By Muaffaq Neirbiah
As the Syrian crisis deepens, the Stockholm Process has emerged as a unique initiative aimed at uniting the efforts made by democratic powers and figures in Syria. This process emerged spontaneously, getting its name from the Swedish capital where it took place. Four major consultative meetings were held in Stockholm, under the auspices of the Olof Palme International Center and the Swedish Social Democratic Party. The Stockholm Process is distinguished by its inclusive and dynamic nature, seeking to engage in a constructive dialogue that includes all Syrian spectrums.
The term ‘process’ implies a modest and active approach, neither monopolizing nor excluding any party of Syrian groups.
The aim was holding a conference that would constructively be inclusive and engaged in a Kurdish-Kurdish dialogue, Kurdish-Arabic dialogue, and intra-Syrian dialogue.
The declaration by the authorities in Damascus of democratic change Powers was one of the significant attempts to unite most of these powers. The national meeting of this power’s coalition had been prepared for nearly a year within the period of 2006 and 2007. It marked a turning point regarding its approach and efforts toward consensus, but its outcomes were insignificant. Subsequently, the authorities arrested key figures of that coalition.
The tensions among these powers exacerbated by the outbreak of popular protests during the Arab Spring. On the other hand, they had a significant impact on attempts to forge a unified front for the Syrian Opposition. The aim was to support the young revolutionaries regarding peaceful uprisings and facilitate the creation of an agreed-upon political leadership. These internal divisions also contributed to marginalize Kurdish powers, hindering their ability to effectively collaborate with other groups and factions. Thus, they delayed the formation of a unified front.
Also: Patriotism Shapes a New Vision for Syria’s Future
The negative impact of these divisions was evidently significant in the fall of 2011 during the formation of the Syrian National Council. A faction of the democratic powers within the Council sought to marginalize other groups and align with Islamist powers. That led to the dominance of Islamists supported by regional actors seeking to capitalize on the Syrian regime’s decline to gain influence in Syria.
Then, a new official opposition emerged, initially welcomed by the international community, but it soon changed into a front of rejection against all parties. It sought towards the support by external entities. The ‘coalition’ replaced the ‘Council’ under Western pressure and regional interventions which led to the undermining of resulting structures.
These circumstances marginalized the democratic powers, turning their role into a powerless one. Subsequent attempts to address that dire situation were thwarted by the same regional powers and the support of opportunistic parties and Islamist factions. The same situation happened regarding the coalition in the summer of 2013. Despite a positive agreement with the coalition to integrate a significant number of Kurdish powers, attempts by some Islamist and democratic powers to obstruct its path led to limited outcomes.
The weak representation of democratic and secular powers hindered their ability to play their crucial role in the Syrian political landscape. Due to pressure by the official opposition and political dominance, efforts have aimed to unify democratic powers and expand their influence. Most of these attempts have failed so far.
The Stockholm Process relied on the support of open-minded parties in Sweden, as well as encouragement by other powers.
Fundamentally, our primary approach was based on the conviction that any initiative would be a fruitless endeavor unless it was supported by practical actions. This approach aligned with the policies of the Syrian Democratic Council (SDC). The SDC’s goal is establishing a unified Syria through the collaboration of diverse Syrian powers. Also, the desired aim is to change the state of sustainable tyranny in Syria into a modern democratic one.
SDC’s efforts have been consistently obstructed by powers aligned with powerful regional actors, notably the Justice and Development Party in Turkey. These actors have exerted pressure on both Syrian and international powers to thwart the SDC’s progress.
However, the SDC has adopted a dialectical approach to address these challenges. Additionally, it proactively has sought to overcome them and minimize their negative impacts.
Also: Deir ez-Zor’s Inhabitants Strive to Build a Brighter Future for Syria
Therefore, we implemented a plan to overcome obstacles one by one. Moreover, we held four consultative meetings in Stockholm, including dozens of Syrians. We discussed many matters such as the Syrian identity, the Kurdish issue, the relationship between the state and religion, and the necessity of consensus on principles for the Syria’s future.
The crucial outcomes of these meetings were principles as follows:
– Adopting a shared Syrian identity that makes the ‘Syrian Republic’ a homeland for all Syrians.
– Eliminating the tyranny in all its forms.
– Providing guarantees requires that Syria should be decentralized, like many advanced countries.
– Considering principles of all religions in Syria is also a necessary condition for establishing an inclusive society.
– The prior agreement on constitutional principles is crucial to ensure the satisfaction of Syrians and the advancement of the country.
The Stockholm Process has sought to achieve its goals through practical endeavors. However, there were political tensions, both within Syria and internationally.
Syria was fragmented due to interventions of external powers, notably the Turkish military force. Iran, through its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and militias, has exacerbated conflicts in Syria. That was obvious in eastern Syria when Iran coordinated with the Syrian regime, aiming for a long-term presence and to secure a land corridor to Lebanon for it and Hezbollah.
Therefore, our focus has been on the political process, its progress, and how to implement UN Resolution 2254. We aim to ensure Syria’s unity. This is challenging but achievable. It is a primary goal within the objectives of the Process and those meetings.
The Stockholm Process seeks to establish a united and democratic Syria. We call on all Syrian parties to participate in achieving this goal. Also, we support every entity that contributes to Syria’s unity. Furthermore, we are committed to promoting inclusive dialogue, hoping to convene a national conference that will be a turning point regarding the Syrian issue. Additionally, we emphasize the importance of a Syrian-led political solution, and seek to enhance the role of Syrians in shaping a bright future for their country.