geneva 2 peace negotiations.

haven't been here in a while, a surprise is never bad, we are used to weatherforecasts at the start of the year, warm humid dry, all, here where we have the generators we could wish for more wind.

so geneva 2

i just start writing straight ahead, only because it will be very complicated to posit an original thought
and the matter is ofcourse thoroughly complicated i dare to go with so little immediate preparation.

i love that the notion is there we have to start a new thing, or a clean thing, and that is true, the negotiations must optimally express the central points.

a summary is that the syrians do want the regime to change, wich means assad to go, the former state to be replaced by something different, and influential positions and authoritys redistributed.

personally i fully support that, my conviction is no regime justifies torture, and certainly now no regime can still justify it by as much was known from syria three years ago.

i could elaborate, military means, targetting civilians, the inept and impossible casualty registers that are nevertheless maintained and profiled in as consistent as absurd style.
wich is a bad "omen", a bad calculus.

next there is assads position, i want everything you can have nothing, my people are scared, your people are scared, perhaps that works.

surely the definition will sound different in him, however the only way to consider that is to remove assad from the negation(equation). allawites, minoritys, kurds, moderate, and to a further if not that extremely pronounced extend, women and children, civilians, deserve each the safety and protection they need.

the nasty thing here is that the answer is "yes we know, that is not assad"

typically one fear is countered by the other the fear for injustice is countered by the fear for insecurity,

taking things back to the initial perspective, wich they from my point of view very much deserve. the torture, arrests. executions. in 100s and soon thousands hardly anyone in the whole of syria supported assad.

the poison of the terror tale took the usual age of time to rot in.
and so did the horror.

unfortunately we are not done here, erdogan is a complication for the kurds, and such may be polemic or maybe premature, what will surely pay a decisive role is the balance of power.

perhaps it would be nicer to say the balance of sympathisers, it goes too far.
i sympathise with assad, but with none of his state, i sympathise with Russia and i like putin, i don't sympathise with putin or his politics with syria, i sympathise with Obama, and i would want the outcome to be a conceivable succes for him, i trust their methodology and institutionalisms least.

it is the balance of power, or powers.

i have 'ahum' an unfortunate happy lot of experience with helping out balancing power, so i will once again develop some valuable insights,
good i just started writing;)

the basical point is you want to satisfy all. it goes so far that if the division and much to my personal regret i fear it should, in these nazions must take place, a kurdistan, a shia irak, a sunni irak, a sunni irak syria, a shia syria, a secular syria, and perhaps a tad more, it is worth contemplating rewarding the israelians forall the good germans did in the sense of handing them an obligatory palestinean israelian oblast.

perhaps it is not a good idea but the opportunity is relevant. it may be to early to risk iraks deplorable stability, it may be the most relevant part of the whole story.

i am sorry if it is. i have strongly voiced and hoped irak could be federal, that the cooperation and distribution of wealth would hold.

south sudan could become a reminder of the opposite.

in short you would "reward" each protagonist harbour and land in a negotiable yet at least attempted proportional manner. not half easy in syria.

israel i do not fear, i fear a croatisation of israel though. where it stretches coasts and takes people every resource to trade and the seas and oceans.

fortunately it has a coast. since there are at least three factions represented in syria for whom acces to the sea is relevant, and of life interest, it looks like the most problematical detail.

in case syria needs to try and stay whole, assad has to step up. an internationally organised media and campaign infrastructure set up , and elections held, (strongly and transparantly checked domestically)the different interests must be just equaled out, expressing i would think partnership, responsability , reason, the acknowledgement of the interests of the syrian people.

if they will, and if we will know in how far they tried, i wonder.