One week after the first United Nation monitors arrived in Syria to oversee implementation of the peace plan negotiated by U.N. Special Envoy Kofi Annan, conditions on the ground have already made it irrelevant. What remains to be seen is how long it will take for the international community to acknowledge its failure and press ahead with its collective efforts to bring about a democratic transition in Syria.

One week after the first United Nation monitors arrived in Syria to oversee implementation of the peace plan negotiated by U.N. Special Envoy Kofi Annan, conditions on the ground have already made it irrelevant.  What remains to be seen is how long it will take for the international community to acknowledge its failure and press ahead with its collective efforts to bring about a democratic transition in Syria.  The U.S. has much to gain by taking the lead in declaring the Annan plan stillborn, and charging the Assad regime with its speedy collapse. 

Such an acknowledgement will not come easily.  Although few Western or Arab officials held out much hope for the Annan Plan, or took seriously the commitment of the Assad regime to implement it, once the plan took hold, the inclination has been strong to give it more time to work, and to avoid taking the initiative in withdrawing support from the one diplomatic framework that has secured Russian and Chinese support in the U.N. Security Council. 

Yet the costs of inaction are high and growing by the day.  Several hundred Syrians have been killed by regime forces in the period since the so-called "ceasefire" took effect on April 12.  On April 17, more shells fell on the city of Homs than on any previous day of the year-old uprising. Continued support for the plan has already provoked questions about how deeply the Friends of Syria Group (FoS) is committed to democratic transition in Syria, and how fully prepared it is to uphold the position that the Assad regime is illegitimate, and that Assad himself must go.  The longer the Friends lend cover to the Annan plan, the louder these questions will become. 

If expectations for the plan have never been high, the Assad regime's behavior should be sufficient to overcome the impulse to give the Annan Plan more time. Its disdain for the plan has been breathtaking, surprising even some hardened diplomats who are familiar with the long history of broken pledges from Damascus.  Despite the Syrian government’s claims to have pulled forces back from major urban centers, satellite imagery confirms that it has done little more than move new units into new offensive positions. There are also reports of increasing use of Syria's air force, including helicopter gunships, in attacks on civilian positions. 

Nor has the regime shown any inclination to moderate its year-long campaign of repression. Not only has the civilian death toll continued to climb, but information flowing out of Syria reports waves of detentions and other punitive measures directed against protesters and opposition activists.  Moreover, if the Syrian regime has lied systematically about its compliance with the pullback of forces and ending the use of violence, it has done nothing at all to respond to the remaining points of the Annan plan, which include the release of political prisoners, free access to Syria for the media and respecting the right of Syrians to protest peacefully.  Mr. Annan himself has been oddly silent on the complete lack of Syrian response to these elements.  All told, it is little wonder that the emir of Qatar, Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani, predicted that the Annan plan had "only a 3 percent chance of success." 

While Russian officials accuse unnamed governments and "external forces"1 of seeking to undermine the Annan Plan—ignoring the Assad regime’s responsibility for its failure—the concern among the Syrian opposition and its supporters is just the opposite: that Western governments have been drawn into an initiative that is not simply flawed, but dangerous; have failed to provide explicit benchmarks for assessing its implementation; and have not established a timetable that would make clear that support for the Annan Plan is not open-ended. 

Rather, in what is seen as a misguided effort to persuade the Russian government to soften its support for the Assad regime, the West is viewed as having acquiesced to an initiative that compromises its core commitment to the regime’s removal, constrains its engagement with the opposition, and shifts the focus of global diplomacy away from forums like the Friends of Syria Group and toward the U.N. Security Council, where Russia’s willingness to serve as the spoiler gives it veto power over Western and Arab League initiatives. Whether these perceptions are accurate or not—and in Washington, at least, U.S. officials insist that the Annan Plan has not derailed its policy toward Syria—there is nonetheless a growing conviction that it is helping the Assad regime to reconsolidate its authority, and that the plan has failed to constrain the regime’s indiscriminate use of violence, and should be acknowledged as a failure, sooner rather than later. 

Fortunately, the Friends of Syria Group has alternatives to the Annan Plan.  These include implementation of the commitments made at the April 2 FoS meeting to expand support to the Syrian opposition, one element of which calls for a managed approach to the militarization of the Syrian uprising,2 as well as more extensive engagement with the internal opposition. They also include efforts to build international and NATO backing for defensive allied operations, such as the creation of a safe zone along Syria's northern border, that would provide Turkey with the assurances it is seeking as a precondition for any such move.  An additional element of this approach might include efforts to suppress Syrian air power.  All of these strategies are far more likely to be effective in pressuring the Assad regime, and in accelerating efforts to secure a negotiated political transition in Syria, than the fatally flawed plan put forward by the U.N. special envoy. 

Related Publications

Mona Yacoubian on Syria

Mona Yacoubian on Syria

Thursday, August 9, 2018

By:

As the Assad regime consolidates power across Syria, Mona Yacoubian says that regime change is increasingly unlikely seven years into the civil war. But, the conflict remains complex, as the U.S. and coalition forces continue to work to eradicate remnants of ISIS and Israel becomes increasingly concerned over Iran’s military presence in neighboring Syria.

Violent Extremism; Global Policy

Regime Offensive Aims to Retake Southwest Syria, Displaces Thousands

Regime Offensive Aims to Retake Southwest Syria, Displaces Thousands

Monday, July 2, 2018

By: Mona Yacoubian

Over the past two weeks, the Syrian government has embarked on a military offensive across Syria’s southwest, focused on retaking the city of Dara’a. Russia has played a critical role, backing the operations with airstrikes. The United Nations estimates that at least 160,000 Syrian civilians have been displaced by the fighting, and the number could increase as the battle intensifies.

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

Iran and Israel Are Racing Toward Confrontation in Syria

Iran and Israel Are Racing Toward Confrontation in Syria

Monday, May 21, 2018

By: USIP Staff; Mona Yacoubian

Ties between Tehran and Damascus have been close since the 1979 revolution, but the relationship deepened after Syria’s civil war erupted in 2011. With the Assad regime’s survival at stake, Tehran doubled down on its support, providing critical military assistance—fighters and strategists—and economic aid estimated to be in the hundreds of millions of dollars.

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

What is Next for U.S.-Turkey Relations?

What is Next for U.S.-Turkey Relations?

Friday, April 20, 2018

By: Eric S. Edelman; Jake Sullivan

Relations between the United States and Turkey have come under increasing strain in the past two years over the U.S. role in Syria and Ankara’s strengthening ties with Russia. American support for Kurdish forces battling ISIS has angered Turkey, which sees the cooperation as bolstering Kurdish nationalist elements inside its borders. USIP Board member Eric Edelman, a former U.S. ambassador to Turkey during the George W. Bush administration, and USIP International Advisory Council member Jake Sullivan, who served as Vice President Joe Biden’s national security adviser, provide some insight on the state of Turkish-American relations.

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

View All Publications