It was clear during the emergency meeting held by Arab foreign ministers to discuss the situation in Syria that the regime in Damascus was no longer able to cause a rift within the ranks of the Arab League as it has many times in the past. Indeed, there was no Pan-Arab “steed” for it to ride, nor a “Zionist enemy” for it to outbid others with. The regime itself was in the defendant's cage, on proven charges of killing its own people. As for those who would defend it, i.e. its partners in the “defiance camp”, they are implicated in the same crime, each within their own sphere – Yemen, Sudan and Algeria, if we were to put aside the Lebanese “prisoner”. Enlightened Egyptian diplomacy prevented Syria's membership from being suspended, and deprived Syria of a pretext it could have used to cause uproar over Arab “intentions” and to declare its absolute rejection of the resolution that had been reached unanimously, with the exception of reservations voiced by Syria itself of course. Yet what did such Arab unanimity achieve? Does it represent a call for Bashar Al-Assad to engage in dialogue with the opposition in order to resolve the crisis? Is his regime expected to comply with the fifteen-day deadline? Or will other stances be gradually taken in the near future? The fact of the matter is that Arab countries took a major step forward, one that could be followed by quick steps towards stripping the Syrian regime of legitimacy, when they placed this regime on an equal footing with the opposition that rose up more than eighteen months ago. They considered, in other words, that the “dialogue” the regime claims to be engaged in with domestic opposition figures is not sincere, and does not depart from being a means to waste some time until it completes its attempt to put an end to the uprising by way of killing and incarceration. As for the call to both sides to meet at the Arab League's headquarters and under its supervision, it means that the Arabs have come to consider the Syrian regime as unfit to find alone a solution to the crisis, even if it were to decide to truly engage in dialogue, and as untrustworthy, which is why external – and so far Arab – supervision is necessary for the success of such a dialogue. The Arab League's resolution also calls on Damascus to quickly carry out reforms, put a stop to acts of violence and killing, put an end to its warlike deployment of troops, and abandon the security formula. Furthermore, the Council of the Arab League considers itself to be permanently in session in order to follow up on developments. In other words, it is in effect paving the way for measures it might be taking if the Syrian regime were to refuse to comply with its resolution and carry on its blood-spattered campaign of violence, which is expected. And although the Syrian opposition in turn voiced reservations to the resolution and considered the regime not to be qualified to enter into dialogue that contradicts its very nature, demanding that the Arab League take stronger stances and recognize the National Council that was formed in Istanbul, such a resolution by the Arab League paves the way for a transformation at a broader international level, as the ring of support which the regime is relying on in its desperate obstinacy is loosening little by little. Perhaps the fact that Russia has welcomed the efforts of the Arab League falls within the framework of this expected transformation, after Russia had so far considered that the problem was between the regime and some who oppose it, refusing any foreign interference, even by the Arabs. Added to this is the recurrent talk of a Russian “deadline” for Assad to carry out reforms – a deadline that will be reached very soon. As for the main support of the regime in Syria, i.e. the Iranian regime, it is itself besieged and exposed to further isolation, especially after its plot to assassinate Saudi Arabia's Ambassador in Washington was uncovered. Indeed, the trial of the Iranian man accused of the attempted assassination begins next week, and it could reveal the involvement of high-ranking leaders in Tehran, which would drive countries to impose new sanctions against it.
