Damascus Documents in Geneva Negotiations: Incitement against the Regime is High Treason

Damascus Documents in Geneva Negotiations: Incitement against the Regime is High Treason
TT

Damascus Documents in Geneva Negotiations: Incitement against the Regime is High Treason

Damascus Documents in Geneva Negotiations: Incitement against the Regime is High Treason

“You are neither my friend nor my brother, you are just a colleague,” said one of the members of the Damascus delegation to a representative from the “other party” during the meetings of the Constitutional Committee in Geneva, which concluded on Friday evening.

These verbal comments do not reflect the depth of the gap between the parties to the talks. This rift, however, was highlighted in the texts of the counter proposals, which were obtained by Asharq Al-Awsat.

A document submitted by the head of the pro-government delegation, Ahmed al-Kuzbari, stated that a person, who violates the political system of governance, by using force, threats, incitement, or by provoking aggression on the territory of the state, communicating with hostile parties and dealing with any external party in any way that harms national interests, shall be convicted of high treason.

In another document, the pro-government delegation said: “The law shall criminalize anyone, who calls for the consolidation of subnational identities that affect the unity and security of society.”

It added: “The Constitution preserves cultural diversity within the framework of national unity,” pointing out that harming the army is “a crime punishable by law.”

UN Envoy Geir Pedersen

The seventh round of the Constitutional Committee meetings ended on Friday. While UN envoy Geir Pedersen did not announce a new date for the next round, the Damascus delegation proposed that they take place at the end of May.

Russian presidential envoy Alexander Lavrentiev, US envoy Ethan Goldrich, his Turkish counterpart Sedat Unal and other Western officials accompanied the negotiations, which were held within the framework of UN Security Council Resolution 2254.

Pedersen, who as usual avoided a press conference, said in a statement: “The Committee members in the first four days discussed draft constitutional texts on four basic constitutional principles: Basics of Governance, submitted by nominees of the Syrian Negotiations Commission, State Identity, submitted by some of the civil society nominees, State Symbols, submitted by nominees of the Government of the Syrian Arab Republic and Regulation and Functions of Public Authorities, submitted by nominees of the Syrian Negotiations Commission.”

He continued: “On the fifth day, in line with the agreement, the delegations were expected to submit revisions to reflect the content of the discussions during the previous four days. All delegations offered at least some revisions to some of the texts presented. Some of these embodied amendments indicating an attempt to reflect the content of the discussions and narrow differences. Others contained no changes.”

On the Agreement

The node in the previous rounds was related to the fifth day of the session, as the Damascus delegation refused to reach joint formulations with the delegation of the Negotiations Commission headed by Hadi al-Bahra. This position forced Pedersen to shuffle between Moscow, Damascus and other capitals, until an understanding was reached that the counter-papers would be exchanged on the fifth day.

Some suggested that this meant formulating common texts, while Damascus interpreted it as a request to submit written comments, based on its reading of Pedersen’s invitation letter to the seventh round of talks.

Thus, 15 papers were submitted in response to four documents presented over the four days of the seventh round. These papers, the texts of which were obtained by Asharq Al-Awsat, revealed the depth of the gap between the parties.

State Symbols

Al-Kuzbari said in one of the documents: “Our delegation followed all the discussions that took place during the third day of the meeting on the principle of state symbols, as well as the proposals submitted by other parties about it. Our delegation expresses its dissatisfaction with any of the discussions or proposals presented to amend it, and affirms its adherence to the aforementioned principle, which states the following:

“The symbols of the Syrian Arab Republic represent higher national and well-established cultural values, and express its history, heritage and unity, and they are all unchangeable...

1- The flag of the Syrian Arab Republic consists of three colors: red, white and black. It has two green stars, each with five prongs. The flag has a rectangular shape, its width is two-thirds of its length, and consists of three rectangles of equal dimensions along the length of the flag, the top in red, the middle in white, and the bottom in black. The two stars are in the middle of the white rectangle.

2- “Humat ad-Diyar” is the national anthem of the Syrian Arab Republic.

3- Arabic is the official language of the Syrian Arab Republic.

4- The Syrian lira is the currency of the Syrian Arab Republic and the unit of measurement for its money.

5- The emblem of the Syrian Arab Republic is an Arab shield on which the national flag of the Syrian Arab Republic is engraved in its colors. The shield embraces an eagle holding in its claws a ribbon on which the “Syrian Arab Republic” is written in the Kufic script. At the bottom of the shield are two ears of wheat. The eagle, the ribbon, and the two ears of wheat shall be in golden color, and the writing and wing lines shall be in a light brown color.”

The delegation of the Negotiations Commission presented a document pertaining to state symbols, which read: “The history of the Syrian flag: it appears to the observer that it was subjected to alteration and modification several times, due to events or changes in the state, which, in the view of those concerned, required an alteration or modification, or a return to the adoption of another flag for a reason related to the context of historical events."

Since the Constitution is a text that has a spirit… there is a mutual influence relationship between the constitution and reality, a dialectical relationship represented in the impact of the political reality on the written texts, as well as the adaptation of the texts of the constitution to political developments…

We, in Syria, currently have two flags among the set of historical flags that are approved by millions of Syrians. A group believes that the independence flag (22/02/1932) represent them, while another group states that it is represented by the flag of unity (1/1/1958), which was adopted by [late Egyptian President] Gamal Abdel Nasser.

In our estimation, the revolution, which began with peaceful demonstrations since March 2011, has developed into what we all know. These events and circumstances deserve to be a reason to demand changing the flag again by more than half of the Syrian population.

Looking at the contexts of the Syrian constitutions, we find that the flag, slogan and anthem were referred to a special law that clarifies them:

- Article 6 of the 1950 Constitution states: “the emblem and national anthem of the Republic shall be designated by law.”

- In the 1973 Constitution, Article 6 states: “The law shall specify the state’s flag, emblem, anthem, and the provisions pertaining to each of them.”

The delegation of the Negotiations Commission added: “We are going through a historical stage that calls for change. As it is decided historically and in reality, there is no constitution that remains the same. Rather, it can vary with the change in the circumstances of the social contract that originally established it. We are undoubtedly facing the creation of a new social contract.”

State Identity

The document of the Damascus delegation stated: “Our delegation believes that there is no independent principle called "the identity of the state" in the constitutional sense, but principles or articles in the constitution that reflect this identity, however, to interact with the propositions and discussions that took place, we present the following modified vision":

“1 - Arabism is the basis, the historical origin and the unifying identity of all the people of the region, as well as the unifying framework for all the citizens of the Syrian Arab Republic, culturally, socially, civilly and humanly. It is not a choice governed by an interest or a goal, but rather an affiliation that is broader than being limited to race, religion, sect, language or interest.

2- The Arabic language is the official language of the Syrian Arab Republic. The state, with all its bodies, especially the educational, cultural and media institutions, guarantees its promotion and consolidation as one of the foundations of its national identity.

3 - The Syrian people, with their diverse social fabric, are an integral part of the Arab nation. They are proud of their Arab affiliation and are proud of their nation and its eternal civilizational message throughout history, in the face of all colonial, separatist and terrorist projects aimed at the disintegration of states.

4- The law criminalizes anyone who calls for the consolidation of subnational identities that affect the unity and security of society, and the constitution protects cultural diversity within the framework of national unity.”

Basics of Governance

The proposal submitted by the Negotiations Commission on Monday stated that the “system of governance in the state is republican based on the rule of law, respect for human dignity and the will of the people, and a full commitment to building a free, just and solidarity society.”

It added that sovereignty must be exercised by the people through the means of voting established in the constitution, “allowing them to freely and democratically express their will to choose who exercises power on their behalf, at the national and local levels, within the framework of political pluralism and the peaceful transfer of power.”

The document said that political parties are “an expression of political pluralism.” “Parties are established and they exercise their activities freely within the framework of the laws regulating their work, in a manner that does not conflict with the provisions of the Constitution.”

Al-Kuzbari presented a counter-paper, in which he stated: “Since the title presented by the other party, “Basics of Governance”, does not constitute a constitutional principle, and our delegation made this clear during the meetings, we present the following modified vision, based on a conceptual, not constitutional standpoint:

The Constitution preserves the political system of governance in the state. Any violation of it in any illegitimate way, especially through the use of force, threat of force, incitement, or encouragement of aggression against the state’s territory, communication with hostile parties, and dealing with any external party in any way that harms national interests, shall be condemned on charges of high treason.

“Loyalty to the state, its institutions, its Syrian Arab army and its armed forces is the duty of every citizen. Any intimidation against it, undermining its prestige or its role, or trying to change the structure of state institutions with the aim of weakening it, is a crime punishable by law.

“Political parties express political pluralism and contribute to the formation of the popular will. Any political activity outside the framework of licensed parties is prohibited by law. The creation and financing of parties and organizations is governed by national laws and regulations. Establishing parties, organizations or groupings on the basis of religious, sectarian, regional, ethnic or foreign allegiance is prohibited.”

In response to another paper, entitled, the Work of Institutions, the Damascus delegation presented a document, stating that the title was not a constitutional principle, and thus could not be discussed “before clearly defining the tasks and duties of the legislative, executive and judicial authorities, and the bodies and institutions emanating from them.”

Tension and Calm

The discussions that were taking place under Russian, American, regional and Western “censorship” saw tense and calm moments, amid an atmosphere that lacked warmth. Participants from Damascus stressed their “refusal of friendship or brotherhood.” There were calls to “focus on the richness of discussion and the evolvement of ideas, even with the lack of willingness to translate the progress of the dialogue into final proposals.”

Pedersen emphasized this last point, as he stated that he became “more optimistic at the end of the last session,” where he noticed a greater desire for discussion, dialogue and hearing opinions.

But he also pointed out that the gap remained wide and that the Committee should be governed by a sense of compromise and constructive engagement aimed at reaching a general agreement of its members, in line with the Terms of Reference and Core Rules of Procedure.

Pedersen said that he would soon seek, after consulting with the two co-chairs, to set the date of the next round in May, and that he would communicate with the government and the Negotiations Commission to develop more practical proposals to improve the process.

“Two-and-a-half years after the launching of the Constitutional Committee – an event that took nearly two years to bring about – there is a clear need for this commitment to be embodied in the Committee’s work, so that substantive issues begin to be bridged, and that the Committee begins to move substantively forward on its mandate to prepare and draft for popular approval a constitutional reform,” the UN envoy stated.



Report: Europe’s Options in the Strait of Hormuz Are Few and Risky

A cargo ship in the Gulf, near the Strait of Hormuz, as seen from northern Ras al-Khaimah, near the border with Oman’s Musandam, amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in United Arab Emirates, March 11, 2026. (Reuters file)
A cargo ship in the Gulf, near the Strait of Hormuz, as seen from northern Ras al-Khaimah, near the border with Oman’s Musandam, amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in United Arab Emirates, March 11, 2026. (Reuters file)
TT

Report: Europe’s Options in the Strait of Hormuz Are Few and Risky

A cargo ship in the Gulf, near the Strait of Hormuz, as seen from northern Ras al-Khaimah, near the border with Oman’s Musandam, amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in United Arab Emirates, March 11, 2026. (Reuters file)
A cargo ship in the Gulf, near the Strait of Hormuz, as seen from northern Ras al-Khaimah, near the border with Oman’s Musandam, amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in United Arab Emirates, March 11, 2026. (Reuters file)

When senior officials from 40 countries met virtually this week to discuss how to bring shipping traffic back to the Strait of Hormuz, Italy’s foreign minister had a proposal. He urged them to establish a “humanitarian corridor” allowing safe passage for fertilizer and other crucial goods headed to impoverished nations.

The plan, described after the meeting by Italian officials, was one of several competing proposals from Europe and beyond that were meant to prevent the Iran war from causing widespread hunger. But it was not endorsed by the envoys on the call, and the meeting ended with no concrete plan to reopen the strait, militarily or otherwise, reported the New York Times.

European leaders are under pressure from US President Donald Trump to commit military assets, immediately, to end Iran’s blockage of the strait and tame a growing global energy and economic crisis. They have refused to meet his demands by sending warships now. Instead, they are hotly debating what to do to help unclog the vital shipping lane once the war ends.

But they are struggling to rally around a plan of action.

That partly reflects the slow gears of diplomacy in Europe and the sheer number of nations, including Gulf states, that are invested in safeguarding the strait once the war ends. Many nations involved in the talks, including Italy and Germany, have insisted that any international effort be blessed by the United Nations, which could slow action further. Military leaders will take up the issue in discussions next week.

More than anything, the struggle reflects how difficult it could be to actually secure the strait under a fragile peace — for Europe or for anyone else. None of the options available to Europe, the Gulf states and other countries look foolproof, even under the assumption that the major fighting will have stopped.

Naval escorts

French officials, including President Emmanuel Macron, have repeatedly raised the possibility that French naval vessels could help escort merchant ships through the strait after the war ends.

American officials have pushed for Europeans and other allies, like Japan, to escort ships sailing under their own countries’ flags.

Naval escorts are expensive. Also, their air defense systems alone might not be sufficient to stop some types of attacks, like drone strikes, should Iran choose to start firing again.

“What does the world expect, what does Donald Trump expect, from let’s say a handful or two handfuls of European frigates there in the Strait of Hormuz,” Defense Minister Boris Pistorius of Germany said last month, “to achieve what the powerful American Navy cannot manage there alone?”

Sweep for mines

German and Belgian officials, among others, say they are prepared to send minesweepers to clear the strait of explosives after the war.

Western military leaders aren’t convinced that Iran has actually mined the strait, in part because some Iranian ships still pass through it. So while minesweepers might be deployed as part of a naval escort, they might not have much to do.

Help from above

Another option is sending fighter jets and drones to intercept any Iranian air assaults on ships. American officials have pushed Europe to do this.

It is quite expensive and still not guaranteed to work. Iran can attack ships with a single soldier in a speedboat, and if just a few attempts succeed, that could be enough to spook insurers and shipowners out of attempting passage.

Diplomacy

Another option are negotiations and economic leverage to pressure Iran to refrain from future attacks, and deploy a variety of military means to enforce that. This effort would go beyond Europe. On Thursday, the German foreign ministry called on China to use its influence with Iran “constructively” to help end the hostilities.

This option is expensive and still not guaranteed. Negotiations seem to have done little to stop the fighting. But this may be Europe’s best bet, for lack of a better one.

What if none of that works?

Iranian officials said this week that they would continue to control traffic through the strait after the war. They have already made plans to make ships pay tolls for passing through the strait, which is supposed to be an unfettered waterway under international law.

A continued blockage risks global economic disaster. Countries around the world rely on shipments through the strait for fuel and fertilizer, among other necessities.

In some regions, shortages loom. In others, like Europe, high oil, gas and fertilizer prices have raised the specter of spiking inflation and cratering economic growth.

“The big threat right now is stagflation,” said Hanns Koenig, a managing director at Aurora Energy Research, a Berlin consultancy. “You’ve got higher prices, and they strangle the tiny growth we would have seen this year.”

*Jim Tankersley for the New York Times


US Military Jets Hit in Iran War Are the First Shot Down by Enemy Fire in Over 20 Years

An F-15E Strike Eagle turns toward the Panamint range over Death Valley National Park, Calif., on Feb. 27, 2017. (AP)
An F-15E Strike Eagle turns toward the Panamint range over Death Valley National Park, Calif., on Feb. 27, 2017. (AP)
TT

US Military Jets Hit in Iran War Are the First Shot Down by Enemy Fire in Over 20 Years

An F-15E Strike Eagle turns toward the Panamint range over Death Valley National Park, Calif., on Feb. 27, 2017. (AP)
An F-15E Strike Eagle turns toward the Panamint range over Death Valley National Park, Calif., on Feb. 27, 2017. (AP)

Iran shooting down two American military jets marks an exceedingly rare assault for the US that has not happened in more than 20 years and shows Iran’s continued ability to hit back despite President Donald Trump asserting it has been “completely decimated.”

The attacks came five weeks after US and Israeli strikes first pounded Iran, with Trump saying earlier this week that Tehran's “ability to launch missiles and drones is dramatically curtailed."

Iran shot down a US F15-E Strike Eagle fighter jet Friday, with one service member getting rescued and the search still underway for a second, US officials say. Iranian state media also said a US A-10 attack aircraft crashed after being hit by Iranian defense forces.

The last time a US warplane was shot down by enemy fire in combat was an A-10 Thunderbolt II during the 2003 US invasion of Iraq, said retired Air Force Brig. Gen. Houston Cantwell, a former F-16 fighter pilot.

But, he said, that’s because the US had largely been fighting insurgents who didn’t have the same anti-aircraft capabilities. The fact that there have not been more fighter jets lost in Iran, Cantwell said, is a testament to the capabilities of US forces.

"The fact that this hasn’t happened until now is an absolute miracle,” said Cantwell, who served four combat tours and is now a senior resident fellow at the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies. “We’re flying combat missions here, they are being shot at every day.”

Shoulder-fired missile likely used, experts say

US Central Command said in a statement Wednesday that American forces have flown more than 13,000 missions in the Iran war while striking more than 12,300 targets.

After more than a month of punishing US-Israeli airstrikes, a degraded Iranian military nonetheless remains a stubborn foe. Its steady stream of strikes against Israel and Gulf Arab neighbors have been causing regional upheaval and global economic shock.

When it comes to American dominance over Iran's airspace, there’s still a distinction between air superiority and air supremacy, said Behnam Ben Taleblu, Iran program senior director at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a hawkish Washington think tank.

“A disabled air defense system is not a destroyed air defense system,” he said. “We shouldn’t be shocked that they’re still fighting.”

American planes have been flying missions at lower altitudes, which makes them more vulnerable to Iran's missiles, Taleblu said. It’s possible that Iran fired at the F-15 with a surface-to-air missile, but it's more likely that a portable, shoulder-fired missile was used, he said. Those are much harder to detect and reflect how Iran is “weak but still lethal.”

“This is a regime that is fighting for its life,” he said.

Mark Cancian, a retired Marine colonel and a senior defense adviser with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, agreed that a shoulder-fired missile was likely used against the fighter jet.

Nonetheless, the American air war against Iran has been a “tremendous success” so far, he said.

To put things in perspective, he said the loss rate for American warplanes flying over Germany during World War II was 3% at one point, which would equal about 350 warplanes in the US war against Iran.

“But then there’s the political side — you have an American public that is accustomed to fighting bloodless wars,” Cancian said. “Then a large part of the country doesn’t support the war. So to them, any loss is unacceptable.”

Pilots are trained on what to do if their plane is hit

The last US jet shot down in combat was struck by an Iraqi surface-to-air missile over Baghdad on April 8, 2003. The pilot safely ejected and was rescued, according to the Air Force.

In high-threat environments like missions over Iran, Cantwell, the retired general, said an aviator's blood pressure goes up and they become highly alert to incoming missiles. Those are typically either infrared- or radar-guided missiles, he said, requiring different evasive tactics.

If they are hit and need to eject from their aircraft, they are trained on what to do next, he said.

Pilots learn to check for wounds after a violent ejection and the shock of a missile explosion and, most crucially, how they are going to communicate their location so rescuers can find them.

At the same time, he said, the enemy is likely working to intercept the communications or even spoof the location.

Helicopters are more at risk than other aircraft

The planes that went down Friday were not the first crewed American aircraft to be lost overall in Iran.

A military helicopter and airplane exploded in 1980 during an aborted mission to rescue several dozen American hostages at the US embassy in Tehran, according to the Air Force Historical Support Division.

After a series of setbacks, including severe dust storms and mechanical failures, the mission was called off. As the aircraft took off, the rotor blades of one of the RH-53 helicopters collided with an EC-130 aircraft full of fuel and both exploded, killing eight.

More US helicopters have been shot down in recent decades, including a MH-47 Army Chinook helicopter that was struck by a rocket-propelled grenade in Afghanistan in 2005, killing 16. Helicopters are more dangerous because “the lower and the slower, the more susceptible you are,” Cantwell said.

That’s why those who went out on this week's rescue missions, likely in helicopters, he said, did “such a brave and honorable act.”


Iran Leaders Join Crowds on Tehran’s Streets to Project Control in Wartime

An Iranian flag is seen on a residential building that was damaged by recent strikes at Vahdat town in Karaj, southwest of Tehran on April 3, 2026. (AFP)
An Iranian flag is seen on a residential building that was damaged by recent strikes at Vahdat town in Karaj, southwest of Tehran on April 3, 2026. (AFP)
TT

Iran Leaders Join Crowds on Tehran’s Streets to Project Control in Wartime

An Iranian flag is seen on a residential building that was damaged by recent strikes at Vahdat town in Karaj, southwest of Tehran on April 3, 2026. (AFP)
An Iranian flag is seen on a residential building that was damaged by recent strikes at Vahdat town in Karaj, southwest of Tehran on April 3, 2026. (AFP)

After more than a month of being stalked by targeted assassinations, Iran's leadership has adopted a new tactic to show it is still in control - with senior officials walking openly in the streets among small crowds who have gathered in support of the regime.

In recent days, Iran's president and foreign minister have separately mixed with groups of several hundred people in central Tehran. On Tuesday, state television aired footage of the two posing for selfies, talking to members of the public and shaking hands with supporters who had gathered in public areas.

According to insiders and analysts, the appearances are part of a calculated effort by Iran's theocratic leadership to project resilience and authority — not only over the vital Strait of Hormuz but also over the population — despite a sustained US-Israeli campaign aimed at "obliterating" it.

One insider close to the hardline establishment said such public outings are intended to show that the regime is "unshaken by strikes and that it remains in control and vigilant" as the war grinds on.

The US-Israeli war ‌on Iran began on ‌February 28 with the killing of veteran Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and several senior military ‌commanders ⁠in waves of ⁠strikes that have since continued to target top officials.

Iran's new Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, has not been seen in public since taking over on March 8 from his father. Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi, meanwhile, was removed from Israel's hit list amid mediation efforts last month, including by Pakistan, to bring Tehran and Washington together for talks to end the war.

Talks aimed at ending the war have since appeared to have petered out, as Tehran brands US peace proposals "unrealistic". Against that backdrop, recent public appearances by President Masoud Pezeshkian and Araqchi appear designed to project defiance, if not a convincing display of public support.

A senior Iranian source said officials' public presence demonstrates that "the establishment is not intimidated by Israel's targeted killing of top Iranian ⁠figures".

Asked whether Iran's foreign minister or president were on any sort of kill list, an Israeli ‌military spokesperson, Nadav Shoshani, said on Friday he would not "speak about specific personnel."

NIGHTLY RALLIES TO ‌SHOW RESILIENCE

Despite widespread destruction, Tehran appears emboldened by surviving weeks of intense US-Israeli attacks, firing on Gulf countries hosting US troops and demonstrating its ability ‌to effectively block the Strait of Hormuz.

On Wednesday, US President Donald Trump vowed more aggressive strikes on Iran, without offering a timeline ‌for ending hostilities. Tehran responded by warning the United States and Israel that "more crushing, broader and more destructive" attacks were in store.

Encouraged by clerical rulers, supporters of the regime take to the streets each night, filling public squares to show loyalty even as bombs rain down across the country.

Analysts say the establishment is also seeking to raise the "political and reputational" cost of the strikes at a time when civilian casualties are deeply disturbing for Iranians.

Omid Memarian, ‌a senior Iran analyst at DAWN, a Washington-based think tank, said the decision to send officials into gatherings reflects a layered strategy, including an effort to sustain the morale of core supporters ⁠at a moment of acute pressure.

"The system ⁠relies heavily on this base; if its supporters withdraw from public space, its ability to project control and authority weakens significantly," Memarian said.

Speaking to state television, some in the crowds voice unwavering loyalty to Iran's leadership; others oppose the bombing of their country regardless of politics; and some have a stake in the system, including government employees, students and others whose livelihoods are tied to it.

Hadi Ghaemi, head of the New York-based Center for Human Rights in Iran, said the establishment is using such loyal crowds as human shields to raise the cost of any assassination attempts.

"By being in the middle of large crowds they have protections that would make Israeli-American attacks against them very bloody and generate sympathy worldwide," he said.

POTENTIAL PROTESTERS STAY OFF STREETS AT NIGHT

The Islamic republic emerged from a 1979 revolution backed by millions of Iranians. But decades of rule marked by corruption, repression and mismanagement have thinned that support, alienating many ordinary people.

While there has been little sign so far of anti-government protests that erupted in January and abated after a deadly crackdown, the establishment has adopted harsh measures, such as arrests, executions and large-scale deployment of security forces, to prevent any sparks of dissent.

Rights groups have warned about "rushed executions" during wartime after Iran hanged at least seven political prisoners during the war.

"Many potential protesters are frightened by the continuing presence of armed men and violent crowds in the streets and largely stay at home once darkness falls," Ghaemi said.