Nadine Elali

Members of the Syrian opposition gathered last week in Istanbul and announced the names of the dissidents who will form the Syrian National Council. The council’s aim is to coordinate the opposition’s policies and to represent the anti-regime uprising politically.
NOW Lebanon talks to the Syrian Local Coordination Committee’s Omar Edelbi, who was named among the council’s 140 members, about the Syrian opposition and the formation of the council.

Who makes up the opposition inside Syria?

Omar Edelbi: The opposition inside Syria is a group of political parties known for their struggle against the regime. [They are made up of] the People’s Party, the Communist Labor Party, the Socialist Union Party and the Revolutionary Labor Party.
Some of the parties formed coalitions over the years, such as the National Democratic Gathering and the Damascus Declaration, which was formed as Bashar al-Assad came to power. The Damascus Declaration is liberal and includes liberal religious movements, political parties and independent national figures.
During the uprising, the Damascus Declaration remained one of these coalitions, and the rest of the leftist parties formed a new coalition which they called the National Coordination Committee, which also included independent national figures coming from a leftist background.
These two coalitions have become the two most prominent national opposition coalitions inside Syria.
There are three main forces in the uprising: the Local Coordination Committee, the Leadership of the Syrian Revolution and the Higher Council of the Revolutionary Command. There are other formations but smaller in size in terms of number of members.

Who makes up the opposition in exile?

Omar Edelbi: The main organized groups are the Muslim Brotherhood and the Damascus Declaration. Two new movements were formed during the uprising: the Independent Islamic Movement and the National Working Group for Syria, which is a civil Islamic group.

When did the need for some form of representation arise?

Omar Edelbi: After the first month of the uprising, there became a clear need for a political side to manage the crisis; to represent the uprising, the people inside; to converse with the international community; and, to a certain extent, to lead and support the uprising inside Syria financially, politically and diplomatically. But after the second month of the uprising, people began talking about bringing down the regime, and therefore it became necessary to have a political side representing itself as an alternative to the regime.

Can you tell us about the Antalya Conference?

Omar Edelbi: The Antalya Conference was the first attempt to form a representative body early into the uprising. It represented most of the opposition but not all of them.
The forces of the uprising inside Syria, the Coordination Committees and the Union of Coordination Committees, were not represented. At the time, they had taken the decision to not take part in any political activity; they wanted to leave the political mobilization to the opposition and focus on organizing the uprising.

Why were there so many conferences for the opposition? Why was it so hard for them to agree?

Omar Edelbi: Many factors were at play. There was a lack of political experience and practice, which is only normal after 40 years of tyranny and oppression. Moreover, there was little communication between the opposition inside Syria and those in exile, so there was little trust between both parties. Not to mention the personal differences between the different opposition figures.
However, six months into the uprising, this became unacceptable, and the Revolutionary Youth inside Syria began to scold the opposition—among some of the slogans at protests on Fridays were ones to bring down the opposition.

Can you tell us more about the gatherings that were held in Istanbul and later in Doha?

Omar Edelbi: In Istanbul attempts seemed more serious than the previous ones. The meetings were organized by a group of academics among the National Working Group for Syria. Independent opposition political figures participated as well as other political movements. The Preparation Committee for the Istanbul Conference held its meetings in early August to set standards for the selection of members that would form the Syrian National Council.
As the committee held its meetings in Istanbul, another group of figures called for Burhan Ghalyoun to take the initiative and to hold another meeting in Doha. The consultations in Istanbul were stopped, and those leading the consultations joined the Doha Conference.
The Doha meetings did not produce anything serious, but they were able to unite the opposition from inside Syria. Many attacked the Doha meetings, sometimes fairly and other times unfairly. Some of the reasons were that the talks were called for by Dr. Azmi Bchara, who was unfamiliar with opposition parties, and so his choice of figures was criticized. The Doha meetings were also accused of being an attempt to market the Arab Initiative to solve the crisis.
I personally don’t believe that such accusations are accurate; no one at this level can ever market a slogan that contradicts the call to bring down the regime. The Syrian street has gone even further and called for trying and executing the president.

Can you tell us about the Syrian National Council that was announced in Istanbul?

Omar Edelbi: After Doha, the National Working Group returned to Istanbul and continued its consultations. It announced the names of the dissidents last Thursday. There are 140 members, with 60 to 100 inside Syria and 40 in exile. This time the Revolutionary Youth have up to 35 seats. They chose figures that are less controversial, mainly academics who are capable of setting a vision for the future of Syria and capable of addressing matters such as human rights, politics, diplomatic relations.

What is the opposition’s opinion of the council?

Omar Edelbi: The Local Coordination Committees decided to support the initiative and join the council. We have three independent members among it.

The majority of the opposition in exile has also joined except for the Muslim Brotherhood in exile, which is still waiting for the Brotherhood inside Syria to make their decision.
We are still waiting for the opposition inside Syria. The Syrian opposition has always been hesitant; it believes that any political mistake is a catastrophe. It is true that the opposition has not erred till now, but it has not accomplished anything either. It will need to take a risk.
They are waiting for the Coordination Committees and the Revolutionary Youth to approve so that they can follow, and the latter is doing the same, so it is like the chicken-egg paradox.
We hope to see the rest of the opposition and national figures joining so that it would reflect the diversity of Syrian society.

What are the duties of this council?

Omar Edelbi: The council is meant to set foundations for the future—it is not meant for future representation. It will not lead the transitional phase; its duties are solely to lead the phase till the regime falls, to form to a certain extent a political representation for the uprising, to seek support for it, and to lead dialogue internally and with the international community.
People have to understand that the council is not a parliament—it will not lead Syria, it will never be its government. This is essential so that the opposition stops talking about shares.

How do you feel the existence of the council reflects on the overall situation in Syria?

Omar Edelbi: The move is very positive. Now we feel that political life in Syria is at play. The political forces now seem capable of dialogue. They are ready to set the foundations for future political life. The leftist parties are gathering themselves, and the Islamic parties and liberal parties too, and they have all come to a consensus on the need for a civil, democratic state. Now you can have an idea what Syria’s future political scene will look like.

We have also seen that the international community welcomed the council as soon as it was announced. Everyone is eager to see a political representation for the uprising, so there is a convergence of wills inside and outside Syria, so let’s take part in making this a successful attempt.

We are running out of time; there is no more time to miss opportunities, and the street needs a political party to direct, lead and support the uprising. The more loss that we experience on the political level, the more it will reflect on the field. There are calls now to divert the demonstrations from their peaceful path, and this is very dangerous. I believe that this is the last warning for the opposition after six months of inability to invest in the peaceful demonstrations, whereas the regime has been losing points by resorting to violence.