A Window Toward a Possible Solution, and “Habash’s” Invitation

By Dr. Zaher Baadarani
President of the Syrian Future Movement (SFM)

I’ve observed both negative and positive reactions to the invitation by our friend, Dr. “Mohammed Habash”, regarding his 1+4 equation, which he proposed a few days ago on Syria TV. It emphasizes the necessity of including the Assad regime at a dialogue table that encompasses the current de facto authorities on the ground (the Syrian regime has become one of them and a major reason for their existence). The reactions were as expected, filled with years of blood, oppression, and the sighs of the oppressed and bereaved who have suffered and are still enduring the harshness of the tyrannical Assad regime!

It is important to note that differing from others is both a treasure and a revolution, and in our method and vision at the Syrian Future Movement, it is desired and appreciated (as long as it does not involve violence or injustice). Regardless of our religious or political differences with Dr. “Habash”, he is credited for his withdrawal from the arenas of glorifying criminals in Damascus. He could have stayed with them and had a significant position! His history before the revolution of the free is known and notable, and since leaving Syria, he has seldom spoken about politics, making it beneficial to hear his voice and opinion clearly (especially since he represents a viewpoint close to him and his surrounding circles).

However, let us ask: Did the negative reaction to “Habash’s” invitation stem from our stance against the Syrian regime and its dark history, which has proven over the years that it will not accept anything but submission to its authority and marching in its ranks, and that betting on any solution involving it is a waste of time and a diversion from the cause?
Or is the attack on “Habash’s” proposal due to our way of thinking as Syrians, a reflex to reject any invitation carrying a type of solution devised by Syrians (individuals or groups) from deep suffering and stagnation?
Or is it attributed to the frustration among today’s leaders of the Syrian opposition, and yesterday’s figures of the Syrian regime, reaching a peak of treason among us Syrians?!
There is no doubt in my mind that many negative comments stem from the man’s controversial history, which he and others like him try to escape from, yet the issue of “Habash” remains complex due to his problematic propositions that never end within a minefield bordered by religion and creed (and it is unjust to link these issues together!).

Returning to the point, if these voices are solely against including the Syrian regime, then it is a logical and acceptable stance based on all past failed experiences! Here, we can understand the reactions in their natural context. If the whole world decided to open a new page with the Assad regime or to involve it in any possible solution (it would not be acceptable or welcome at all).
But if these negative voices and responses stem from what we pointed out about the danger that they have become a general way of thinking and style among us, then here lies the danger! That does not build a nation nor uplift a country nor lay the foundations for a solution!

To answer this question, we need a calm, realistic, practical reading, perhaps starting with the most important question: Are the Syrians against the Syrian regime because it is an oppressive, criminal regime, etc.?
To answer, we look at the reality:

• There is no dispute that the Syrian opposition today negotiates with the Syrian regime through the Negotiating Body and the Constitutional Committee – they are not a homogeneous group – despite acknowledging opposition voices against it, this stance now represents the Syrian opposition and revolutionary forces, whether we like it or not. This means that the opposing Syrians are not against dialogue with the Syrian regime as a principle! Otherwise, we would see demonstrations outright rejecting the Negotiation Body, and its proponents would have exited the Syrian political scene years ago after being branded as traitors, which has not happened!
• The reality outside the control of the Syrian regime is governed by three authorities: SDF, HTS, and the legitimate opposition, and there is no kind of normalization between these authorities, rather a history closer to enmity. We have not been able to find a way to breach this for the benefit of the citizens of the same country.

It can be said: We are facing a situation of zero-sum hostile thinking among some Syrians, especially content creators and actors on social media, representing our populist Syrian reality, while the Syrian regime and the opposition negotiate, even minimally, we find that the authorities outside the Syrian regime’s control have been for years, and which should have united – even minimally – are still suffering from conflict and disconnection without a minimum of normalization!

Therefore, is this description of today’s Syrian reality only against accepting the Syrian regime? Or are they against each other only?

As Syrians, we have the option to reject all de facto authorities, as our position in the Syrian Future Movement, and although they represent the reality that the Syrian conflict has led to, they

do not represent us nor carry our vision of a united, free Syria, and we fear that our voice, among the rejecting voices, does not represent a significant influential mass in reality, and it is like every country a case of expressing an opinion only!

Reading reality makes it necessary not to rely on social media to gauge the overall Syrian sentiment, as while comments and participations on “Habash’s” plan may not exceed one or two thousand, we see the division of millions of Syrians between accepting or rejecting dialogue with the Syrian regime, at a time when they coexist with the state of enmity between the authorities outside the regime’s control! And otherwise, those who rose against the security regime in 2011 would not be incapable of uprising and revolution against others (if they saw it in their interest), and those who tell you that Syrians are tired of rebelling against the current situation, tell them about the movements in Sweida and Idlib today!

Undoubtedly, we need love and coexistence as “Habash” mentioned, but: (First) we need to find a reasonable degree of balance in our positions, and (Second) stop any dialogue with the Syrian regime or temporarily freeze it as it has proven its failure, and that it is the cause of today’s distorted and disfiguring map of Syria, and (Third) find genuine settlement solutions and contractual agreements between the de facto authorities outside the Assad regime and system (i.e., between Syrians who are united by their hatred of Assad and rejection of his continued rule and regime).
With this, I conclude by saying let us work on the principle that united us from day one: one one one, the Syrian people are 1, and if we truly achieve this (not just as a chant), we will not hear any other equations, and this is sufficient.