|
13 November 2012 By Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed For the first time, British
Prime Minister David Cameron clearly said that he
would be in favor of a safe exit for Syrian President
Bashar al-Assad if it stops the bloodshed and
facilitates the transfer of power in Syria. Al-Assad's
fate is rapidly falling out of his own hands as the
noose tightens around him and his choices narrow — he
can either die in his palace or flee abroad. Al-Assad's urgency to respond to David Cameron was
obvious. Cameron's statement worried the Syrian
President and also raised a lot of wider speculation
that a conspiracy is being plotted behind closed doors
to resolve the Syrian crisis through a political
decision granting al-Assad exile abroad without trial,
or at least this is what we can gather from the term
"safe exit". Cameron traveled between the region's
capitals at a time when Russian Foreign Minister
Sergey Lavrov was also present in the Middle East.
Lavrov had met for the first time Riad Hijab, a
leading Syrian opposition figure who lives in exile in
the Jordanian capital. Hijab previously served as
prime minister in al-Assad's government but defected
only a few weeks after his appointment. There is no doubt that al-Assad knows that the
Russians are talking behind his back about a solution,
which includes him leaving the government, after
failing to strike a reconciliation deal between the
al-Assad regime and the opposition. One source
confirmed that the Russians are talking about the
details of al-Assad's departure, be it a smooth exit
or a forced exile, but the Russian proposal is still
not practical in many respects in terms how to
administer the country after the exit of the Damascus
butcher. I believe that al-Assad has heard something of this
whispering and knows that Cameron did not make his
statement randomly; especially since he pointed out
that the Syrian President cannot remain unaccountable
for his crimes. This suggests that provisions for a
trial have been included in the discussions over al-Assad's
departure. The Russians also propose creating small states in
western Syria and the Israelis support this.
Interestingly, after meeting with Russian President
Vladimir Putin, Israeli President Shimon Peres said
that he is against any foreign intervention in Syria.
Here we can decipher that Peres means he is against
the proposed Western intervention, and that he would
prefer an "Arab" solution, as proposed by the Arab
League, which calls for Arab forces to intervene in
Syria. Of course, Peres knows that Arab troops would be
too weak and would cause the conflict to expand rather
than overthrow the al-Assad regime. Such intervention
would lead to an inter-Arab war, with the region drawn
into more battles to distract it from the Palestinian
cause for another twenty years. International foreign intervention, especially
under the UN flag, would be able to resolve the great
battle quickly by removing al-Assad and ensuring the
legitimacy of an alternative Syrian regime. In the
absence of such legitimacy, there would be problems
such as the continued presence of al-Assad militias as
well as extremist elements such as al-Qaeda, which,
although they are fighting against the regime's
forces, remain a target for international pursuit, as
is happening in Libya today. We are now in a new phase of the conflict, nearing
al-Assad's exit, but the accompanying dangers will not
be easy to deal with. If al-Assad leaves without trial
this is a problem for everyone, and if Syria is
divided into smaller states this is totally
unacceptable.
Al Rashed is the general manager of Al -Arabiya
television. He is also the former editor-in-chief of
Asharq Al- Awsat, and the leading Arabic weekly
magazine, Al Majalla. He is also a senior Columnist in
the daily newspapers of Al Madina and Al Bilad. He is
a US post-graduate degree in mass communications. He
has been a guest on many TV current affairs programs.
He is currently based in Dubai. |