The Syrian government has agreed to accept a peace plan proposed by UN and Arab League envoy Kofi Annan, al Jazeera television quoted his spokesman as saying.
"The Syrian government has written to the joint special envoy Kofi Annan, accepting his six-point plan, endorsed by the United Nations Security Council," spokesman Ahmad Fawzi said in a statement on Tuesday.
Annan, who is in China to solicit support for the plan, considered it "an important initial step that could bring an end to the violence."
Russia has backed the former UN chief's plan, which calls for a UN-supervised ceasefire and political dialogue.
He is greeted quite amicably.
Annan's peace plan leaves room for Syrian Interpretation
As well as interpretation by others.
The key to the success of Kofi Annan’s Six-Point Plan unveiled today lies in what is not said in the scheme: At no point does the plan call for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to step down or delegate power.
Even those points are gently worded. For example, Syria “should” cease troop movements toward population centres and “should” end the use of heavy weapons, and should “begin” the pullback of military concentrations. All this leaves ample room for Syrian interpretation.
As for negotiating Syria’s future political system, the Annan points call only for Syria to “commit to appoint an empowered interlocutor when invited to do so by the envoy [Mr. Annan].”
All this makes the scheme much more acceptable to Mr. al-Assad and to his allies in Moscow and Beijing, all of whom rejected the idea that Damascus was getting all the blame and the opposition militants none at all.
There is more, be sure to read at the link.
What the author points out is that what is acceptable to Syria, Russia and China is not acceptable to the opposition
The Syrian National Council and Free Syrian Army, among others, have insisted they will never talk to Mr. al-Assad, and never agree to take any steps toward ending hostilities until he’s gone.
To offset that negative reaction, the Annan Points also go easy on the opposition.
Crucially, they call for the Syrian forces to make the first move in halting the fighting – a significant concession by the Assad regime that had insisted on mutual cessation – and they do not compel the opposition to do much of anything in this regard.
They say only that commitments from the opposition to stop fighting and accept UN supervision “would be sought by the envoy.”
However, as an incentive for the opposition to make such a commitment, the plan offers incentives: specifically, a two-hour humanitarian break in government fighting each day, and the possibility of an accelerated rate of release of opposition members jailed by the government.
It just might be enough to entice a representative number of opposition people to sign up for this plan, and defer their hopes for Mr. al-Assad to step down at a later date.
Mr. Annan said Tuesday that acceptance of the plan is merely “an important initial step” that “could bring an end to the violence and the bloodshed, provide aid to the suffering, and create an environment conducive to a political dialogue that would fulfill the legitimate aspirations of the Syrian people.”
The success of the plan now depends on the opposition’s acceptance and implementation of it. It’s likely that at the conference of Friends of the Syrian People, meeting Sunday in Istanbul, world powers will be pushing for the opposition to go along with it.
Will the "Friends of Syria" be pushed into going along with this peace plan?
So far I am not getting that impression.
From the latest news- Obama and Erdogan sending "non-lethal" aid to the rebels
Communications devices that are used to conduct warfare can hardly be construed as "non-lethal"
Not when they are used in planning attacks. Which would seem to be their intended use.