Syria’s highly anticipated National Dialogue Conference promised to be a critical step toward defining the country’s post-Assad political trajectory. The agenda, which included discussions on topics ranging from transitional justice to economic principles, touched on meaningful and practical challenges facing the country. But the conference was hastily organized and failed to include representation from all of Syrian society. In addition, conference organizers’ lack of transparency has raised serious concerns regarding the real political intentions of caretaker authorities. At best, the conference was a starting-off point for Syrians to gather and freely discuss challenges and opportunities. At worst, however, the conference risked being a performative exercise in power consolidation. This not only represents a squandered opportunity for meaningful dialogue but also risks deepening societal divisions and exacerbating discord within key segments of Syrian society, further destabilizing an already fragile security situation.
Representation & inclusivity
Organizers did not clarify the criteria for inviting participants, who were notably around 80% male and absent of any representatives from the Self Administration. This opacity, coupled with some controversial invitations and notable omissions, raised significant concerns about the absence of a clear methodology and the fairness and inclusivity of the process. Many invitations were also sent with less than 24 hours’ notice, which severely limited the ability of key stakeholders—particularly those residing abroad—to attend and contribute meaningfully. Among other demographics, military representatives who hold undeniable political influence were entirely absent from proceedings. Syrian youth, too, were under-represented. One demographic that was well represented, though, were religious leaders, in what may have been intended to project a façade of diversity and inclusivity.
Geographically, invitations were unevenly distributed, with some regions receiving significantly fewer representatives than others. This imbalance meant that certain areas were under-represented in the discussions despite their political significance or societal diversity. For example, Rural Damascus, that played a crucial role in its resistance to the Assad regime for over a decade, received limited invitations compared to Damascus.
Discussions & political implications
The conference agenda itself promised to examine key challenges facing Syria, but the length of discussions and of the conference were always going to be insufficient. The three hour-allotments for discussion were not enough time for participants to discuss wide-ranging issues in detail, though the break-out sessions were reported to have been spaces for rich discussion. The results of these break-out sessions did not, however, appear to have been reflected in the final statement, which was ready for distribution upon participants’ return to the main hall—a suspiciously short turnaround time for a document that supposedly reflected the discussions and outcomes of the conference. Numerous participants reportedly raised concerns that it had been pre-prepared, reinforcing suspicions that the conference was primarily a public relations exercise. As ETANA highlighted previously, such a superficial process will not be enough to meaningfully address the political, economic and societal issues facing Syria.
As for the document itself, key democratic principles, such as democracy, a transition of power, a separation of powers and rule of law were conspicuously absent from the final statement, raising doubts about the commitment to establishing a democratic political system. Although the statement included reference to key rights, the vague wording of the declaration allows authorities to manipulate its interpretation to justify policy decisions that may diverge from the aspirations expressed during the conference. Furthermore, no structured framework for future engagement was outlined, leading to fears that this conference was merely a one-off event rather than the beginning of a sustained national dialogue.
Recommendations
The National Dialogue Conference, while framed as a landmark event in Syria’s political evolution, has failed to meet standards of inclusivity, transparency and democratic engagement. To ensure a credible and meaningful dialogue process, future efforts should include a transparent invitation process, inclusive participation, independent oversight, authentic documentation and concrete follow-up mechanisms. Without these key changes, any national dialogue process will be a hollow political gesture rather than offering meaningful bearing on Syria’s sensitive transitional process.
