Everyone in Syria, including pro-government and opposition sides, realizes the nature of the present crisis. And each side is ignoring this nature in the quest for the solution that pleases it. This explains the suggestions that emerge from every direction and that are focused on technical aspects related to the constitutional clauses or the laws that regulate political and economic life. And this also explains the ongoing impasse and the ineffectiveness of the governmental steps being carried out by the Authority in the framework of reform, namely the cancelation of the emergency status and the formation of dialogue committees and the parties' law. The protest movement is proceeding and expanding. This implies that people are not convinced with the usefulness and credibility of these measures. The oppression operations are proceeding and becoming increasingly violent. This implies that these measures are not linked to the authorities' field actions. There are two parallel worlds and two non-meeting paths as long as both the Authority and the opposition believe that the confrontation must end by exterminating the other. Everyone knows that the issue of the present Authority in Syria is much more complicated than some constitutional or legal clauses, even if these are not implemented, and more dangerous than a cabinet change. The Authority in Syria, especially since the correctional movement, has been mixed with and stuck to a social, sectarian and familial structure. The threat against the Authority – no matter how zealous the defenders of the idea of nationalism and tolerance are – is threatening a part of the populace that has a specific belonging. Thus, the current confrontation is taking a defensive aspect of the existence of this side, and a desire to get rid of the authority monopolization by the other side. This indicates, in depth, a tragic historic inheritance and a certain excision that is political for one side and social for the other. The current events of the Syrian crisis represent the essence of the current impasse. The political justifications are merely justifying this essence and its continuation rather than building on it in order to head down the road of the solution. In this framework, the draft of the parties' law is casting a light on this issue since everything that has been announced serves the consolidation of the authority rather than partisan pluralism as stated by some officials. The essence of pluralism consists of the free competition through a direct popular voting for the parties' candidates in order to transfer power. In addition, the draft law forces the parties to abide to some principles, the majority of which contradict with the principles of the ruling party. Unless the Baath party in Syria submits to these principles and their constitutional translation through the constitution and the laws, this measure will become a power in the hand of the Authority against its opponents rather than a reform that leads to a solution. Today, a certain trend is being consolidated in Syria for both the rulers and the opponents. This trend believes that the solution to the sectarian problem that was ignited by the crisis consists of the power balance on the ground and the external support. This might stretch the confrontation and [delay] the solution in spite of the tragedies and losses. It may be time for the government and the opposition, after the elapse of months on the confrontations, to step out from the current logic of confrontation and the technical solutions and to head towards the logic of the historic reconciliation that will constitute the basis for the constitution and the upcoming laws. This reconciliation calls for political and social tolerance, thus canceling the tendencies to terminate the others, the sectarian tendencies and the monopolization. It also consolidates equality in rights and competition. The technical solutions are to come later in order to reinforce this equality on the level of the constitution and the laws.
