The trouble with the truce in Syria

Damascus says it has accepted the terms of a ceasefire deal, but it is not clear when the guns will go silent. Brokered by the United States and Russia, the agreement is meant to further the process of talks between the warring sides, as well as to open supply routes for humanitarian supplies. But there are many concerrns about the deal. Syria says it will continue to coordinate with Russia to decide which groups and areas will be included in the ‘cessation of hostilities’ plan, and what targets to hit in air strikes. The fact that Daesh and Al Nusra are not part of any ceasefire regulations gives Damascus enough room to go after its adversaries. How much fire the political opposition and rebels will face is anybody’s guess. Syria also said it will cease armed operations but will continue ‘counter terrorism efforts’. This will enable Damascus to seal borders and create more problems for displaced persons who are languishing on the cold frontiers without basic amenities.

The ceasefire will have peace dividends only if security forces end the siege on civilians in Aleppo and stop the aerial onslaught against them. Daesh and Al other Qaeda-affiliates are still in the region, but have moved away from civilian areas. With more than 10 million Syrian refugees and 250,000 killed, this socalled peace move should not be another half-hearted peace effort. International efforts to broker peace can only succeed if the truce is monitored, and stringent regulations are put in place. But will President Assad play by the rules when he’s on top is the big question. The reason why agreements reached in Geneva and Munich could not hold for long is because they lacked a mechanism to implement it. This is where the US and Russia have to concentrate. Damascus has accepted the deal from a position of strength; enforcing it will be challenge for the world community, but they must for the sake of millions of suffering Syrians.