10 Talking Points from Syria’s Parliamentary Elections

A woman casts her vote at a polling station in Damascus, Syria, July 19, 2020. (Reuters)
A woman casts her vote at a polling station in Damascus, Syria, July 19, 2020. (Reuters)
TT
20

10 Talking Points from Syria’s Parliamentary Elections

A woman casts her vote at a polling station in Damascus, Syria, July 19, 2020. (Reuters)
A woman casts her vote at a polling station in Damascus, Syria, July 19, 2020. (Reuters)

Syria’s recent parliamentary elections, the third since 2011, have revealed several changes that have taken place in the war-torn country. They have highlighted the emergence of warlords and showed their lack of transparency and disregard for the United Nations-sponsored peace process. The following are ten talking points from the polls:

1- Baath majority: Even though the current 2012 constitution eliminated the article that referred to the Baath as the “leader of the state and society”, the party still maintains its grip over the country. The party may have changed its name, but it kept its role in naming Baath candidates and the parties that are qualified to ally themselves with it. The party leadership submitted 183 candidates, including 166 Baathists, who became uncontested winners regardless of the vote. This narrowed down the “competition” to “independent” candidates, ranging from businessmen to warlords, vying for the remaining 67 seats in the People’s Council.

2- Geneva process: Since the eruption of anti-regime protests in 2011, Damascus has stuck to its military, political, economic and electoral paths. It organized parliamentary elections in 2012 and 2016, amended the constitution in 2012 and held presidential elections based on it in 2014. The third parliamentary elections reflect Damascus’ continued commitment to its “path” away from the ongoing political process taking place in Geneva that is aimed at implementing UN Security Council resolution 2254. The Baath’s continued control of the majority of parliament is a given and will ensure that it holds final say over any reforms or constitutional amendments. It will also hold sway over any candidate seeking to run for president whereby a nomination needs the approval of 35 lawmakers in order to be eligible. The same thing happened in 2014 and will happen again for the 2021 polls.

3- Presidential elections: It was clear that Damascus was not seeking to widen any margin for fresh faces for the parliamentary elections, which raises questions about next year’s presidential polls. The 2021 elections may face the same fate as the parliamentary ones unless the United States and Russia reach a regional understanding or an agreement is reached in Geneva on the polls.

4- Area and control: The parliamentary elections were held even though the regime does not control the whole of Syrian territories. American, Russian, Turkish and Iranian forces are currently deployed in Syria where the regime controls some 63 percent of territories. These four armies control the rest. Significantly, Israel carried out a series of air strikes, including against the Mezzeh military airport, as the ballots were being counted.

5- Voter turnout: According to the current constitution, military and security personnel are allowed to participate in the parliamentary elections. Syrians residing outside the country are not, but they can take part in the presidential polls. Witnesses said that as a result the voter turnout was very low. How will Damascus justify this? Will it blame the coronavirus outbreak or terrorist attacks?”

6- Familiar faces: Preliminary estimates showed that half of the new faces of parliament will be first-time members. Many stalwarts of the council will be absent, such as businessman Mohammed Hamsho, who withdrew his candidacy two days before the elections at the Baath’s behest. The elections sprung a surprise with the defeat of Aleppo businessman Fares al-Shehabi. Notably missing in Homs was major lawmaker Abdulaziz Trad al-Melhem, who usually opened parliament sessions.

7- War profiteers: Significant among the new faces at parliament are the war profiteers who amassed their wealth during the conflict. They include Hussam Qaterji from Aleppo and Bilal Niaal and Omar Khaity, who rose to prominence in the trade business in the Damascus countryside. Others include Alain Bakr in Aleppo, Ammar al-Assad in Latakia and Badi al-Droubi in Homs. Mohammed Hammam Msouti continued to make a name for himself at Hamsho’s expense.

8- Warlords: The parliamentary elections highlighted the rising influence of faction and militia commanders who have fought alongside the regime since 2011. Among them are Bassem Soudan, head of the “Baath Brigade” in Latakia, whose brother heads the Syrian branch of Hezbollah. Others include Hussam Qaterji, whose family is embroiled in trade and fighting, Omar Hassan, commander of the “Baqer unit”, in Aleppo, and Fadel Warda, former commander of the “national defense forces” in Hama.

9- Sectarian representation: According to an American research center, Alawite representation at the 250-member parliament rose to 39. Sunnis now occupy 171 seats, Christians 23 and Shiites five.

10- Criticism: Losers in the elections began to make criticism even before the final electoral results were announced. The businessman Fares al-Shehabi, who is known for his loyalty to Damascus, blamed his defeat on corrupt figures and warlords. This was understood as a reference to Qaterji and members of the Berri family. Artist Bashar Ismail, another defeated candidate, blamed his loss on “political money.”



What to Know about the Tensions between Iran and the US before Their Third Round of Talks

The flags of US and Iran are displayed in Muscat, Oman, 25 April 2025. Iran and US will hold third round of nuclear talks on 26 April 2025, in Muscat. (EPA)
The flags of US and Iran are displayed in Muscat, Oman, 25 April 2025. Iran and US will hold third round of nuclear talks on 26 April 2025, in Muscat. (EPA)
TT
20

What to Know about the Tensions between Iran and the US before Their Third Round of Talks

The flags of US and Iran are displayed in Muscat, Oman, 25 April 2025. Iran and US will hold third round of nuclear talks on 26 April 2025, in Muscat. (EPA)
The flags of US and Iran are displayed in Muscat, Oman, 25 April 2025. Iran and US will hold third round of nuclear talks on 26 April 2025, in Muscat. (EPA)

Iran and the United States will hold talks Saturday in Oman, their third round of negotiations over Tehran’s rapidly advancing nuclear program.

The talks follow a first round held in Muscat, Oman, where the two sides spoke face to face. They then met again in Rome last weekend before this scheduled meeting again in Muscat.

Trump has imposed new sanctions on Iran as part of his “maximum pressure” campaign targeting the country. He has repeatedly suggested military action against Iran remained a possibility, while emphasizing he still believed a new deal could be reached by writing a letter to Iran’s 85-year-old Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei to jumpstart these talks.

Khamenei has warned Iran would respond to any attack with an attack of its own.

Here’s what to know about the letter, Iran’s nuclear program and the tensions that have stalked relations between Tehran and Washington since the 1979 revolution.

Why did Trump write the letter? Trump dispatched the letter to Khamenei on March 5, then gave a television interview the next day in which he acknowledged sending it. He said: “I’ve written them a letter saying, ‘I hope you’re going to negotiate because if we have to go in militarily, it’s going to be a terrible thing.’”

Since returning to the White House, the president has been pushing for talks while ratcheting up sanctions and suggesting a military strike by Israel or the US could target Iranian nuclear sites.

A previous letter from Trump during his first term drew an angry retort from the supreme leader.

But Trump’s letters to North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in his first term led to face-to-face meetings, though no deals to limit Pyongyang’s atomic bombs and a missile program capable of reaching the continental US.

How did the first round go? Oman, a sultanate on the eastern edge of the Arabian Peninsula, hosted the first round of talks between Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and US Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff. The two men met face to face after indirect talks and immediately agreed to this second round in Rome.

Witkoff later made a television appearance in which he suggested 3.67% enrichment for Iran could be something the countries could agree on. But that’s exactly the terms set by the 2015 nuclear deal struck under US President Barack Obama, from which Trump unilaterally withdrew America.

Witkoff hours later issued a statement underlining something: “A deal with Iran will only be completed if it is a Trump deal.” Araghchi and Iranian officials have latched onto Witkoff’s comments in recent days as a sign that America was sending it mixed signals about the negotiations.

Yet the Rome talks ended up with the two sides agreeing to starting expert-level talks this Saturday. Analysts described that as a positive sign, though much likely remains to be agreed before reaching a tentative deal.

Why does Iran’s nuclear program worry the West? Iran has insisted for decades that its nuclear program is peaceful. However, its officials increasingly threaten to pursue a nuclear weapon. Iran now enriches uranium to near weapons-grade levels of 60%, the only country in the world without a nuclear weapons program to do so.

Under the original 2015 nuclear deal, Iran was allowed to enrich uranium up to 3.67% purity and to maintain a uranium stockpile of 300 kilograms (661 pounds). The last report by the International Atomic Energy Agency on Iran’s program put its stockpile at 8,294.4 kilograms (18,286 pounds) as it enriches a fraction of it to 60% purity.

US intelligence agencies assess that Iran has yet to begin a weapons program, but has “undertaken activities that better position it to produce a nuclear device, if it chooses to do so.”

Ali Larijani, an adviser to Iran’s supreme leader, has warned in a televised interview that his country has the capability to build nuclear weapons, but it is not pursuing it and has no problem with the International Atomic Energy Agency’s inspections. However, he said if the US or Israel were to attack Iran over the issue, the country would have no choice but to move toward nuclear weapon development.

“If you make a mistake regarding Iran’s nuclear issue, you will force Iran to take that path, because it must defend itself,” he said.

Why are relations so bad between Iran and the US? Iran was once one of the US’s top allies in the Middle East under Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, who purchased American military weapons and allowed CIA technicians to run secret listening posts monitoring the neighboring Soviet Union. The CIA had fomented a 1953 coup that cemented the shah’s rule.

But in January 1979, the shah, fatally ill with cancer, fled Iran as mass demonstrations swelled against his rule. The revolution followed, led by Khomeini, and created Iran’s theocratic government.

Later that year, university students overran the US Embassy in Tehran, seeking the shah’s extradition and sparking the 444-day hostage crisis that saw diplomatic relations between Iran and the US severed. The Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s saw the US back Saddam Hussein. The “Tanker War” during that conflict saw the US launch a one-day assault that crippled Iran at sea, while the US later shot down an Iranian commercial airliner that the American military said it mistook for a warplane.

Iran and the US have see-sawed between enmity and grudging diplomacy in the years since, with relations peaking when Tehran made the 2015 nuclear deal with world powers. But Trump unilaterally withdrew America from the accord in 2018, sparking tensions in the Middle East that persist today.