The Al-Nusra Front, which was classified by Washington as being “a terrorist organization connected to Al-Qaeda," gave the Americans and the West in general a pretext to sustain their refusal to arm the revolutionary forces and opposition in Syria. The most revealing sign at this level was the call issued by French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius to show patience for a few months before responding to the calls of the Syrian National Coalition to provide the opposition fighters with weapons, so that they are able to hasten the regime's collapse. In Marrakech, where the fourth international meeting for the Friends of the Syrian People was held yesterday to get around 100 Arab and foreign states to act as an umbrella of consensus for the recognition of the Coalition as the sole representative of the Syrian people, American Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was the most prominent absentee, due to an intestinal virus which forced her to dispatch William Burns to Marrakech. And while President Barack Obama anticipated the meeting by announcing the United States' recognition of the Coalition as the sole representative of the Syrian people, his administration addressed to the opposition and the revolutionary forces a concomitant message on the eve of the meeting, saying that those controlling the fronts in Syria should quickly get rid of the virus of the hardliners and extremists. It added that the international community, which holds the power to give full legitimacy to any transitional government in Damascus and contribute to Syria's reconstruction to eliminate the signs of destruction, will not voluntarily offer a gift to the hardliners and assign them as partners during the stage of democratic diversity. Everyone understood the message in the West, but it was picked up by head of the Coalition Ahmad Maaz al-Khatib at the wrong time. Indeed, from the Marrakech platform, he announced his gratitude for the American recognition, taking a step forward by calling on the Alawis to stage civil disobedience and a step backward when he appeared to be defending the role played by Al-Nusra Front. And when he called on Washington to revise its decision to classify the Front as being a terrorist organization, he quickly received the answer from Burns. It is likely that the West, which is obsessed with Al-Qaeda, tends to exaggerate the justification of its fear from the organization's relations and networks, and it selection of the confrontation arenas whenever the situation on the ground is adequate for it to carry out its operations, including the explosions that are claiming the lives of innocent people more than they are harming the “enemy." This is at least how Syrian oppositionists perceive the backdrop of the West's reluctance to arm them the way it was seen during the Libyan revolution. And what is clear to many among them is that America and Europe are still fabricating pretexts – one of which being Al-Nusra Front – to extend the great massacre which has so far claimed the lives of 50,000 people in Syria, as it was announced by Qatari Prime Minister Hamad Bin Jassem Bin Jabr ath-Thani. True, the fears over the fall of heavy artillery in the fundamentalists' hands are legitimate, regardless of their affiliations or ties. But what is also true is that the extension of the conflict in Syria is the shortest way towards civil war, in which the tragedies of the towns of Akrab after Al-Houla are mere scenes of its possible beginning, regardless of the Syrian people's sacrifices. Among the oppositionists, those frustrated about the Americans' and Europeans' weeping before the brutality of the conflict and what is being committed against and over the heads of the civilians, are drawing up a roadmap for the gradually-mounting demands of Washington, Paris and London: the unification of the civil opposition, the unification of the military factions, the organization of the relations between the leaders abroad and those leading the fighting on the fronts, and finally the cleansing of these fronts from those suspected of being terrorists. Once again, and whether intentionally or unintentionally, the Americans - and the French who are competing with them in condemning the acts of the Syrian regime - are causing the Syrians to become terrified, whenever question marks are raised in regard to the fate of the Western strategy. In the end, this policy is similar to Moscow's, i.e. dealing with the revolution in the face of the regime as an internal issue. And while Israel's security is a priority in the American national security calculations, would it harm the Hebrew state to see endless wars provoking the shedding of Syrian blood and the destruction and division of another Arab country after Iraq and Lebanon were depleted with sectarian-denominational schisms? 50,000 people have fallen in Syria in 20 months. Could this be the price for the recognition by around 100 states of the Coalition's representation of the people? As for the dead, and those about to be martyred, they can only get the harshest expressions of condemnation from the West towards the regime, until it is convinced to leave! Although he rejected Takfiri ideology, Al-Khatib's mistake does not justify the blind witness role played in Washington and Moscow, in parallel to the repetition of boring pieces of advice. Indeed, the mistake is shared with oppositionists who settled for the convergence of interests with armed men acting under various banners. But what is definitely true is that the killing of 1,000 Syrians per week will not encourage anyone to raise the banner of dialogue and moderation, or even proclaim a battle to cleanse the fronts of the revolution, before proceeding with the war to topple the regime. In Marrakech, Burns reassured everyone that power transition in Syria is coming “one way or another." But what he did not say - in the presence of Arab and foreign ministers - is that the rise of the movements of political Islam to power following the Arab spring revolutions, and the Muslim Brotherhood's monopolization of the rule in Egypt among other locations under the pretext of protecting the revolution from deceit and the ghosts of the remnants, granted the West yet another justification to show reluctance towards Syria's MB, and to reflect on the consequences of its arming when the time comes. We will therefore witness further reflection, in parallel to the killing of 1,000 Syrians every week! This will be seen as long as the conflict of interests is at its peak between Kremlin and the White House, and as long as the Security Council is an arena for the settling of scores between its members as it was stated by Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal.
