On April 1, the Saudi-owned, London-based Asharq al-Awsat daily carried the following report: “European diplomatic sources that are closely following up on the developments of the Syrian file expect a “tough and complicated” round of inter-Syrian talks in Geneva under the mediation of the international envoy, Staffan de Mistura, which is expected to be re-launched
on April 9 and 10.

“The sources that spoke to Asharq al-Awsat said yesterday said that the last round was “successful” since the regime’s delegation and that of the higher authority of negotiations stemming from Al-Riyadh’s conference “did not pull out or boycott or refuse to attend” to the UN headquarters. More importantly, De Mistura managed to come up with “points of rapprochement” between the two delegations as reflected through the “paper” that he distributed on the last day or the past round.

“But the sources added that his “success” is due to the fact that De Mistura’s conclusions were meanly confined to the “general principles” that everyone accepts and over which there are no differences. However, things will be “quite different” when the discussion of the main matters begin with the first headline being: “The nature of the transitional phase.”

“Official French sources indicated that the Syrian file, precisely the contents of the transitional phase, constituted the subject of discussions during the meeting between the American and French presidents, Barack Obama and Francois Hollande, on the margins of the nuclear summit in Washington yesterday. According to these sources, the French side wanted to know the outcome Secretary of State John Kerry’s visit to Moscow in addition to discussing the subject of counter-terrorism, mainly ISIL, and the future plans regarding this matter…

“In conclusion, according to the western sources, the upcoming political and diplomatic battle that will be taking place in Geneva and the concerned capitals will focus on “determining the contents of the transitional phase.” The positions of the regime and opposition are well known in this regard: the Syrian president was crystal clear as he explained his vision during his last interview with the Russian media. This vision entails: “A cabinet of national unity” including the independents and the opposition while the Geneva negotiations are to “settle” the issue of distributing the portfolios…

“Meanwhile, the opposition was quick to reject this vision and to insist on that the reference regarding the transitional phase should consists of the Geneva statement (2012), which calls on establishing “a transitional authority with all the executive powers.” The opposition representatives are wondering about the contents of the negotiations in Geneva if these will not include the nature of the transitional phase.

“In light of the deep gap between the positions of the regime and the opposition, eyes are once again turned towards the two sponsors of the peace process that managed to impose a non-complete truce since February 27 but one that served to deliver aid to dozens of thousands of Syrians and one that led to launching the indirect talks. For this reason, the main questions revolve around the agreements reached in Moscow during the visit of John Kerry and the two long meetings that he had with his counterpart, Sergey Lavrov and (especially) President Vladimir Putin.

“The western sources said that the Russian party worked on promoting the idea that Kerry “understands” the Russian demand “to abstain from addressing” the fate of the Syrian president for the time being… In addition, the two parties agreed on pushing in the direction of launching direct negotiations in Geneva instead of the indirect talks.

“The European sources indicate that they “are aware” of that Washington’s main concern is to eliminate ISIL and that it is not “in a hurry” with respect to Al-Assad’s ousting especially since he did actually engage in fighting ISIL. The sources added that the regime is “benefiting” from the ceasing of the hostilities in order to re-arrange its forces and to send them back to other fronts such as the case of Palmyra for instance. The present truce has allowed Al-Assad to do that. Meanwhile, the armed opposition is “restricted” by this truce. Thus, the regime is “launching a promotional campaign to say that it is the only force on the ground that is capable of fighting terrorism. The regime is now imposing itself as a partner to the alliance forces in this war...""