‘Syria opposition talks just political posturing’

Press TV has conducted an interview with Eric Draitser, the founder of Stopimperialism.org, from New York City, to shed more light on the Geneva II talks and the prospect of peace in Syria.

The following is an approximate transcript of the interview.

Press TV: Should we be happy that at least negotiations of some sorts have started or are you pessimistic about this process?

Draitser: I am pessimistic about the process because the process itself is kind of a joke because we all understand; we have been following what has happened in Syria for the last three years, that the so-called opposition that claims to be, actually, representing the Syrian people, has no real authority on the ground. Authority on the ground is asserted by Jihadi factions, whether it is the ISIL organization or Jibhat al-Nusrah or any of the other organizations, they will be authority on the ground, they are the ones who take the territory, they are the ones who commit the atrocities and they are the ones who, really are the opposition. Those who are representing the opposition in Switzerland, they are merely the handpicked puppets of the United States. They act as if they are representing the Syrian people, when in fact they represent the interest of the United States and NATO and Israel and so the talks that are happening there, the government came from Damascus with the intent of at least presenting themselves as being willing to negotiate but knowing very well that the war continues on the ground and that whatever substantive discussions are held in Geneva, are really just that discussions.

Press TV: If these talks are not the way forward, then what is the way forward?

Draitser: Well. Part of what the Syrian government proposed at the talks and I am not saying that the talks have no value at all, they do have a value but as long as the opposition is unwilling to come together against terrorism and against the foreign elements that are financing this war on Syria, until such time that is going to happen, then the war continues.

What the Syrian government proposed was the idea that there could be certain ceasefires with certain conditions and this is of course constructive, but again, who is going to honor these ceasefires on the ground? If the Syrian government is able to guarantee a safe passage out of a city like Homs or Aleppo, who is going to stand up from the opposition and say that they are going to guarantee the same thing?

This is an unequal equation that we are looking at. So again, when we talk about the talks, this is more of a diplomatic posturing rather than it is anything substantive.