This meeting came following Syrian President Bashar al-Assad issued a decree pardoning those involved in cases related to “terrorism”, with the exception of those who caused the death of a person, which provided a positive impetus for the committee’s work. The sessions discussed the four axes that the UN envoy to Syria, Geir Pedersen, agreed upon with the delegations before the tour was held, which are: “preserving and strengthening state institutions” presented by the government delegation, and “unilateral coercive measures from a constitutional standpoint” presented by eight members. From the civil society delegation, and the “highness of the constitution and the hierarchy of international agreements” proposed by the opposition delegation, in addition to the principle of “transitional justice” proposed by seven members of the civil society delegation. During the meetings, each delegation was given the opportunity to present and discuss its paper, and some papers were leaked to the media, which turned the sessions into platforms for presenting ideas, without laying any consensual basis or ground on which to build, especially since the proposals were presented as broad lines, and on topics spaced unconnected. However, the atmosphere that prevailed in the eighth round can be considered a continuation of the calm witnessed by its predecessor last March, which discussed four axes: the basics of governance, the identity of the state, symbols of the state, and the organization and tasks of public authorities.
What is noticeable in this tour is the clear American interest in its course
It is noticeable in this tour the clear American interest in its course, in continuation of the interest previously paid by Washington to the work of “constitutionality”, as the US Assistant Secretary of State, Ethan Goldrich, conducted a series of meetings on the sidelines of the meetings, with Pedersen, the Italian special envoy to Syria, in addition to the head of the opposition delegation Anas Alabdah. The American activity on this track coincides with Washington’s efforts to extend the decision to introduce humanitarian aid across borders and lines of contact, whose effects will end next July, amid Russia’s refusal to extend it, due to its fears that this aid will be used to provide support to “terrorist” factions, in addition to the impact The divisive politics perpetuated by this mechanism, according to statements by Russian officials.
Also, the eighth round’s meetings coincided with a Turkish political and field escalation in Syria, in light of Ankara’s desire to exploit the prevailing international tension once morest the backdrop of the Russian war on Ukraine, to nibble more Syrian lands near its border strip, within areas controlled by the “Syrian Democratic Forces” (SDF). ) backed by the US, and excluded from the “constitutional” meetings. Also, this tour comes following Ankara made changes to the structure of the opposition “Syrian Coalition,” whereby a number of figures affiliated with certain international powers were excluded, and the Muslim Brotherhood’s representation was reduced, in addition to its formation according to a mechanism that facilitates Ankara’s control. Perhaps all of the above can explain an aspect of the calm that appears during the meetings, the intensification of activity on the “constitutionality” line, and giving more time to present the axes that are being discussed, which led to an increase in the number of days for each round to regarding a week instead of four or five days , in addition to rounding the intervals between them.
In any case, the Al-Dustouria meetings, which have reached their eighth round so far, have not succeeded in laying down a real ground on which to build a political solution to the Syrian crisis, something that seems to be still far from being achieved in light of the continuous heating up of the conflict fields in Syria, as part of attempts to invest The Syrian war has many sides, most notably Washington, which wants to consolidate the existing state of division, and Ankara, which seeks to legitimize the occupation of border areas, and the exploitation of this occupation in presidential election propaganda, in addition to the Syrian war’s link to international tension and division once morest the backdrop of the Ukrainian war.
