Commentators in Arab newspapers have warned that the goal of the “Protecting Civilians in Syria” law, known simply as the “Caesar Law” passed by the United States to impose sanctions on Syria, is to topple the Syrian regime.
A book believed that the law would fail to end Bashar al-Assad’s rule, while others argued that it was aimed at changing or “amending” the Syrian regime.
The law “Caesar” came into effect on June 17th, with the aim of increasing the financial, economic and political isolation that Assad suffers from, besieging and punishing his allies in order to force him to accept a political solution to the Syrian crisis on the basis of Security Council Resolution 2254.
Breaking the Fork of the System
In the London-based Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper, Ibrahim Hamidi wrote: “American officials did not stop repeating a single phrase: ‘The goal is not to change the system’, then add a later phrase ‘but the goal is to change the behavior of the regime’ … The principle of ‘regime change’ not only failed, but rather He does not have internal and American support, nor the United Nations, especially in light of the new crises in the world and the Corona epidemic. Therefore, the alternative principle is ‘behavior change’.
The writer added: “According to the statements and interpretations of the Americans, the ‘Caesar’s Law’ which took a long time before Congress passed and signed it by President Donald Trump ‘did not stipulate changing Assad’, but it stipulated ‘the Syrian government’s commitment to conditions’, namely: taking Iran out of Syria, stop sponsoring terrorism and support Hezbollah, give up chemical weapons, not pose a threat to its neighbors, provide conditions for the return of displaced persons and refugees, hold war criminals accountable and accountable, and work to implement international resolution 2254 …
The writer continued: “Meeting these ‘conditions’ is now binding on the current Syrian government and any future government, because abolishing the ‘Caesar Law’ requires a complex legislative process in Congress. Also, there is an awareness that Damascus does not want or can meet these conditions related to internal or geopolitical matters abroad and that ‘Implementing it from the system means changing the system.’
The same newspaper published an article for Robert Ford, the former US ambassador to Syria, in which he said: “I do not have much hope for Syria. According to my own analysis, the Assad government and its four powerful intelligence agencies will not accept reforms or hold them accountable for the horrific crimes they committed … Even if a successful military coup took place against President Assad, would Washington drop the sanctions of the ‘Caesar Law’ if one of the intelligence generals came to power? Answer: No.
The writer added: “For its part, Washington is demanding the Syrian government to change its behavior, stop killing citizens, suppressing its critics and accepting the rule of law. It is clear that the Syrian security apparatus will fight for a long time before accepting any accountability. Today, it also has no incentive to surrender.”
Ford predicted that Syria would become “more isolated than ever before, and it would look like North Korea, from which we sometimes hear reports of malnutrition and even starvation. However, North Korea, despite its economic pressures, remains united.” It is possible to imagine the success of some regions within Syria subject to Turkish and American protection in obtaining local autonomy if the Syrian government lacks the economic and military ability to impose the reintegration of these regions into the entity of the unified Syrian states.
In the London daily Al-Rai Al-Youm, Alyan Alyan indicated that “the American administration is betting that it is with these sanctions according to this law, capable of achieving what it failed to achieve with military aggression through its tools, believing that the repercussions of sanctions against the Syrian people and their livelihood will push the people to revolution The regime, especially in light of the information published by the United Nations agencies that a high percentage of the Syrian people stand on the brink of hunger. ”
The writer added: “The American administration – despite all the above – and despite the stationing of some of its forces in eastern Syria, and despite the Zionist support for the Takfiri factions with weapons and others, it failed to achieve its stated goal, which is to break the regime’s thorn and topple it.”
“Victory or break the siege”
Abdel-Moneim Ali Issa warned in the Lebanese newspaper Al-Akhbar that “there is a ‘cook’ ripening away from the limelight, and its broad title is the establishment of ‘neutral Syria as the only alternative to get out of the crisis that entered three months before its tenth year, without a horizon to exit from its tunnel Al-Mu’tam, who recovered at the beginning of this year – and then renewed that recovery recently, within the past few days, after the entry into force of the ‘Caesar’ law.
On the other hand, Bashar Mohamed indicated in the Syrian newspaper Al-Thawra that “the current scene is completely exposed to Damascus, which set the priorities of the confrontation by confronting Western-American economic terrorism by enhancing the resilience of the internal front by improving the living reality, securing the requirements of the Syrian people, and enhancing coordination at the highest levels.” With allies and friends, especially as they are partners in the field and partners in what has been achieved from victory over terrorism. ”
The writer added: “There are two options before Damascus, either victory and break the siege, or victory and break the siege … and our recent history testifies that we are capable of that, and no one on this simple is able to dictate to us our choices, whatever the sacrifices … All of your siege and your plans will fall on The doorsteps of Damascus, which will not be alone in the confrontation, the choices of the Syrian people are fixed by the stability of their leadership, and the coming days will prove that. ”