‘International powers prolonged the crisis in Syria’

The proxy wars of the international powers have prolonged the crisis in Syria, said Hesen Mistefa, lawyer and the co-Chair of the Raqqa (Reqa) Civil Council, in an interview with Hawar News. A translated excerpt of the interview can be read below.

After 10 years of war, peace in Syria still seems out of reach. After all those meetings in Geneva, Astana and Sochi, why has no progress been made towards a solution?

Today is the 10th anniversary of the protests, which were first launched peacefully for democracy and freedom in Syria. However, some parties tried to manipulate those protests by weaponising them for their own benefit. The war in Syria has been longer than the total duration of the both world wars. The people of Syria have paid a great price. Meetings in Astana, Riyadh, Qahire, Sochi and Geneva, which were planned for a so-called solution, remained inconclusive. International powers held those meetings for their own benefit. Sochi was designed for the benefit of Russia whilst Riyadh was held for the benefit of Gulf countries. The Turkish state also wanted to prolong the crisis. The states, which held those meetings for the so-called solution, are responsible for the emergence of problems.

Who benefited from the prolonging of the crisis in Syria? How do you evaluate the intervention of Russia and Turkey in Syria?

Turkey wanted the crisis in Syria to continue without any doubt, and Turkey has been the country which benefited from the crisis the most. The Turkish state has broken the Syrian territory into pieces. Millions of people were displaced. Many businesses were transferred from Syria over to Turkey. The Turkish state conducted trade over the blood of Syrians and sent the Syrian people into camps, for which Turkey later on accepted funds from the international powers. Russia, too, entered the Syrian territories for its own benefit. The main motive of Russia, which has been supporting Damascus, was the oil and gas reserves in the region.

Why can’t the international society offer a solution for Syria? Is it because they don’t want a solution or they are not able to find a solution?

Each party has approached the crisis in Syria with their own advantage in mind. The states with conflicting interests have been in proxy wars over Syria. The proxy wars waged by the international powers prolonged the crisis in Syria.

The international society does not want to solve the crisis. We remember the international approach towards Bosnia Herzegovina and Iraq as well. The international society wages its own war over Syria. The UN would have solved the problem if they intended to do so, but they do not.

The people of North and East Syria have built a system of self-defence and self-governance. Why is this project not adopted throughout Syria?

Very significant values have emerged in North and East Syria, but nobody expected the positive outcomes that we now see there.

The Autonomous Administration [of North and East Syria – AANES] has overcome the crisis in a considerably short amount of time and applied institutionalisation within the frame of democracy and freedom. The AANES offered a new model for the people of the region without discrimination. However, some parties could not tolerate the AANES. The Turkish state launched an occupation campaign in North and East Syria in 2019.

Many parties gambled over the destruction of the new system, but they all lost. People have defended their political achievements in North and East Syria, which so far has not been taken as an example for the rest of Syria. It is clear that the solution of the Syrian crisis lies in this project.

The Syrian population accepts the No.2254 decision of the UN and sees this as the solution. Since this decision conflicts with the benefits of some parties, it cannot be applied, but there are many states pushing for this decision.