Syria peace conference: Don't hold your breath

How deep is the divideseparating Russia and the United States on Syria? A photo fromthe recent G8 summit in Northern Ireland says it all - twogrim-faced leaders slouched in their chairs, Barack Obama bitinghis lip and Vladimir Putin staring at the floor.

The awkward photo opportunity, which went viral on theInternet, highlights the increasingly tense relationship betweenthe former Cold War foes who find it difficult to agree on aseries of high-profile issues, including Syria and a fugitiveU.S. intelligence contractor whom Putin refuses to extradite.

Washington and Moscow have been trying since May to organizean international peace conference to bring an end to theviolence. But hopes that such a conference will take placeanytime soon - if at all - are fading quickly.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian ForeignMinister Sergei Lavrov originally announced that they would tryto hold the conference, which is intended to bring rebels andrepresentatives of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's governmentto the negotiating table, by the end of May.

But the date keeps slipping. First it was bumped to June,then July. Earlier this week U.N.-Arab League peace mediatorLakhdar Brahimi, who held talks with senior U.S. and Russianofficials in Geneva, ruled out a peace conference before August.

Diplomats at the United Nations in New York say it isunclear whether the peace conference will take place at all.

"It's not looking too good," a senior Western diplomat said.

The point of the conference was to revive a plan adoptedlast year in Geneva. At that time, Washington and Moscow agreedon the need for a transitional Syrian government, but left openthe question of whether Assad could participate in the process.

The United States, like the Syrian rebels, says Assad andhis family should play no role in a transitional government,though Russia says there should be no conditions on the talks.

Kerry and Lavrov will discuss Syria again next week on thesidelines of an Association of Southeast Asian Nations conference in Brunei, the United Nations said on Tuesday.

ASSAD WON'T HAND OVER POWER

There are other sticking points in discussions on how tomake what U.N. diplomats have been calling "Geneva 2" take placeat all - who will represent Assad's government and the Syrianopposition at the negotiating table. There is still no agreementon the lineup of potential negotiators. Then there is the issueof whether Assad's other key ally Iran should participate, asRussia wants but Western governments dislike.

Recently, Assad's forces have enjoyed some militarysuccesses. They recaptured two towns near the Lebanese border,while rebels complain about insufficient arms and ammunition.

This, diplomats say, makes both Assad's government and theopposition more reluctant to seek a compromise and diplomacy inGeneva - Assad because he thinks he can win the war militarily,and the opposition because it does not want to negotiate from aposition of weakness and is holding out for more weapons.

Assad's foreign minister, Walid al-Moualem, told a newsconference earlier this week that authorities were ready to forma broad-based government of national unity. But he made clearthat they were not planning to give up control of Syria.

"We head to Geneva not to hand over power to another side,"he said. "Whoever on the other side imagines this, I advise themnot to go to Geneva."

Some diplomats say the ebbing hopes for a serious peaceconference highlights the impotence of the United Nations andBrahimi, who for months has threatened to quit the post like hispredecessor, former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan.

Annan quit the job last year out of frustration at the waythe dispute between Russia, Assad's main arms supplier, and theUnited States, which supports the rebels and recently announcedit would begin providing them with arms, has left the SecurityCouncil in a state of paralysis on the Syrian issue.

Russia and China long ago ruled out sanctioning Syria andhave vetoed three Western and Gulf Arab-backed resolutionscondemning Assad's government for an increasingly sectarian warthat the United Nations says has killed more than 90,000.

GRIM PROSPECTS FOR DIPLOMACY

Richard Gowan of New York University predicted that acollapse of Kerry's peace conference plan will increase pressureon Obama to send more and heavier weapons to the Syrian rebels.

"If the Geneva proposal fails, there will be pressure on theU.S. to move beyond its current offer of light weapons to therebels, especially if Assad's forces score more victories,"Gowan said.

"Kerry's bet on Geneva may backfire by demonstrating thatdiplomacy is really a lost cause, but perhaps Kerry, who hasreportedly argued for air strikes, is fine with that," he said.

Washington's cautious move to begin arming moderate Syrianrebels - not Islamist militants who are increasingly present inthe conflict - came after it said Assad's forces had crossed a"red line" by using chemical weapons.

The Syrian government denies the charge and says the rebelshave used chemical arms. It also accuses Western and Gulf Arabgovernments of arming the opposition.

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, now in his second andfinal term, is increasingly worried that he may be remembered asthe man who failed in Syria, U.N. diplomats told Reuters. He haseven considered stepping in himself to try to broker a peacedeal if Brahimi throws in the towel, the envoys added.

Outgoing U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice, who will soon take upthe post of Obama's national security adviser, said earlier thisweek that the council's failure to take decisive action on Syriawas a "moral and strategic disgrace."

"The repeated failure of the Security Council to unify onthe crucial issue of Syria I think is a stain on this body andsomething that I will forever regret - even though I don'tbelieve that outcome is the product of the action of the UnitedStates," Rice said.

British Ambassador Mark Lyall Grant echoed Rice's unusuallystrong words, which were clearly aimed at Russia and China. Healso defended the United Nations against suggestions that theorganization itself was somehow responsible for the SecurityCouncil's failure to act on Syria.

"People talk about it being a stain on the United Nationsbut you can't blame the United Nations," he said, adding thatthe responsibility lies with its member states.

"We have tried very hard over the last two years to securesome leverage for the Security Council in this crisis as it'sunfolded," he said. "Unfortunately we've had three resolutionsvetoed by Russia and China ... Events on the ground might haveunfolded very differently had those resolutions been adopted."

A March 2011 council resolution authorized militaryintervention in Libya and gave a green light for NATO to mountan operation to protect civilians that led to Libyan leaderMuammar Gaddafi's ouster and death at the hands of rebel forces.

No Western nations have called for something similar inSyria, and Russia has vowed to prevent a similar move in Syria.

There may be no swift end to the war. And even if theopposition were to prevail, it is unlikely to bring stability.

"The Syrian civil war is likely to go on for years," saidRichard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations.

"It is not just that it is proving harder and taking longerto oust the Assad regime than many expected," he told Reuters."It is also that even if the regime were to be removed, whatwould follow would be a prolonged round of fighting amongopposition forces who disagree on just about everything excepttheir opposition to the current regime." 

Follow Emirates 24|7 on Google News.