Consequences and results of Astana talks
TEHRAN(basirat): If we summarize the results of lasting months such as Aleppo freedom to ceasefire and then the Astana talks, we must admit that Syria and the axis of resistance, have been registered a strategic victory in their records.
Syrian peace talks in Astana at 23, 24 January 2017 while ended, that there are different views about the results and their consequences.
Astana talks was held indirectly with the attendance of 14 leaders of armed groups and Representatives of the Syria government that signed ceasefire contract, This means that representatives of the government and the opposition separately discussed with Russia and Turkey, and the United Nations , then represented discussions of both sides, was transmitted to the opposite side in another meeting.
Naturally, the parties fought with each other for about six years, sitting round a table and facing each other, it was not easy. Some political analysts believe that the talks under one roof is a great achievement and the hopes have been strengthen to gain subsequent agreements.
Positive and negative signs
The main topic of the meeting was to discuss a cease-fire and ways of stabilizing it. According to the mechanisms that was approved for this matter, Astana meeting can be assessed successfully in its own, but if we consider the differences between the both sides in the political dimension, it becomes clear that the Syria government and the opposition have a long way to achieve a reconciliation. Differences between armed groups are factors that may undermine cease-fire. In cases such differences have been led to conflicts between these groups in the town of Idlib.
Syria's permanent representative to the UN, Bashar Jaafari who headed the Syrian delegation at peace talks in Kazakhstan have Positive view at the Astana meeting, He assessed the talks positively, but stressed that the statement by the representative of opposition groups were outside the diplomatic framework and it is provocative and has no relation with the meeting.
He added:” Astana talks is important event in the political settlement of the Syrian crisis” He noted, for example, that Syrian oppositions that were at the meeting, have supported a range of al-Nusra Front actions in Wadi Barada.
Jaafari said this remarks in response to remarks by Mohammad Alloush, Chairman of the Syrian armed opposition on Astana talks. Mohammad Alloush, head of the political committee of Jaish al-Islam in the first session of the talks accused Syrian military, Iranian forces and affiliated groups of violating the cease-fire.
Stances of the Islamic Republic at the meeting was based on principles which has stressed a long time ago in case of Syria. Arabic African deputy foreign minister and head of the Iranian delegation at the Astana talks, Hussain Jabir Ansari again stressed that there is necessity to maintain the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Syria and asked the international community to prevent the transfer of weapons to terrorists in Syria. In the meantime Bashar Jaafari have also demanded to close borders of Turkey. Despite opposition of the Islamic Republic of Iran with the attendance George Carroll, America's ambassador in Kazakhstan that had participated as an observer in the Astana talks, he said that: Washington believes in achieving a political solution to resolve the crisis in Syria and include more committed oppositions group in this process.
Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov also stressed that Astana talks recognize participation of armed groups in the Syria peace process.
The contents of final statement
Relevant countries have stated in final statement that they have common views to monitor the ceasefire process, prepare for the start of talks in Geneva and the importance of separating opposing groups from terrorist groups. The countries which have signed the final Astana statement, have emphasized on trilateral mechanism to monitor the ceasefire in Syria and assist to all Syria civilians and corporate all engaged parties to access war-torn areas. The territorial integrity of Syria have emphasized on this statement basis on UN resolutions and continues of talks based on 2336 Resolution of the Security Council and was declared any military solutions to solve Syria crisis have been abolished. Also the parties stressed to have a common fight against ISIL and Al-Nusrah Front and separation of opposition groups.
This statement also demanded an end to terrorist acts and create a trilateral mechanism to monitor and ensure complete implementation of the cease-fire. Also the opposition armed group invited to participate in the next talks in Geneva based on Security Council Resolution 2254.
To recognize terrorists!?
Recognition of armed groups that challenged between Russia and Iran’s viewpoints. Iran refers to these groups as terrorist while as the west refers to these groups as moderate. In this subject Russia actually accept west viewpoint. Apparently, Russia has accepted this subject and plans to expand the circle of opponents who participate in political negotiations.
In viewpoints of the Islamic Republic that initially have paid special attention to battle on the ground, have no disagreement with this approach in its totality. If terrorist groups (except Fath alsham and ISIL which are excluded from the ceasefire agreement) show their commitment to the ceasefire and enter in the reconciliation process at the next steps, recognition of them has no objection.
However, the ceasefire violation by these groups is like military option and the abolition of political agreements. The Syrian regime and its allies have power to fight against them.
Conclusion
In the end, the Astana talks have been evaluated as an unprecedented meeting of authorities and participants that opened a new way to solve Syria crisis politically. If the ceasefire will not violated, Syria will experience a time of peace and stability. This is an opportunity to strengthen the legitimacy of the Syria government and prepare conditions to participate new parties in a political process. But the experience of the political dialogues between the Syria government and the oppositions usually has failed, because the differences between the two sides is very deep and complex. Therefore, it can be predicted that significant results have been gained in the next meeting at Geneva. If we summarize the results of lasting months such as Aleppo freedom to ceasefire and then the Astana talks, we must admit that Syria and the axis of resistance, have been registered a strategic victory in their records.
