Borrell to Asharq Al-Awsat: Reconstruction of Syria Hinges on Change in Regime’s Behavior

High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell. (AP)
High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell. (AP)
TT
20

Borrell to Asharq Al-Awsat: Reconstruction of Syria Hinges on Change in Regime’s Behavior

High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell. (AP)
High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell. (AP)

High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell stressed that the political leadership in Damascus must take clear steps to “end the repression of the Syrian people.”

In an interview with Asharq Al-Awsat, he added that the regime must engage “meaningfully” in UN-led negotiations to make a clear decision “to change the way Syria is governed and the way it relates to the rest of the world” before a conference on its reconstruction can be held.

What do you expect of the donor conference in Brussels on March 30 at the political and economic levels? Does Covid-19 affect your expectations?

After ten years of conflict in Syria, the international community cannot waver in its focus on the need for a political solution. The European Union calls on all international actors with influence in the Syrian crisis to join forces at the conference in Brussels on March 30 to reaffirm and consolidate strong support for a political solution in accordance with UN Security Council Resolution 2254. The conference will ensure that Syria remains at the very top of the international agenda.

My aim is that the international community renews its political and financial support not just for the Syrian people – whether they be refugees or still in Syria – but also for Syria’s neighbors, particularly Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey, as well as Egypt and Iraq.

This conference serves as the main pledging event for Syria and the region in 2021, and a central aim is to ensure that United Nations’ appeal is met as fully as possible – especially considering the extra challenge of the pandemic.

Since the start of the conflict in 2011, the EU including its member states have contributed almost €25 billion to meet the needs arising from the conflict in Syria, in Syria itself and in the wider region. Around two thirds of the pledges made at successive conferences come from the EU.

The Brussels conference is being held on the 10th anniversary of the Syrian uprising. When do you think the donors conferences to rebuild Syria will be held? What is your position on the reconstruction of Syria now?

I look forward to the day when a conference for the reconstruction of Syria can be organized. Its timing, however, depends on the actions first and foremost of the Syrian regime. We call upon that regime to change its behavior. It is up to the leadership in Damascus to make the clear and unambiguous decision to end the repression of the Syrian people, to engage meaningfully in UN-led negotiations; in short, to make a clear decision to change the way Syria is governed and the way it relates to the rest of the world – before such a conference can take place.

Syria is set to hold presidential elections in a few months. How do you view these elections? Will the EU normalize relations with Damascus after that?

If we want elections that contribute to the settlement of the conflict, they must be held in accordance with UN Security Council resolution 2254, under supervision of the UN, and seek to satisfy the highest international standards: they must be free and fair, all candidates must be allowed to run and campaign freely, there is a need for transparency and accountability and, last but not least, all Syrians, including members of the diaspora, must be able to participate.

Under the current circumstances of conflict and since the regime has failed to engage meaningfully in UN-led negotiations, it is not feasible that elections organized by the Syrian regime - such as presidential elections later this year - can be carried out in accordance with these criteria and UN Security Council Resolution 2254. These presidential elections cannot therefore lead to any measure of normalization with the regime. Consequently, we have urged other members of the international community, and the wider region, to also avoid any such normalization.

Did you invite Russia to the conference? How can you work with Russia on Syria while relations are at a low point?

The Russian Federation has been invited to each and every Brussels conference on Syria, and is always welcome. It is no secret that relations between Russia and the European Union are not easy at present. This should not prevent us, however, from exchanging views on global matters of mutual concern, nor to work towards solutions when we can. As an example, we have good cooperation within the Middle East Quartet.

The conference is being held after the European Union renewed economic sanctions against Damascus and one year after the implementation of the Caesar Act. Do they have any effect on the Brussels conference? Moscow and Damascus say that these sanctions will harm the flow of the humanitarian and medical aid. What do you say?

EU sanctions in place regarding Syria are designed to avoid impeding the supply of humanitarian assistance. This includes efforts in the global fight against the recent Covid-19 pandemic. Consequently, the export of food, medicines or medical equipment, such as respirators and ventilators, are not subject to EU sanctions. Furthermore, a number of specific exceptions are foreseen for humanitarian purposes.

Let us not forget the larger picture: the Syrian regime is largely responsible for the humanitarian suffering of the Syrian people. The regime has deliberately denied humanitarian assistance to areas of Syria as part of its strategy in this conflict. Regime behavior has led to the humanitarian crisis – not sanctions. This is a point that the EU will make quite clearly at the conference should there be any further attempt to blame sanctions for humanitarian suffering.

The goal of these measures is to put pressure on the Syrian regime to halt repression and negotiate a lasting political settlement of the Syrian crisis in line with UNSC Resolution 2254 under UN auspices. They are a response to widespread and systematic violations by the regime of human rights and of international humanitarian law. The Syrian regime needs to adopt a clear change of behavior before the lifting of EU sanctions can be contemplated.

The Brussels conference is being co-chaired by the United Nations. What is your position on the efforts of UN Special Envoy to Syria, Geir Pedersen, and the progress of the Constitutional Committee? What do you think of Pedersen’s proposal to set up a new contact group on Syria?

The EU will continue to support UN Special Envoy Geir Pedersen in his tireless efforts to advance all aspects of resolution 2254 in a comprehensive approach. It is important that progress is achieved in the Constitutional Committee as it should serve as a door-opener to advance on other aspects of that Resolution. We are aware that Pedersen is also trying to advance on these other aspects, and support him in these efforts also. The EU believes that the fate of missing persons and those detained should be addressed with particular urgency as a matter of immense concern to families throughout Syria, and I encourage the Special Envoy in his efforts in this direction.

Regarding Special Envoy Pedersen’s appeal for constructive international engagement on Syria, I also agree with this. The gathering in Brussels on March 30 is a practical example of the commitment of the European Union to enhancing dialogue among those actors with influence in the Syrian crisis.

Russia announced its willingness to negotiate with the United States to reach a political solution in Syria. Is that possible these days? What is your position on the American-Russian dialogue on Syria?

It is true that US-Russia negotiations have played an important role on the Syria file in the past, such as those between Secretary Kerry and Foreign Minister Lavrov. Whether such negotiations are possible today you would need to ask them. What we are trying to do with the Brussels conference is to bring together all key actors and donors precisely to encourage dialogue and progress towards a political solution. The European Union stands ready to engage and to help where we can, as Syria is an issue of primary importance to us.

Currently, Syria has three spheres of influence: in the northeast, northwest and the rest of the country. Does the European Union have the same vision for these zones?

Yes, the EU has the same vision for each of zone: the unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Syrian state. Moreover, the political solution to be reached in the framework of resolution 2254 for the future of Syria must be Syrian-led and Syrian-owned.



Al-Hadi Idris to Asharq Al-Awsat: The Parallel Government Aims to Prevent Sudan’s Fragmentation

Al-Hadi Idris, former member of Sudan’s Sovereign Council (Asharq Al-Awsat).
Al-Hadi Idris, former member of Sudan’s Sovereign Council (Asharq Al-Awsat).
TT
20

Al-Hadi Idris to Asharq Al-Awsat: The Parallel Government Aims to Prevent Sudan’s Fragmentation

Al-Hadi Idris, former member of Sudan’s Sovereign Council (Asharq Al-Awsat).
Al-Hadi Idris, former member of Sudan’s Sovereign Council (Asharq Al-Awsat).

As Sudan grapples with ongoing turmoil following the outbreak of war in April 2023, the establishment of a “parallel government” in areas controlled by the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) has sparked widespread concern. Domestically, regionally, and internationally, fears are mounting over Sudan’s future, the risk of further division, and the threat of another partition. However, supporters of this initiative—who recently signed a new constitution and a governance roadmap—view it as a major opportunity to build a new Sudan founded on freedom, democracy, and justice, preventing the country from descending into chaos and fragmentation.

A Government for Peace and Unity

The new administration, known as the “Government of Peace and Unity,” aims to rebuild the state on principles of justice and equality while ensuring essential services for all Sudanese citizens—not just those in RSF-controlled areas. Its proponents have sought to reassure both Sudanese citizens and neighboring countries that their objective is to preserve Sudan’s unity.

Emerging at a critical juncture, this initiative presents itself as an alternative to the military-backed government based in Port Sudan, which serves as Sudan’s temporary capital. The parallel government hopes to earn the trust of Sudanese citizens and secure international support by demonstrating a serious commitment to ending the war and reconstructing the state on democratic, secular, and decentralized foundations.

Will this government succeed in bringing about the desired peace, or will the challenges it faces prove insurmountable? Asharq Al-Awsat spoke with Dr. Al-Hadi Idris, a key leader in the “Tasis” coalition behind the formation of the parallel government.

Why Form a Parallel Government?

Idris, a former member of Sudan’s Sovereign Council during the transitional government led by Dr. Abdalla Hamdok, emphasized that their goal is to establish a “government of peace and unity.”

“As a political and military force, we have always been committed to resolving Sudan’s crisis, which erupted on April 15, 2023, through peaceful means,” Idris explained. “We have made extensive efforts to push those supporting the war toward dialogue and engagement with peace initiatives, including those in Jeddah, Manama, and Geneva. However, the army and the de facto authorities in Port Sudan have refused to negotiate. This left us with no choice but to explore more effective ways to bring the warring parties to the table and stop the conflict. The formation of a parallel government is a step toward fulfilling our responsibilities to the many people who have been neglected and left without adequate care.”

Why Is the Army Refusing Dialogue?

Idris, who also leads the Revolutionary Front—a coalition of armed movements from Darfur and political groups outside the region, such as the Beja Congress led by Osama Saeed and the Kush Movement from northern Sudan—claims that the military’s reluctance to negotiate stems from external influences.

“We understand why the army refuses to come to the negotiating table,” he said. “It is under the control of the Islamic movement and remnants of the former regime, who fear that any political process will remove them from power and diminish their influence. They are keen on prolonging the war despite the devastation, suffering, and displacement it causes to civilians.”

Accusations of Division Policies

Idris accused Sudan’s military leaders of implementing measures that risk deepening the country’s divisions. These include issuing a new currency exclusive to areas under their control, restricting access to education in certain regions, and selectively issuing travel and identity documents.

“Such actions could lead to the country’s partition, which we completely oppose,” he stressed.

A Government for All Sudanese

Idris rejected claims that the new government is tied solely to Darfur or the RSF.

“Our government is not for Darfur alone, nor for the RSF or any single region,” he said. “It represents all of Sudan—from north to south, east to west. We have drafted a constitution that guarantees equal rights for all, signed by individuals and entities from across the country. The new government will be responsible for rebuilding the state and delivering essential services, including education, healthcare, and security.”

Local and Regional Concerns

Despite strong opposition to a parallel government from neighboring states, as well as international and regional organizations—including the United Nations and IGAD (Intergovernmental Authority on Development)—Idris remains confident that these concerns will dissipate once the government takes shape.

“People have a right to be worried,” he admitted. “But once they see our government in action, they will understand that we stand for unity, peace, and stability—not the opposite.”

International Recognition: A Secondary Concern

Idris dismissed concerns over whether the new government would gain international recognition.

“This is not something that worries us,” he said. “We have already engaged with countries like Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia, and Chad, where we have encountered sympathy for our cause. These nations have a vested interest in Sudan’s stability. In Uganda, we were received by President Yoweri Museveni himself, and in Kenya, President William Ruto welcomed us with open arms.”

The Failure of the Old State Model

According to Idris, Sudan’s traditional state structure has failed and is no longer viable.

“The world is changing around us,” he observed. “Lebanon has entered a new era, and Syria has moved past its oppressive old regime. The old political systems have no future. Since Sudan’s independence in 1956, no government has succeeded in establishing a stable, unified national state. Our history is marked by conflict and instability. That is why, during our meetings in Nairobi, we emphasized the need for a democratic, secular, and decentralized state that protects the rights of all citizens, regardless of their regional or ethnic background.”

A Role for the US in Ending the War

Idris believes the United States can play a decisive role in resolving the Sudanese conflict.

“Washington was heavily involved from the beginning of the war in 2023,” he said. “President Joe Biden’s administration made significant efforts to help Sudan, though it was unable to stop the war. We hope that the new US administration under Donald Trump will take a more effective approach, using a mix of incentives and pressure on all parties to achieve peace. We are open to working with anyone who can help resolve the crisis. Our government is a government of peace, and we are ready to engage with all stakeholders.”

Protecting Civilians from Airstrikes

Idris stressed that any legitimate government must prioritize civilian protection.

“A government that does not protect its citizens has no value,” he asserted. “We will appoint a defense minister whose primary mission will be to develop defensive strategies aimed at safeguarding civilians by all possible means. Additionally, we are working to establish the nucleus of a new national army, drawing from our allied forces, including the RSF, the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement-North, the Sudan Liberation Movement-Transitional Council, and other armed factions. A unified Joint Chiefs of Staff will be formed, and after the war ends, this force will serve as the foundation for a restructured national army dedicated solely to border protection and internal security—completely detached from politics.”

“There will no longer be two separate armies,” Idris declared. “There will be one unified military.”

Currency and Travel Documents

Idris confirmed that the new government will introduce its own currency, passports, and travel documents.

“The currency issue was a major factor in our decision to establish this government,” he said. “In many parts of Sudan, people rely on bartering because the Port Sudan government has drained cash supplies from areas outside its control. As a result, goods like salt, sugar, and wheat are traded in lieu of money. In some regions, cash is virtually nonexistent, making daily life incredibly difficult.”

When Will the New Government Be Announced?

Idris revealed that intensive consultations are underway to finalize the launch date.

“We expect to announce the new government within a month, from inside Sudan,” he said. “We have several options for where the announcement will take place, and we will reveal the location in the coming days.”

Participation in Future Negotiations

As for potential peace talks, Idris made it clear: “We are open to any serious and responsible initiative—whether local, regional, or international—but we will only engage in negotiations as the legitimate government of Sudan, a government of peace.”