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.



Why Is a ‘Very Close’ Iran-US Deal Taking So Long?

A man walks past Iran's national flag at the Vanak Square in Tehran on June 10, 2026. (AFP)
A man walks past Iran's national flag at the Vanak Square in Tehran on June 10, 2026. (AFP)
TT

Why Is a ‘Very Close’ Iran-US Deal Taking So Long?

A man walks past Iran's national flag at the Vanak Square in Tehran on June 10, 2026. (AFP)
A man walks past Iran's national flag at the Vanak Square in Tehran on June 10, 2026. (AFP)

President Donald Trump has repeatedly declared Iran and the US are on the verge of agreeing a deal to end the Middle East war, but a litany of sticking points have delayed finalizing an accord and will complicate its implementation, analysts say.

Trump has been widely mocked in US and Iran for frequently insisting an end to the conflict was imminent even as negotiations dragged on for weeks, with US network CNN saying he had used phrases like "very close to a deal" or in the "final throes" of talks on 39 occasions.

In what has become a familiar pattern, Trump on Thursday withdrew a threat of renewed strikes on Iran and said a deal could be signed in the coming days, only for Iran's foreign ministry to respond by saying it "has not reached a final conclusion on the agreement".

Arash Azizi, lecturer at Yale University, told AFP that one reason the deal has taken so long is that the Iranian side believed "they could hold out to get better terms" after not capitulating during the conflict.

Trump, meanwhile, "could hardly stomach" releasing Iran's frozen assets -- a key demand of Tehran -- and also risked facing accusations the accord would be more favorable to Iran than the 2015 nuclear deal he pulled out of during his first term, he added.

Trump "had to accept that his initial gambit of causing an Iranian capitulation by sheer military force didn't work and he had to settle for something much less", said Azizi.

Both Iran and the United States would appear to have vested interests in ending a conflict that saw five weeks of all-out war, paused by an uneasy ceasefire on April 8.

The US-Israeli war has become increasingly unpopular in the US, even among the president's core supporters, with Trump mindful of the looming US midterm elections.

A deal could also see Tehran win the security guarantees and recognition it has long craved from the US and ensure the personal safety of its own leadership, after former supreme leader Ali Khamenei and several top officials were killed in the first phase of the war.

But any negotiation -- in this case mediated by Pakistan as well as Qatar -- between two foes who have been sworn enemies since shortly after the 1979 revolution was never going to be easy.

- 'Frozen war' with 'flare-ups' -

Iran's new leadership structure after the killing of Ali Khamenei has likely proved problematic, with the extent of the power wielded by his successor and son Mojtaba Khamenei still unclear. He is said by Iranian officials to have been wounded and has yet to appear in public.

Trump's own pronouncements have also changed with startling rapidity, most notably on Thursday when he threatened to hit Iran "very hard" before predicting that a "great settlement" was near.

Trump, in a Truth Social post Friday, appeared to again be losing patience, describing the Iranian side as "very dishonorable people to deal with".

"Trump has neither a clear strategic objective nor a credible exit strategy for extricating the United States from the war with Iran," said Ali Alfoneh, a senior fellow at the Arab Gulf States Institute (AGSI).

He said a key obstacle was Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has opposed any Iran-US deal and on Friday again vowed "Iran will not have nuclear weapons".

The Iranian authorities, meanwhile, have "sensed Trump's reluctance to enter the midterm election season burdened by an unpopular war", and seek above all an enduring peace without US aggression, said Alfoneh.

"The conflict has already taken on the characteristics of a frozen war, punctuated by periodic flare-ups," he added.

- 'Tremendous leverage' -

Iran has always insisted that any deal include Lebanon, where Israel has been attacking the Tehran-backed group Hezbollah, which has been further weakened but not eradicated.

A White House official said on Friday that Iran had agreed to dismantle its nuclear program, which the West fears is aimed at making a nuclear weapon -- a commitment that has yet to be confirmed by Tehran.

Critical will be the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz shipping bottleneck, which Iran blockaded at the start of the war in a move that caused global energy prices to surge.

Iran "will not forget the tremendous leverage it gained by closing it," Thomas Juneau, professor at the University of Ottawa, wrote in a study for London-based think tank Chatham House.

"It will not hesitate to consider closing the Strait again if it perceives it to be necessary."


What to Know About the Growing Opposition to Trump Family-Linked Resort in Albania

A drone view shows people during a protest against a luxury resort, a plan by a company linked to Donald Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, on an environmentally sensitive part of the Adriatic coast, in Zvernec near Vlora, Albania June 6, 2026. (Reuters)
A drone view shows people during a protest against a luxury resort, a plan by a company linked to Donald Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, on an environmentally sensitive part of the Adriatic coast, in Zvernec near Vlora, Albania June 6, 2026. (Reuters)
TT

What to Know About the Growing Opposition to Trump Family-Linked Resort in Albania

A drone view shows people during a protest against a luxury resort, a plan by a company linked to Donald Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, on an environmentally sensitive part of the Adriatic coast, in Zvernec near Vlora, Albania June 6, 2026. (Reuters)
A drone view shows people during a protest against a luxury resort, a plan by a company linked to Donald Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, on an environmentally sensitive part of the Adriatic coast, in Zvernec near Vlora, Albania June 6, 2026. (Reuters)

A massive coastal development project linked to Jared Kushner, the son-in-law of US President Donald Trump, is facing growing resistance from protesters in Albania.

Thousands of protesters are taking to the streets in nightly protests, blowing whistles and holding up cardboard cut-outs of flamingos — one of the protected migratory bird species that could see their habitats threatened by the proposed luxury resort.

The government says the development on the Adriatic coast would be transformational for the former communist nation as it seeks to enter the high-end tourism market and pushes for European Union membership.

But the venture, spanning an abandoned island and a nearby stretch of seafront on Albania’s southern coast, has drawn opposition from environmental campaigners and critics of longtime Socialist Prime Minister Edi Rama.

Outside forces blamed for anger

In an interview with The Associated Press, Rama vowed not to “step back” from the development and defended his administration's environmental record. He insisted the protests were being encouraged by malicious cyber activists overseas.

“There is a lot of manipulation. There are a lot of half-truths that become bigger and bigger lies by the hour,” Rama said, accusing Iran of targeting his government.

The allegations, which Rama has made for several years, followed a dispute with Albania after it sheltered members of an Iranian opposition group in 2022. Iran has denied the claims.

Despite Rama's defense of the development, the protests have gathered pace, with supporters in Albanian communities in neighboring Greece and other European countries also holding rallies.

A drone view of protesters waving Albanian National flags during a protest against a luxury resort, a plan by a company linked to US President Donald Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, on an environmentally sensitive part of the Adriatic coast, in Tirana, Albania, June 10, 2026. (Reuters)

Kushner and Ivanka Trump found the site on a barefoot hike

The luxury project has two components: a coastal development in the Narta Lagoon area, which is a wildlife reserve, and a smaller resort on the nearby uninhabited island of Sazan, a communist-era military base.

The planned development of hotels, apartments, villas and a marina is linked to Kushner and Trump’s daughter, Ivanka Trump. An investment firm linked to Kushner has been granted special investor status by Albanian authorities.

In an interview this week with US podcaster David Senra, Ivanka Trump said they discovered the site by accident.

“We were on a friend’s boat, and we stopped for a swim. Effectively, that’s how we found it,” she said. “We swam to the island. We went on a hike, barefoot all the way up to the top, and we were just captivated.”

Harsh communist rule and pristine beaches

Albania has 450 kilometers (280 miles) of coast that remained largely underdeveloped during decades of harsh communist rule.

Protest groups fear sections of that pristine coastline could be snapped up by powerful investors. And public anger grew after video showed an activist being dragged by a private security guard while demonstrating at the site.

The development is planned within a nature reserve and one of Albania’s most valuable biodiversity areas, a key stopover for migratory birds along the Adriatic coast.

Since late May, excavators and other heavy machinery have entered the area, opening access routes, digging into the sand, clearing land among pine trees and installing fencing.

Environmental groups from Albania and elsewhere in Europe condemned the work, with one prominent local group charging that long-protected habitats are being “irreversibly destroyed.”

Albanian Prime Minister Edi Rama speaks during an interview with The Associated Press in Tirana, Albania, Tuesday, June 9, 2026. (APi)

A multibillion-dollar bonanza?

Albania’s state anti-corruption agency has confirmed it opened an investigation related to the project but has not disclosed details.

The government says the land earmarked for the project is privately owned. But competing claims have emerged questioning the privatization.

Rama has committed to the venture, saying it would align with Albania’s ambition to become a major global tourism destination.

“Albania should not be a country that fears an extraordinary project like this one, where exceptional partners have come together to invest 4 billion euros ($4.6 billion),” Rama said.

He added: “There is no chance for this investment to stop as long as I am here.”

However, the demise of a similar project in Serbia offers a cautionary tale. In November, Serbia's Parliament passed a special law to enable the building of a luxury complex in the capital, Belgrade, to be financed by an investment company linked to Kushner.

The following month, Serbia's prosecutor for organized crime charged four people, including a government minister, with abuse of office and falsifying of documents to help pave the way for the development.

Kushner later withdrew from the planned multimillion investment that would have replaced a sprawling bombed-out military complex, a designated heritage zone whose legal protection was lifted by the former officials now on trial.


Kharg... A Pivotal Island for Iran

This handout image taken by the European Space Agency (ESA) captured by the Copernicus Sentinel-2 satellite shows a view of Iran's Kharg Island. (Photo by EUROPEAN SPACE AGENCY / AFP)
This handout image taken by the European Space Agency (ESA) captured by the Copernicus Sentinel-2 satellite shows a view of Iran's Kharg Island. (Photo by EUROPEAN SPACE AGENCY / AFP)
TT

Kharg... A Pivotal Island for Iran

This handout image taken by the European Space Agency (ESA) captured by the Copernicus Sentinel-2 satellite shows a view of Iran's Kharg Island. (Photo by EUROPEAN SPACE AGENCY / AFP)
This handout image taken by the European Space Agency (ESA) captured by the Copernicus Sentinel-2 satellite shows a view of Iran's Kharg Island. (Photo by EUROPEAN SPACE AGENCY / AFP)

Islands under Iran's control, spanning from the northern Arabian Gulf to the entrance of the Strait of Hormuz, have returned to the forefront of the war as part of direct military calculations.

These islands gain additional importance as potential points for engagement in a new phase of the war, shifting the battlefield to energy warfare and transit control.

At the heart of this map stands Kharg Island, which US President Donald Trump had threatened to seize, considering it the lifeline for Iranian oil exports. Meanwhile, other islands serve functions of controlling transit, military fortification, and advanced strategic positioning on one of the world's most sensitive maritime passages.

Kharg Island is an 8-kilometer-long coral island in the Arabian Gulf, located approximately 43 kilometers off the mainland and about 500 kilometers northwest of the Strait of Hormuz. It is the terminus for pipelines coming from Iran's oil fields in the central and western parts of the country. It was established by the giant American oil company Amoco and seized by Iran during the 1979 revolution.

Kharg Island occupies an exceptional position in Iran's strategic structure, serving as the lifeline for the majority of Iranian crude exports. It is located in the northern Gulf off the Iranian coast, making it close enough to the Iranian mainland to remain under the umbrella of its fires, missile, and drone capabilities.

Its importance stems primarily from its direct economic function. The island houses the terminal through which almost all of Iran's oil exports pass, securing the largest share of the state's crude revenues. During the ongoing war, it quickly became a prominent target in military discussions, as striking it would impact one of the state's most vital funding sources.

The Most Important Gateway

The island developed during Iran's oil boom in the 1960s and 1970s because large parts of the Iranian coast were too shallow to allow supertankers to dock. Hence, with its deep harbors and terminals, the island became the most important gateway for Iranian oil exports, especially to Asian markets, particularly China.

Theoretically, any American control could choke a vital financial artery for the regime and give Washington leverage to compel Tehran to keep the Strait of Hormuz open. Moreover, due to its location, the island could, in such a scenario, turn into an advanced platform for military pressure on the Iranian mainland. However, this temptation is met with significant obstacles.

Seizure would require stationing American forces on a small island very close to the Iranian coast, meaning within range of Iranian drones, missiles, and mobile artillery, and the potential use of mines and fast boats. Thus, an attacking force could quickly become a fixed target vulnerable to attrition.

Furthermore, retaining the island after forces enter it would require constant air cover, advanced air defense systems, and protected supply lines by sea and air. Tehran has increased its fortifications on Kharg in recent weeks, sending additional personnel and deploying air defense assets, alongside reports of mines around the island.

Significant Strategic Advantages

It also threatened to target American forces if they attempted to enter the island, and to strike the energy infrastructure of companies dealing with the United States if its oil facilities were targeted.

The island includes storage tanks, housing for thousands of workers, and has a clear civilian presence. It also contains an old Portuguese fortress and the ruins of an early Christian monastery in the Gulf.

The Washington Post said on Thursday that for the US, capturing the island would give the United States significant strategic advantages, including potentially choking off Tehran’s ability to pay its military.

Despite intensive strikes launched by the United States and Israel against targets inside Iran, Kharg Island, the most important center for Iranian oil exports, has remained off the list of these strikes so far; experts warn that striking it could cause a catastrophic collapse in global markets.

Threat to Strike the Island

Trump had repeatedly threatened to launch strikes on the island's oil infrastructure if Tehran did not stop its attacks on ships in the Strait of Hormuz, a warning observers said could heighten market tensions already suffering unprecedented supply disruptions.

Trump had stated during the bombing of Iran that the United States had completely destroyed military targets on the island. He added that the American strikes had not targeted the oil infrastructure on Kharg Island, but he wrote that if Iran or anyone else does anything to interfere with the free and safe passage of ships through the Strait of Hormuz, he will immediately reconsider this decision.

Centcom said US forces had struck more than 90 Iranian military targets on the island, “while preserving the oil infrastructure.”

The regional military command unit said it had destroyed naval mine storage facilities, missile storage bunkers and numerous other military sites.