Shall we call the step of opening some crossing points for delivering food aids a humanitarian stance, a breakthrough, a quantum leap, a new pathway for coming solutions or just an attempt for beautifying the conference, especially if we consider that Israel is more merciful than Al-Assad regime when it opens the crossing points with Gaza for transporting the fuel, goods, medicines & other stuff in spite of that it is in the case of continuous war? However, there are some parties who doubt that the Syrian regime is going to pass any effort that he considers surrender or a political weakness. Negotiations are running through several axes. The United States & Russia are intensifying their presence & it seems that they are meeting in many points. On the other side, we can see Al-Ibrahimi running the dialogue battle between the regime and the opposition. It is a complicated and tough marathon due to that Geneva 1 is the base and starting point on which all confrontation lines between the issue holders or runners are based. It may be that land represents the most important role due to that Al-Assad is trying to race with time through expanding on the biggest strategic and critical areas to be able to negotiate out of strength. At the same time, we realize that the Free Army & his allies are seeking to stop Al-Assad Troops, circumvent them and achieving bigger expansion, especially in Aleppo and the other areas of population density and economic importance. It seems that the Russian have provided Al-Assad with a new power represented by adopting the principle of "negotiate out of strength." However, this has not happened due to that there is a consensus of that Al-Assad had lost the most important spots in spite of his attempt to show the world that the opposition is located in no more than a very limited area controlled by groups of terrorists who does not represent the Syrian nation. However, the reality refutes such claim if we consider the map of each party. Moreover, will the items of Geneva 1 be applied through forming a transitional government that does not include Al-Assad or will this issue be a complex subject to maneuvering as long as the regime keeps fighting for survival even if such fight leads to departure of majority of the Syrian nation either through arms threat or through displacement, prisons and famines? Argument should not be long if we consider that death circle is still going on together with the lack of direct pressure force that pushes the negotiators, whether the major powers or the related two parties in Syria, towards relegating Al-Assad through draining the sources of his power, whether the direct material support from Russia & Iran trough arms or fight volunteers from Hezbollah, Iraq or the rest of groups who are pushed towards fighting under or in the name of sectarianism. Arab countries which are supporting the Syrian regime, opposing it or keep inactive in regard to performing any role differ from each other in regard to their influence on the on-ground course of conflict & the same thing applies on the two regional powers of Iran & Turkey. Iran is fighting a battle of existence through which it is seeking to extend its influence on an Arab land for acquiring more regional power through which it can impose some decisions and even influence in the far future. Turkey does not represent a strong pressure in spite of that and negative change together with sectarian and racial population interaction may affect its security due to its close location. The competition between both of them is evaluated by each of them on the basis of its vision and interests. Turkey is burdened with the refuges and the fears of disturbances led by some Alawite or Kurd members while Iran is not facing such critical borders case. Syria is present on the Arab, regional and international levels but its problems are bigger from all of these countries due to that the solution is still inside it only.
