In an interview with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, he announced that the planned 2021 Syrian presidential election will be totally open to anybody who wants to run. He predicted there would be numerous nominees and a lot of challengers.
This election is intended to be part of the transition to a “post-war”
government, even if Syria’s war isn’t necessarily entirely over at this
point. Talk of having a very open system where everyone is free to run
has been something Russia has long pushed as its vision for Syria’s
future.
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo says President Trump and Turkey’s
President Erdogan will be discussing their own political solution for
“all of those in Syria.” This is almost certain to be at odds with the
Syria-Russia track for post-war Syria.
Since early in the Syrian War, the US and Russia had very conflicting
visions of what the future of Syria would look like politically, with
the US maintaining that “free elections” would necessarily preclude any
top officials of the Assad government, especially Assad, from running at
all.
Whether the US and Turkey are in a position to push an alternative isn’t
clear either, since the US and Turkey are almost certain to have very
conflicting ideas on a number of issues, especially the issue of what
happens to the Kurds.
Especially as Russia, Iran and Syria are the GUARANTORS OF PEACE IN SYRIA. Well worth using CAPS.
Seems to me that media, including Antiwar, are determined to maintain CONDESCENDING attitudes towards Astana processes, Sochi process for formulating Constitutional Committee, and up coming Geneva process /- as something not worth mentioning.
Thus — it is totally logical to think that US and Turkey will be charting something brilliant and new — and that something will be contrary to Russia’s ideas. Turkey did not spend all this political and military energy to just casually throw away what was agreed with Russia and Iran.
I believe that it will take a long time in Western way of thinking that other nations are capable of promoting regional peace and organize processes that will lead to the end of hostility and permanent peace.
The US has its story and is sticking to it: the US sets the terms for peace and organizes everyone everywhere, thus any other agenda is by definition undermining peace. There is little western media willing and capable of alternative reporting, in other words telling the entire story in a balanced way.
Does the new Syria end at the Euphrates?