The Alawite location has always taken precedent with Assad. The Alawites is why Hezbollah is in Lebanon and explains much of the Shia Crescent. When talking about any peace process Assad is equated to Iran simply because he is Shia. Russia will back Iran and Iran will back Assad. To the Shia there are no country borders, there are nations of people.
The United Nations can remove weapons of mass destruction from Syria, but, that doesn't mean there will be peace. The conflict in Syria is not about peace, it is about the preservation of ethnic security. The extremist groups have no allegiance to any leader, but, only themselves.
Why is there a civil war in Syria? Is it over Assad? Or is the fact Assad represents a threat to Sunni Arabs more the reason Syria experiences instability. Assad cannot go back to his old ways. There has to be stability for all the nations of people within Syria. Security can be peaceful, but, the real question is, can Syria achieve peace without specific recognition of ethnic security? I think not. There needs to be a recognition of the Shia Crescent in the peace talks and recognition of 'nations of people' security. Perhaps the real peace talks is not about unifying Syria so much as setting up borders within Syria that indicate NATION-STATES.
There needs to be a legal dictate recognizing the traditional lands where Shia and Sunni have lived within Syria. These traditional lands go back hundreds and thousands of years. The borders in Syria indicating ethnic lands should be a natural resolve, not one carved out of anyone's imagination. The UN Treaty for movement toward peace within Syria seems somewhat obvious to me. Assad should not have to push his authority into Lebanon with Hezbollah securing the Alawite territory. There needs to be an understanding the 'Nation of Alawite' is secure through a UN Security Council agreement, PLACING them on their traditional lands within Syria. That is the only way any authority will have respect by the entire of Syria.
The peaceful movement for Syria lies in recognizing ethnics and their land enforceable by international agreements. Syria is still a country with COMMON needs for people such as housing, water, food and national security, but, where ethnics are gathered there are special identity permitted. This is not the first time ethnic tensions are the focus of war. Perhaps the best way to define Syria's war is ethnic cleansing and not a civil war at all.
March 14, 2016
By Jamey Keaten
“The real peace-makers here are the peace-making powers who wanted these talks — the ISSG and the Security Council members — and hopefully the Syrian sides,” de Mistura said. “If during these talks, and in the next rounds, we will see no notice of any willingness to negotiate, which we hope will not be the case, obviously we will do what we want to do, and what we have done: We will bring the issue back to those who have influence.”...
Daesh originally called itself "Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. The reference to the Levant is a direct threat of the Alawites. Some of what exists in the political vapors within Syria is a much larger threat within the Shia Crescent.
Kindly recall before the Iranian Revolution the Shia were being marginalized in the region. They were becoming so marginalized the 'nation of Shia' took the land called Iran to protect their own existence. That same fear exists today and manifests in conflict where Shia exist. Saudi Arabia cut ties to Iran because of the conflicts that manifest because of that insecurity by the Shia. The loss of Shi'ites over the past two to three decades has been considerable when the Crescent is recognized as an ethnic state.
The greatest threat, real threat, to the disruption of any peace in Syria is continued fears of the Shia. That fear has existed a long time and is not easily resolved. The reasons extremists exist is because of the ethnic threat. The ethnic threat is the real destabilizing impetus in the entire region. Syria needs to be STRUCTURED to provide states/provinces where ethnic security is a reality.
Anthropologists have to be at the peace table to structure the agreement regarding ethnic security.
The United Nations can remove weapons of mass destruction from Syria, but, that doesn't mean there will be peace. The conflict in Syria is not about peace, it is about the preservation of ethnic security. The extremist groups have no allegiance to any leader, but, only themselves.
Why is there a civil war in Syria? Is it over Assad? Or is the fact Assad represents a threat to Sunni Arabs more the reason Syria experiences instability. Assad cannot go back to his old ways. There has to be stability for all the nations of people within Syria. Security can be peaceful, but, the real question is, can Syria achieve peace without specific recognition of ethnic security? I think not. There needs to be a recognition of the Shia Crescent in the peace talks and recognition of 'nations of people' security. Perhaps the real peace talks is not about unifying Syria so much as setting up borders within Syria that indicate NATION-STATES.
There needs to be a legal dictate recognizing the traditional lands where Shia and Sunni have lived within Syria. These traditional lands go back hundreds and thousands of years. The borders in Syria indicating ethnic lands should be a natural resolve, not one carved out of anyone's imagination. The UN Treaty for movement toward peace within Syria seems somewhat obvious to me. Assad should not have to push his authority into Lebanon with Hezbollah securing the Alawite territory. There needs to be an understanding the 'Nation of Alawite' is secure through a UN Security Council agreement, PLACING them on their traditional lands within Syria. That is the only way any authority will have respect by the entire of Syria.
The peaceful movement for Syria lies in recognizing ethnics and their land enforceable by international agreements. Syria is still a country with COMMON needs for people such as housing, water, food and national security, but, where ethnics are gathered there are special identity permitted. This is not the first time ethnic tensions are the focus of war. Perhaps the best way to define Syria's war is ethnic cleansing and not a civil war at all.
March 14, 2016By Jamey Keaten
...The two sides deeply split (click here) on the future of President Bashar Assad. His foreign minister, Walid al-Moallem, said Saturday that any talk of removing Assad during a transitional period sought by the U.N. was “a red line,” and rejected an international call for presidential elections to be held within 18 months — a key demand of the opposition.
“Spoilers will try to upset the talks ... public rhetoric will try to cast iron preconditions, but this is a moment of truth — and hopefully, proactive chance,” de Mistura said.
De Mistura also said the onus for achieving successful talks rests with the U.N. Security Council, the International Syria Support Group of 18 regional nations and world powers — and especially the United States and Russia. Those two countries that have spearheaded the process and struck a deal that paved the way for the cessation of hostilities two weeks ago.
Daesh originally called itself "Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. The reference to the Levant is a direct threat of the Alawites. Some of what exists in the political vapors within Syria is a much larger threat within the Shia Crescent.
Kindly recall before the Iranian Revolution the Shia were being marginalized in the region. They were becoming so marginalized the 'nation of Shia' took the land called Iran to protect their own existence. That same fear exists today and manifests in conflict where Shia exist. Saudi Arabia cut ties to Iran because of the conflicts that manifest because of that insecurity by the Shia. The loss of Shi'ites over the past two to three decades has been considerable when the Crescent is recognized as an ethnic state.The greatest threat, real threat, to the disruption of any peace in Syria is continued fears of the Shia. That fear has existed a long time and is not easily resolved. The reasons extremists exist is because of the ethnic threat. The ethnic threat is the real destabilizing impetus in the entire region. Syria needs to be STRUCTURED to provide states/provinces where ethnic security is a reality.
Anthropologists have to be at the peace table to structure the agreement regarding ethnic security.
