conflict has taken a toll of 70,000 lives.
This is the backdrop for the Feb. 26 discussions between the new U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and his Russian counterpart, Sergey Lavrov, in Berlin. At odds over the steps required to put an end to two years of deadly conflict, both men must strive to not take sides and to bring their viewpoints closer together. But what are their differences in perspective?
Two Views on a Negotiated Settlement
For Moscow, the last important capital together with Tehran that maintains ties to Damascus, the only factor that can help change the course of the country will depend on a dialogue between the opposition and the regime of Bashar al-Assad. Russia continues to sell arms to Syria and does not necessarily defend al-Assad as the country’s leader. However, it insists that if the president must go, it must be as a result of general elections.
For Washington, which backs the Syrian opposition by way of non-lethal assistance to rebel forces and economic sanctions against the regime, the removal of Bashar al-Assad is an absolute necessity. “The U.S. government favors a political solution, a negotiated settlement that will lead to President al-Assad stepping down. President Obama thinks—and I share his view—that this is what is going to happen,” Secretary of State John Kerry said earlier in February, indicating that al-Assad’s departure was inevitable.*
The Americans are counting on Russia to assist in laying the groundwork for a negotiated settlement. “I hope there is still a formula that will allow Russians and the U.S. to come to an agreement,” Kerry suggested without going into detail.*
With or Without al-Assad
The viewpoints of Russians and Americans over a negotiated settlement have run into differences of scale. Can Bashar al-Assad remain in power during the transition even if the Syrian opposition is unwilling to negotiate with the head of the regime behind the bloody repression in the country?
In Berlin, John Kerry should strive to change Moscow’s position so that the Russians are able, in turn, to convince Assad to step down. However, the challenge got off on the wrong foot. On Tuesday morning, Sergey Lavrov accused extremists of having “prevailed in the ranks of the opposition … blocking all initiatives that could lead to the start of dialogue,” he expressed regretfully.
As for the Americans, a spokesperson at the State Department told reporters in John Kerry’s press corps that he was not expecting any major breakthroughs as a result of his face-to-face talks with Sergey Lavrov.
*Editor’s Note: This quote, although accurately translated, could not be verified.
This is the backdrop for the Feb. 26 discussions between the new U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and his Russian counterpart, Sergey Lavrov, in Berlin. At odds over the steps required to put an end to two years of deadly conflict, both men must strive to not take sides and to bring their viewpoints closer together. But what are their differences in perspective?
Two Views on a Negotiated Settlement
For Moscow, the last important capital together with Tehran that maintains ties to Damascus, the only factor that can help change the course of the country will depend on a dialogue between the opposition and the regime of Bashar al-Assad. Russia continues to sell arms to Syria and does not necessarily defend al-Assad as the country’s leader. However, it insists that if the president must go, it must be as a result of general elections.
For Washington, which backs the Syrian opposition by way of non-lethal assistance to rebel forces and economic sanctions against the regime, the removal of Bashar al-Assad is an absolute necessity. “The U.S. government favors a political solution, a negotiated settlement that will lead to President al-Assad stepping down. President Obama thinks—and I share his view—that this is what is going to happen,” Secretary of State John Kerry said earlier in February, indicating that al-Assad’s departure was inevitable.*
The Americans are counting on Russia to assist in laying the groundwork for a negotiated settlement. “I hope there is still a formula that will allow Russians and the U.S. to come to an agreement,” Kerry suggested without going into detail.*
With or Without al-Assad
The viewpoints of Russians and Americans over a negotiated settlement have run into differences of scale. Can Bashar al-Assad remain in power during the transition even if the Syrian opposition is unwilling to negotiate with the head of the regime behind the bloody repression in the country?
In Berlin, John Kerry should strive to change Moscow’s position so that the Russians are able, in turn, to convince Assad to step down. However, the challenge got off on the wrong foot. On Tuesday morning, Sergey Lavrov accused extremists of having “prevailed in the ranks of the opposition … blocking all initiatives that could lead to the start of dialogue,” he expressed regretfully.
As for the Americans, a spokesperson at the State Department told reporters in John Kerry’s press corps that he was not expecting any major breakthroughs as a result of his face-to-face talks with Sergey Lavrov.
*Editor’s Note: This quote, although accurately translated, could not be verified.
Previous article![]( "Talks with Iran")