Brahimi may be on the right track, but will he succeed?

Till now, we don’t know what has been going on in the mind of the Envoy of the Secretary General of the UN, Lakhdar Brahimi. Observers and analysts like us don’t have enough information about his next plans to deal with the Syrian crisis. We are, however observing him closely. The mission of this man was described as difficult and almost impossible because it is the “straw” that the “drowning Syrian” can hold to in a call for help from the shadows of division, shredding, free murder and the unfettered raging civil war. Although very little leaks on the margins of the envoy’s meetings, we still get a deep feeling that the man is on the right track. He is struggling to construct a track for his mission that is independent from regional and international interests, albeit succeeding from resisting from the stress being placed upon him from Arab and international countries till now. According to several sources, Brahimi did not accept the Qatari request to put “a prior and low time limit” for his mission nor did he enjoy the “step down recital” which was played by the Qatari Minister as a precondition for the success of his mission. He even refused to go to the Four Seasons to meet Sheikh Hama stating that whoever wanted to meet him could go to his place of residence. In Paris the Secretary General’s meetings with French officials were less disorderly. He insisted on “keeping himself distant” from Kofi Annans’s plans and the strategy of the “Friends of Syria” and ensured his intention to meet different local and regional parties (including Iran) to search for solutions and outlets to the crisis. Such methodology - independent from the calculations of the regional players and free from the “pressure of their interests” – puts Brahimi’s mission on the right track. Even if this does not necessarily mean the man’s fortunes increase. It is evident that he will meet many more challenges and obstacles, especially from those who think that with money they can buy the world to serve their narrow selfish interests and their “big dreams” that never fit their “small sizes”. Brahimi will find a strong support to the first goal of his mission: stop violence and prevent any more bloodshed. But this will not happen in the context of a “comprehensive political settlement” which different mediators failed to reach and make possible - as the connection of this settlement and its main hinge lies in the personal destiny of the Syrian President Bashar al Assad and not the destiny of the whole regime. Particular viewpoints which began to leak to international centres, particularly Washington, following the “offensive film uprising” in the “Arab Spring” countries that are preventing Syria from falling in the hands of extremist Islam (Al-Qaeda) or even the Brotherhood’s Islam, may serve to the interest of these countries. This scenario achieves Washington’s interests in Syria, as specified by the American departments, by preventing the Syrian infection from spreading to neighbouring countries (Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, and Turkey) and preventing the spread of mass destruction weapons or their fall in the hands of “terrorists”. Perhaps this American approach meets the core idea of the Egyptian initiative the “Regional Quartet” where the disputes are almost limited to the Quartet parties about the personal future of the Syrian President - whether he remains, steps down or gets overthrown. There will come a time when the Syrian regime will realise that the “stamens without Assad” option may be the scenario which ensures the survival of the regime and the interest system and those who it represents. Such developments, in addition to the longing Syrian people (supporters and opponents) to get out of the furnace of the civil war which is squeezing them, will represent an  objective support factor to Brahimi’s mission, who I think is not very far from these perceptions and developments. However he will see that stepping down is not the subject of the initiative he is preparing, even if it will probably be the predicate. So it is come to this, that Assad may probably leave the power, but after the death of over thirty thousand individuals. There needs to be a change in the regime, one that does not require overthrowing an individual - maybe a change similar to that of Yemen, but one that is slightly more modified. Such belief took control of Syria’s allies before its adversaries, but the current controversy is related to how, when and where - a controversy which will require more efforts, initiative and struggles to resolve and unfortunately more wasted Syrian blood. Lakhdar Brahimi should propose “magical solution” to make the Syrian blood’s bill less expensive, but the question lies in whether he will succeed or not? --- The views expressed by the author do not necessarily represent or reflect the editorial policy of Arabstoday.