Six weeks ago, a two-man
delegation arrived in secret in Damascus: civilians from Aleppo who represented
elements of the Free Syrian Army, the rebel group largely composed of fighters
who deserted the regime’s army in the first year of the war. They came under a
guarantee of safety, and met, so I am told, a senior official on the staff of
President Bashar al-Assad. And they carried with them an extraordinary
initiative – that there might be talks between the government and FSA officers
who “believed in a Syrian solution” to the war.
The delegation made four points: that there must be an “internal Syrian
dialogue”; that private and public properties must be maintained; that there
must be an end to – and condemnation of – civil, sectarian, ethnic strife; and
that all must work for a democratic Syria where the supremacy of law would be
dominant. There was no demand – at least at this stage – for Assad’s departure.
The reply apparently came promptly. There should indeed be “a dialogue
within the Syrian homeland”; no preconditions for the dialogue; and a
presidential guarantee of safety for any FSA men participating. And now, it
seems, another remarkable development is under way: in seven rebel-held areas
of Aleppo, most of them under the control of the FSA, civil employees can
return to work in their offices, and government institutions and schools can
reopen. Students who have become militiamen over the past two years will be
disarmed and return to their classrooms.
Some members of the FSA have formed what they call the “National Union
for Saving Syria”, although members of the political opposition in areas
outside government control disrupted meetings by condemning the government army
and, according to those involved in the “Union”, making sectarian comments and
condemning Shiites and Iran. Last week there were several defections of FSA
units to the al-Qa’ida-linked al-Nusra Front, which has complicated matters
still further. If the FSA is prepared to talk to the regime, how many are now
left to take part in future agreements between the two sides?
For months now, pro-regime officials have explored how they might win
the army defectors back to their side – and the growth of al-Nusra and other
Islamist groups has certainly disillusioned many thousands of FSA men who feel
that their own revolution against the government has been stolen from them. And
in areas of Homs province, it is a fact that fighting between the FSA and the
army has virtually ceased. In some government-held villages and towns the FSA
are already present without being molested.
And the advantages to Assad are clear. If FSA men could be persuaded to
return to the ranks of the regime’s army in complete safety, large areas of
rebel-held territory would return to government control without a shot being
fired. An army reinforced by its one-time deserters could then be turned
against al-Nusra and its al-Qa’ida affiliates in the name of national unity.
The Islamist fighters in the Syrian opposition are certainly a source of
deep concern to everyone involved in the war – not least, of course, the
Americans, who continue to dither over whether they should give weapons to the
rebels. Had the US administration followed John McCain’s advice, for example,
some of the arms that might have been given to the FSA would already be in the
hands of al-Nusra now that three units within the FSA have gone across to the
Islamists.The Islamist fighters in Syria are meanwhile turning into a serious
threat to the very existence of the country’s Christians. Bishops and
patriarchs from across the region met in Beirut last Friday to lament the
exodus of the Christians of the Middle East; Catholic Maronite Cardinal Bechara
Rai of Lebanon described how for Christians, “the ‘Arab Spring’ had turned to
winter, to iron and fire”.
The prelates were particularly upset at the massive damage to churches
in Raqqa – now under the control of the al-Nusra group – and at the al-Nusra
attack on Maaloula. I saw myself last week how perverse was this assault on the
largely Christian Syrian town north of Damascus. In Christian homes, crucifixes
had been smashed, but the al-Nusra invaders seemed to take a perverse pleasure
in wrecking their homes. In one basement flat
they had emptied the fridge of food and stuffed it full of shoes.
Now that’s something to bend your mind!
Curious facts colour UN's report
So now the world has convinced itself that the Assad regime fired the
sarin gas shells on 21 August, it really is time to read the full version of
the UN chemical weapons inspectors' report from Syria. The details of the death
and suffering of the innocents of the Ghouta area of Damascus are fearful. Two
brothers, it transpires, were the only survivors of their family of 40 who all
lived in the same building. But one or two paragraphs need re-reading.
“A
leader of the local opposition forces (sic) who was deemed prominent in the
area…was identified and requested to take 'custody' of the [UN] Mission,” it
says. Naturally the UN inspectors would want to be kept safe. But they were, in
effect, in the hands of the rebels. A list of questions for survivors was also
“circulated to the opposition contacts”.
Rather more worrying, however, is a short paragraph on page 22. At the
sites where sarin gas missiles landed, it says, the inspectors found that “the
locations have been well traveled (sic) by other individuals prior to the
arrival of the Mission… During the times spent at these locations, individuals
arrived carrying other suspected munitions indicating that such potential
evidence is being moved and possibly manipulated.”
Manipulated? Odd, but I don't remember that quotation in the media
accounts of the inspectors' report
The Independent- Robert Fisk
Comments About This Article
Please fill the fields below.