Enab Baladi – Hussam al-Mahmoud

During the first week of September, the Syrian opposition institutions held several meetings that directly and indirectly revealed disputes among representatives of some political blocs within these institutions. Representatives of the Cairo and Moscow platforms in the Syrian Negotiations Commission and the Syrian Constitutional Committee held a meeting on September 1, attended by the head of the Moscow platform, Qadri Jamil, the head of the Tomorrow Movement in Syria, Ahmed Jarba, and coordinators and members of both platforms within the Negotiations Commission and the Constitutional Committee.

The virtual meeting did not reveal many details about its proceedings, except for discussions on the latest political developments related to the Syrian situation and the work of the Negotiations Commission to ensure its functional role in the direct negotiation process for the full implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 2254. They agreed to continue meetings and coordinate next steps, according to a brief press statement following the meeting.

A few days before this meeting, on August 28, the Cairo platform issued a statement following two previous Negotiations Commission meetings related to amending the internal regulations and its leadership.

In the statement, the opposition platform expressed reservations about the decisions made by the commission in this context and its handling of internal and international changes, focusing on two essential points. First, the recent amendment to the Negotiations Commission internal regulations, passed by numerical majority, is deemed illegal and ignores the pluralistic nature upon which the commission was formed according to Resolution 2254.

The statement also mentioned that the amendment was made to keep certain individuals in their positions for illegally extended periods.

The second point addressed the issue of not involving some political components in the recent commission meetings, and not inviting them to attend these meetings raises concerns that this approach is not just internal organization but paves the way for political steps that do not align with the Syrian people’s aspirations, who rely on the Negotiations Commission to defend their rights and achieve their legitimate ambitions.

The Cairo platform called, in the statement issued on August 28, to ensure the legitimacy of the commission and not to harm a sacred achievement for the Syrian people alone, and not to jeopardize the continuity of the Negotiations Commission’s work until the implementation of Resolution 2254.

Amendment of internal regulations

On July 22, the Negotiations Commission issued a statement at the end of meetings held over two days, attended by representatives of all its components, which discussed recent developments in the Syrian political negotiation process and its meetings and engagements internally and externally during the past period. The focus was on the importance of building a participatory front of local Syrian communities, civil society organizations, research centers, media, and Syrian lobbyists in diaspora countries.

Among the topics discussed during the meetings was the need to amend several articles of the commission statute, such as developing administrative work mechanisms within the commission, various duties for its offices, including the legal office, amending membership conditions, extending the leadership mandate duration from one year to two years, extendable only once, to provide sufficient time to implement proposed plans, support the negotiation process, and allow the commission the widest field to leverage its political and diplomatic relations with regional and international actors.

Extending the leadership mandate aims to grant the commission the needed time to activate its various offices and committees and improve its performance, prioritizing rallying international efforts to serve the Syrian cause and people’s right to political change and the establishment of a state of citizenship, law, and justice.

The amendment of its statute was agreed upon with the presence of all commission components and by majority vote, according to the statement.

The Negotiations Commission emphasized in its statement its decision-making independence and that only the interests of the Syrian people and their just cause and legitimate demands govern it.

However, these amendments sparked the discontent of the Cairo platform, which issued a statement signed by five of its members: Firas al-Khaldi, Ahmed Shabeeb, Nidal Hassan, Ammar al-Nahas, and Taleed Saeb.

Absent members

In response to the rejection of these amendments and the reactions they generated, Tarek al-Kurdi, head of the legal office and member of the Syrian Negotiations Commission, clarified to Enab Baladi that there is an operative internal system that governs, regulates, and organizes the work of the Negotiations Commission in detail and at all levels. It stipulates the need for two-thirds of the commission members’ approval for amending this system in a legally convened meeting, achieving the legal quorum. He clarified that the commission meeting, during which the internal regulations were amended, met the previously mentioned conditions.

Regarding meeting attendance, some representatives from the Cairo platform in the Negotiations Commission have been absent from these meetings for a considerable time. They are invited to the meetings through the commission secretariat office as stipulated by the internal regulations, al-Kurdi said.

The Negotiations Commission member also emphasized its commitment to the Syrian people’s demands, achieving democratic political transition in Syria, and adhering to accountability and justice for Syrians.

A source familiar with the commission voting process previously confirmed to Enab Baladi that the internal statute amendment was passed by majority vote.

The source, who requested anonymity to speak freely, added that only four members from the Moscow platform, and Awad al-Ali, an independent member, opposed the proposed amendments.

A sensitive timing

Similar decisions in the Syrian opposition institutions have often sparked controversy among Syrians. On September 13, 2023, the National Coalition for Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces (Syrian National Coalition) elected Hadi al-Bahra as its chairman, succeeding Salem al-Meslet, who held the position since July 2021.

Before the elections, a leaked letter from the former vice president of the National Coalition, Ruba Habboush, raised questions about the current election mechanism in the National Coalition.

These disagreements and tensions arise as the opposition’s main ally (Turkey) is moving towards normalizing political relations with the Syrian regime, amidst the absence of any effective role for the opposition in recent months.

The Turkish-Syrian rapprochement track is linked to highly sensitive issues within Syrian geography, foremost among them the fate of opposition-controlled areas supported by Ankara in northwestern Syria, recently involved in the issue of opening crossings between opposition-controlled areas and regime-controlled areas with Russian-Turkish push.

Given these political changes, any movements by the Syrian opposition are being linked to this track. For example, a group of Syrian opposition bodies and entities held a meeting hosted by Turkey on September 3, coinciding with the acceleration of Turkish statements regarding rapprochement with the Syrian regime.

The meeting involved the Syrian Interim Government, the National Coalition, the Negotiations Commission, the Council of Tribes and Clans, and leaders of the Syrian National Army.

The meeting produced a final statement justifying the opening of the Abu al-Zandeen crossing between regime-controlled and opposition-controlled areas and an agreement to continue restructuring the Syrian National Army. Later, a disagreement emerged between the Interim Government head, Abdulrahman Mustafa, and the Shamiya Front (one of the National Army’s components).

Although these meetings are titled to overcome obstacles and solve problems and disputes, they have recently turned into generators of additional disagreements and issues, independent of the existing disputes and originally pending issues.