As European Union ministers gather in Luxembourg over the weekend, a major question is on everyone’s mind: Should Assad stay, or should Assad go? Or, is there perhaps a happy medium between the two?
"We are talking about flexible transition arrangements," a diplomat, speaking anonymously, told Reuters. "Transition is key. You won’t see 'Assad must go' in the EU’s position."
That’s not likely to please Washington politicians, whose failures in Syria have been punctuated by the obstinate repetition of the position that Assad should be removed, nevermind what might come next.
Faced with a growing refugee crisis, Europe is eager to see a conclusion in the ongoing Syrian civil war. But developing a strategy that can be agreed upon by all European leaders has proven tricky. France, for instance, has expressed its support for Assad’s immediate removal. Germany, on the other hand, recognizes his usefulness in stabilizing the war-torn country.
"If…we have to accept that Assad will remain as titular head of state for a period of time, do I really care if that’s three days, three weeks, three months or even longer?" British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond told Reuters earlier this week.
Still, while the timelines may differ, the EU does seem to be in agreement that, in the long-term, Assad must eventually cede power.
"There is consensus among member states that Assad will not be part of a future governance of Syria but how to formulate that exactly is to be seen," a second diplomat told Reuters.
EU countries are also at odds over what would become of Assad after his hypothetical ousting. Some have suggested allowing Assad a self-imposed exile in Russia, while others would prefer a formal trial at the International Criminal Court.
Russia has repeatedly pointed to the necessity of supporting Syria’s legitimate government as the only means of stabilizing the nation. Moscow has been working closely with Damascus during its airstrikes against the self-proclaimed Islamic State terrorist group.
Permission from the Assad government makes Russia’s campaign the only legitimate presence in Syria’s airspace, according to international law.
Moscow’s strikes have also already done more to cripple IS than over a year of bombing by the US-led coalition.
According to the Hudson Institute, a US think tank, this success may be pushing European nations closer to Russia’s strategy.
"European governments that have spent political capital supporting Washington’s position from the start of the Syrian crisis, now pressurized to prioritize the fight against the Islamic State instead of ousting Assad, are left to ponder if Putin has been right all along," the institute wrote in an article published in Foreign Policy.
"Is he a more reliable ally than Washington?"
