The much hyped ‘Friends of Syria’ Conference taking place today in Tunisia is nothing but an embarrassment that US, EU and Arab League would remember.
More than 80 countries are participating in this international conference. Its only Lebanon, China and Russia who chose to ‘disassociate’ themselves from the event. Interestingly, the event is being funded by Qatar (hotel arrangements, travel tickets, bookings) while Tunisia maintains the administrative formality of executing it.
Moncef Marzouki, the President of Tunisia stated in an interview with Al Jazeera that he does not want military intervention in Syria. Syria would not be another Libya because events in this country have gone far more complex and intertwined. He once again urged the need to convince Russia to be supportive.
‘Too many cooks spoil the broth’
FOS itself is divided. Though the draft declaration is still being circulated, the communique states that they would not be supplying arms to Free Syrian Army and Syrian National Council.
While, members of the SNC who are currently in Tunisia have stated that it does not matter what is officially stated, they would eventually be armed.
This is one of the first and very apparent rift that exists in FOS. Well, its obvious to happen this way because such a high number of diplomatic representation at an international issue would have their own polemics, agendas and black propagandas.
‘Just to Impress Russia’
Few countries like Tunisia want to lower down the tone of the communique so that Russia can also be involved in their process, at a later stage. This idea, seems ‘Utopian’ and boorish enough for other Arabian countries who demand a military intervention at any cost (like Qatar).
So one can ponder the impact any declaration that FOS would eventually have if everything done is being customised for Russia or China? Just like the Thursday conference on Somalia in London, this entire FOS facade would be nothing but a posh and unnecessary expenditure for the diplomats, serving no purpose, what so ever.
‘Do not lecture Syria’
Ammar Waqqaf of the Syrian Social Club has stated that ‘If FOS wants humanitarian aid, one must talk directly to the Syrian government rather than lecturing it. Syria is self sufficient in terms of food and medical supply. It can take care of itself.’
He also states that it is assumed that the rebellions are concerned with the lives of the normal civilians, but in reality, they are not. In fact, the rebellions try to show that they have a control over the situation in respective district, but in reality, they are not even musketeers.
‘Differences with SNC’
As if the rifts in FOS were not enough, SNC too is facing opposition from the opposition. The National Coordination for Committee for Democratic Change (NCCDC) boycotted its presence in the FOS. They believe that FOS would be biased in praising SNC and there is not point in having any other Syrian Opposition group in the conference if such partiality continues.
NCCDC believes that it has more contacts in Syria and capability to use its soft power than SNC. In fact, it is based in Damascus itself. Also, NCCDC, chaired by Hassen Abdel Azim, is largely based inside Syria unlike SNC that is based in Istanbul.
Conclusion
If Karl Marx, Engels, Lenin and Guevera were still alive, they would have found nothing abysmal with the Syrian uprising. In fact, it includes every normative demand for being called a ‘revolution’ that has crossed the discursive, generative and paradigmatic process to eventuate into one.
Also, everything from international support, foreign intervention, ambitious yet abstract demands are present. Thomas Paine, perhaps would have credited American revolution of 1763 to be their godfather while Edmund Burke would have written another ‘Reflections’ to rebuke it.
But there’s one subtle point which they all thought but never wrote about. The point is, ‘Sometimes, revolutionaries themselves become part of international conspiracies.’