By AmmarJohmani
Spokesman for the opposition's High Negotiations Committee Dr. Monzer Makhous confirmed the Syrian opposition no longer owns a national Syrian decision in view of all this international and regional interference in the Syrian crisis.
In an interview with Ammar Johmani, Makhous explained that the real stand has been so far for the committee is to reject any acceptance of Assad, neither in the transitional phase nor after this stage, indicating that the Syrian decision now is no longer a purely national decision in light of regional interventions.
He said that the Saudi stand is in reality with the departure of Assad, but the international changes are imposed on the regional countries to take into account what has changed on the ground in Syria.
A: There is a state of dispute between the committee and the Cairo and Moscow platforms regarding Assad. Will the Commission accept the expansion of Assad's acceptance base?
M: There is almost unanimous agreement in the committee that Bashar will have neither be in transitional phase nor in the future of Syria. The four political and military currents in the committee reject any presence of Assad except Yahya Qadamani the committee secretariat who resigned following criticism of his acceptance to sit with the delegation of the Moscow platform in a protocol session called by UN envoy Stephane de Mistura, and otherwise the body is the most influential political force in the question of rejecting Assad remain in power at any stage.
A: What is the truth about the Saudi stand from the Syrian crisis?
M: The truth is that Saudi Foreign Minister Adel Al-Jubeir told us at the last meeting that Saudi Arabia would remain with the opposition. He said in one word that the true position of Saudi Arabia is to reject any presence of Bashar al-Assad either in the transitional period or after. But al-Jubeir talked about the political reality that the west started talking about and about the international agendas in Syria. Al-Jubeir stressed that the international stand is not the Saudi stand, but he urged us to think carefully on all levels, including the idea of Riyadh 2.
A: If the platforms were originally represented in the Higher Committee for Negotiations, did the platforms overcome the committee and changed the scales?
M: There is no intention in the committee to accept Bashar al-Assad - so far - whether in the transitional period or other, and in the foreseeable future I do not think the situation will change.
A: But many positions in the committee have changed since Geneva 4?
M: There should be a distinction between the committee and the delegation. The main issue for the committee is the process of political transition. de Mistura surprised us in Geneva by saying about the four baskets. As usual, he did not give us a pre-negotiation program, hence the tension started on this subject, but in any case, the stand regarding Assad remain in power did not change despite the talk about baskets .. so the stand regarding Assad did not and will not change in the High Negotiations Committee.
A: What if states agreed to accept Bashar al-Assad in the transitional phase?
M: In fact, I cannot answer this question now, but in general it depends on the structure of the committee which is still - so far - strong in terms of refusing to accept any role Assad, but the problem is in the variables.
A: So these variables will be dependent on the positions of states?
M: Of course, it is no secret that the opposition in many respects are influenced by states which in the real sense does not carry an integrated national project. Thus there is no purely Syrian decision, we have become hostage.
A: Finally, the French stand regarding Assad was a shock when President Emmanuel Macron said that Assad is not the enemy of the French people. What is the reality of the French position?
M: It is true the French stand was a shock, but there was a special estimation for this stand. I do not think there is a change in the French stand. What happened is that Macron said publicly that we want to get out of the circle of political hypocrisy over the Syrian crisis. He said that the European positions show something and talk in the backstage something else. So Macron stand is more of a revealing position rather than a retreat, and I do not think the French position has changed. He (President Macron) told us that Bashar al-Assad is terrorist and he is a real enemy for the Syrian people, but he said that the one who is attacking us is ISIS not Assad.
