True Motives Behind Kerry’s "Willingness" to Negotiate with Assad

• 03.17.2015, 17:13
•  America,  Near East,  World

Photo from www.wsj.com

Recent remarks made by the US State Secretary John Kerry on his intention in the end to negotiate with current president of Syria Bashar Assad created worldwide panic among the opponents of the present regime in Syria. This opposition was vividly expressed in the statement made by the Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu , in which he particularly noted:  "What is there to negotiate? How will you negotiate with a regime that has killed more than 200,000 people and used chemical weapons?" - Hurriyet reports. 

This article presents a brief analysis that aims to explain the announcement made by the US Secretary to find out whether the fears of Turkey and other opponents of Assad  have any ground.

To answer the question one needs to once more clarify the essence of the US official doctrine in Syria.  President Obama constantly noticed in his official statements that the US main goal in Syria is to avoid the so-called "power vacuum" that would prevent the rise of al-Qaeda-allied rebels in the country.  The objective in case of which military solution will not work and only political solutions will be possible.  To put it simpler the actions so far undertaken by the US, such as arming opposition forces, aimed at putting pressure on Assad to negotiate and making him  leave power himself, which does not necessary mean the regime change in the country.  

Now if we come back to the announcement made by Kerry and restate it literally it will read as follows:  "We have to negotiate in the end. What we're pushing for is to get him (Assad) to come and do that, and it may require that there be increased pressure on him of various kinds in order to do that." Are there any contradictions between US official doctrine in Syria explained above and the Kerry’s words? It seems there is no.

In this sense as Foreign Policy Middle East editor David Kenner rightly notes Kerry's words are to be interpreted not as a substantial change in the US policy towards Syria but "a change in emphasis."  The US strategy in Syria although has always focused on pressure it never excluded possible options of negotiations. The recent announcement made by Kerry indicated that the US policy has more shifted towards negotiations rather than towards pressure. Can the shift be considered a credence to Assad and make the fears of his opponents grounded?

The answer to this question depends on the further progress of possible negotiations: whether the US will finally manage to fulfill its goal of making Assad leave himself by continuing putting pressure on him.