Working or not?

While Andrew Tabler, surely one of the best Syria analysts in DC, already denounced the ceasefire as a failure yesterday, the Washington Post this morning suggests it is holding.

The truth is we really don’t know yet just what is going on.  Ceasefires often need a few days to take hold, and they just as often fall apart quickly.  Tabler is correct to point out that the Syrian military did not fulfill the requirement that it withdraw from population centers, and that Bashar al Assad is clearly intending to keep his police and paramilitaries active.  But his army may well need a respite.  The elite units comprised of unquestionably loyal soldiers have been hyperactive for more than a year.  The opposition could definitely use a few days to refresh itself.

If the ceasefire is even partly effective, it will provide an opportunity to chart a more productive course than the chaotic war that the Syrian government is conducting against its own citizens.  The resistance is gradually weakening.  We should not delude ourselves:  Bashar al Assad may not be any more able to beat the armed insurgency his forces face than the Americans in Afghanistan can defeat the Taliban, but he may well be able to hold on to his seat in Damascus.  In the meanwhile, even an insurgency doomed to failure may roil security and politics in the Middle East in ways that are unpredictable but unlikely to be salubrious.

The best way forward is to use whatever respite the ceasefire provides to strengthen the Syrian revolution’s commitment to nonviolence and enable it to speak with one voice.  Tomorrow, Friday, will be an important day.  If the opposition can convince large numbers of Syrians to demonstrate one way or another that they want Bashar to go, his generals will be thinking about escape routes.  But if the cease fire collapses in chaos, with the blame shared, we are headed back into a war Bashar cannot win but won’t lose.

If the ceasefire by some miracle does hold, the question of negotiations will quickly arise.  The opposition has said it will only discuss Bashar al Assad’s departure and the subsequent transition.  This is Bashar’s “red line”:  he seems to believe he is winning and will insist on staying in power.  The only thing I can think of that will change that is a Russian or Iranian diktat.  The Iranians will hold on tight–they haven’t got a chance of maintaining their strong position in Syria, and its role as transit agent to Hizbollah, once a Sunni-majority transition regime comes to power.  The Russians likely have a price–at the least, continuation of their port access and arms sales.

If there are going to be negotiations, the opposition will have a hard time getting organized to engage in them.  Their many factions are still jockeying for power.  A leaderless revolution has many advantages during the repression–it can’t be decapitated or readily coopted–but once negotiations start structure and discipline become vital ingredients for success.  Let’s hope the Syrian opposition is not quite as disorganized and fractious as it has appeared in recent months.

PS:  Tonight in Aleppo: