There are many obstacles in the path of Arab observers in Syria, and a debate is underway about the mission that they will carry out, even before they arrive. The Arab League believes that dispatching these observers is aimed at verifying that protestors will not be shot. In other words, part of the work of these observers involves protecting civilians, as if their presence in the streets of Syria will reduce the "activity" of security forces. The observers will also verify the withdrawal of arms from public spaces, and the release of detainees. The Syrian government, meanwhile, believes that the goal of allowing observers to enter its territory is to prove to the world its version of events, which it has repeated since the crisis began, namely that "armed terrorist gangs" are at work. This was affirmed by the Syrian foreign minister yesterday, when he said that the observers would see for themselves that the demonstrators are not peaceful. This dispute takes the mission of the observers to another obstacle. What will they observe, and who will do the observing? Where will they be allowed to go? In principle, they should be allowed to go where they want, and the Syrian authorities should facilitate their movement. In reality, the Syrian authorities, as Minister Walid al-Moallem indicated, cannot allow these observers to visit "sensitive military positions." Their movements will be "under the protection of the Syrian government," while the protocol on the observers stipulates that Damascus will "facilitate" their work. There is a difference between "facilitating" and "protecting," in the security sense of the word. It seems that Moallem was referring to this when he made a joking response to a question about the obstacles that some fear will be placed in the path of the observers – he said the observers will have to learn how to "swim." This will bring the Arab League into a controversial debate with the Syrian government over the nature of the locations that the observers will visit, recalling the debate over the visits by United Nations observers to Iraqi sites during the Saddam Hussein era. The Syrian government is clinging to the excuse, based on which it is trying to impose its conditions on the mission of the Arab League and the work of its observers, that the state should enjoy sovereignty over all of its territory. However, the reality is that the mere announcement by Damascus that it had accepted the Arab League initiative and the idea of observers contains an abandonment of this sovereignty, even if partially. When a government allows an outside team to "observe" what is taking place on its territory, whether in terms of what its state bodies, or opposition groups, are doing, it has acknowledged the foreign doubt about its version of events, and about its behavior. It also allows for a foreign party to decide which acts of this government are bad, and which are acceptable. This in itself is a partial loss of sovereignty. The reality is that Damascus was forced to sign the observer protocol. One cannot ignore the circumstances in which it agreed to sign, after hesitating ever since it agreed to the Arab League initiative on 2 November. Seven weeks went by, with messages going and coming among Damascus, Cairo and Doha, while people in Syria were being killed. If the average daily death count was around 20 people, at the least, we can say that around 1,000 people were killed during this period. Damascus was forced to discover the virtue of a "peaceful solution" and "cooperation with the Arab League" at this late date, and the only explanation for this is certainly not a determination to solve the Syrian crisis through dialogue with the opposition and introducing the necessary reforms. Instead, it is a fear of the Arab League's threat to transfer the Syria issue to the Security Council, and a fear of a change in the Russian position, in light of a draft resolution Moscow presented to the Security Council. The best expression of the degree of Syria's honesty when it talks about rejecting interference in its domestic affairs came in Moallem's remarks yesterday – his government's signing of the protocol came after receiving Russian advice ("they advised us to sign, and we listened to their advice"), leaving behind the earlier conditions, most important of which was seeing the Arab League drop sanctions that it imposed on Damascus at the moment of the Syrians' signature. Attempting to gain time, in the hope that there will be changes in positions, and the balance of power, led the Syrian regime to leave behind all of the previous obstacles and conditions that Damascus had termed "conditions of obedience." It might be obedience, to the Russian advice, and the threats of the Security Council, but not to the Syrian people.
