One of the persons present summarized his interpretation of the situation in Syria in a few sentences. He said that Syria has joined the club of countries in turmoil which saw the Arab Spring hit their stability and confront them with difficult questions about the future, and ways of ending the grave situation as well as the costs of adopting this or that option. Sitting with several politicians, he considered that three months of protests led to an attempt to bring together the security solution and reform promises that did not manage to restore stability. A situation heralding a lengthy crisis saw the light on the ground. The regime is unable to put a definite end to the protests, and the protests are unable to bring down the regime. The use of excessive force to stop the protests has harmed Syria's image abroad. Damascus lost its relation with Doha, and saw its relation with Ankara deteriorate. As for its relation with Paris, it went from amiability and encouragement to bitterness and a wish to sanction. The speaker expressed his hope not to see Syria make the mistake of excessively wagering on the Russian stance. Russia today is not the same as before, nor is it the same as the Soviet Union. Its great interests with Europe cannot be compared with its interests with Syria, despite the latter's importance, especially in offering a position on the Mediterranean. It is true that Syria is experienced in resisting international pressure, but the difference today is that foreign pressure comes with domestic turmoil. The speaker considered that the less costly option to date is for President Bashar al-Assad to lead the change process, provided he takes difficult, and perhaps painful, decisions: reducing the Baath Party's role and including the participation of political sides that were prohibited or marginalized, and reducing the control of the security apparatus on the political life and the freedoms of citizens. It will not be a simple matter, but ending the impasse is impossible without such a risk that would contribute to isolate the groups that wager on imposing change through the use of weapons. Another speaker considered that Syria must reformulate its regional position, in light of a balance of forces that refuses to acknowledge its right to use the cards it previously gathered, which allowed it to play Iraqi, Lebanese, and Palestinian roles. He added that some of the relations that were a source of strength could turn into a burden with the change of circumstances, such as the alliance with Iran and Hezbollah. It might not be necessary to end these relations, and it might suffice to rethink the extent of their use and their influence on both domestic and foreign policies. The discussion went on, and the opinions of the persons present diverged. What is certain is that the developments in Syria emerge on TV, in meetings, and in closed chambers. A journalist only has to contact his friends in Baghdad, Amman, Beirut, and Ankara to realize the extent of concern in Syria's neighboring countries. Syria's drowning in a long and bloody conflict will bring about very high costs, and the explosion of the Syrian map will be catastrophic. Wise men in the four capitals are still wagering on the less costly alternative, and are expecting from Damascus difficult decisions that turn around the course of events. The time factor is of utmost importance in such crises, especially when the domestic turmoil meets the external pressures.
