Assad is still needed at the negotiating table

Since the outbreak of the Arab Spring, Syria has been in the proverbial crosshairs, with the epicenter squarely focused on Damascus. Given the Assad regime’s history of brutal behavior and unchecked political power, Syria was a powder keg waiting for the fuse to be lit. The record of not only Bashar al-Assad, but also his father Hefez al-Assad, set the precedent of autocratic rule that has made Syria an ideal bastion for revolution and a haven for foreign fighters eager to seize territory and establish Islamic rule–the Islamic State Caliphate.  

The subsequent fall out in Syria has left diplomats scrambling for answers on how to end the bloodshed, as regional powers continue to plunge the nation into utter chaos. Clashes between embattled Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and the IS forces (now referred to as Daesh) have displaced Syrians by the millions, and the international community appears no closer to an agreement on how to end the fighting. As the world watches the carnage unfold, one question remains at the forefront; how to can we leverage Bashar al-Assad?

{mosads}Assad has to be the crux of any agreement in Syria, and it must contain a deliberate phase out of power away from an unchecked centralized power structure to a government more inclusive of the myriad of interested parties. This means a political solution in Syria, not a military one. A political solution is only possible by including Assad in the talks. United Nations special envoy for Syria Staffan de Mistura recognizes this and has stated that the Assad regime is instrumental in any deal to end the fighting and bring about stability in Syria.

Apart from the impracticality of structuring a plausible transition without Assad, the lessons of Iraq still loom large with regard to the power struggle within Syria. In the wake of the US invasion of Iraq, the Iraqi military and law enforcement disbanded and fled, leaving many of the provinces susceptible to militants and foreign fighters. The same vacuum was created in much of Syria at the outbreak of the Arab Spring allowing a foothold for foreign fighters to take over large swaths of territory. Syria is more susceptible to a dramatic power vacuum given the loyalty of the Syrian military to Assad, and the much more organized opposition militancy of Daesh.  

The current predicament of Syria means that many world leaders will have to face an inconvenient truth, a deal is going to have to be made directly with Assad. The power of Assad to stop the shelling being performed by the military is essential in bringing about a political solution. Many of the formal governmental institutions still remain loyal to the Assad regime, and are instrumental in establishing stability.

In terms of current efforts to destroy Daesh, the forces of Assad and the US led coalition have gained little in terms of synchronization with little progress to show. Militarily and politically, these efforts have been a non-starter towards achieving substantive gains. Assad has come forth and said he is open to talks with the United States; the only way to legitimize any progress in Syria is to have Assad at the table. This marks a drastic turn around for the Assad regime, and a sure marker that the embattled president is looking to make a deal with Western powers.

Politically, there is much work to be done in Syria and the road is paved with many complex issues that can be overcome through measured diplomacy. Any attempt to bring about a transition of power has to be strong enough to withstand the pressures exerted by Daesh and state-actors that are financing the Syrian resistance. None of this is possible without bringing Assad to the table and working through the difficult task of phasing out Assad’s autocratic rule in a manner more reminiscent of the Tunisian model than the Iraqi. 

Waters is a former U.S. Marine who hold a master’s degree in government with emphasis in Middle East politics from Regent University.