Who will determine the fate of Syria and its location? ... by: Amin Hutet.

Five months after the civil motion which contradict in its goals and contents, the image of the Syrian stances and possibilities of this solution's success became more clear, where we see:

1- The majority of the Syrian people whom did not respond to calls launched in other fields calling to take the streets, yet they kept their support for president Assad and his government, being certain that he is serious in leading a vast reform process that he initiated on many scales, and knows that such process require time to accomplish.

2- On the other hand, we find a group that believe in the democratic method  and the peaceful way of protesting and demonstrating, and they demand reforms in a faster way and do not recognize what's been decided of reformative actions. They are using the peaceful pressure policy until they reach the complete achievement,  avoiding touching the national security and stability as noted in many of its representative's positions, but this group's problem even though they gathered in many conferences inside and outside Syria, is that they do not own (or didn't present) a steady and clear vision to what Syria must become in the future, and how the peaceful transformation should be in their opinion, they even do not have the mutual confidence between each other, and ofcourse they have no united leadership that express a position they must follow.

3- The third group, express their presence with an armed movement that they use through what's known in the law science as armed rebellion and disobeying the government and placing their hands by force on its properties and blocking the freedom of other citizens and their rights... this group close the door on any attempt for dialogue or discussion, practicing the logic of "it is up to me" and the weapon is the judge.... This groups's members moved from Daraa to Douma, Homs, Tal Kalakh where the government _along with its security and military services- managed to prevent their plans success , and brought back security to the areas which faced terrorism... finally, the armed rebellion down sized to Hama and Der Azzour, where these organizations managed placing their hands over those cities and forced the country to deal with them.

Within this map of positions, a presidential declaration from the Security Council was brought to condemn the violence and call for a peaceful solution.. and here we ask a question... who has the right to draw Syria's fate?? the majority group which support reforms lead by the government, or the peaceful opposition group which have no united stand and gain a limited popular ground... or the armed groups which only see the weapon as a way for change... or maybe a longer wait for the international intervention???

We know that the armed group do not own a popular ground capable to allow them form the regime their want, so they resorted to using weapons to form it, and started betting -apparently- on a foreign intervention similar to Libya, and i think, the security council declaration disappointed them by stressing that the solution is in the hands of the Syrians, through dialogue... if they do not respond to it,  they will have to face two negatives, either refrain from using weapons and end the armed rebellion .. or waiting for the security and military forces to end it, taking into consideration that the foreign intervention door is shot.

As for the second group -the change and reform with peaceful means- they have the right to demand reforms, but they olso hold the right of the people on them to present a mechanism and a program and to dialogue in regard of this program so that its behavior could be close to reality, sanity and right mind.

In conclusion, and with impossible foreign intervention on the Syrian track, specially after knowing that the most that can be issued by the Security Council  is a declaration that is unbinding and confess the presence of those who use force against government institutions, and there is no solution but the political one made by Syrians -meaning, through dialogue, reform and change in peaceful means- therefore, we see that the horizon becoming blocked in the face of those who call for change using weapons, and misty in front of those who call for change without dialogue, and open in front of the majority clutching to the government and its reform process... so do the rest realize this reality or they will keep their obstinacy which lengthen the suffering of the Syrians until the government will end the rebellion and come to dialogue all those who are not convinced that it is the only way for solution that leads to reforms... taking into consideration, that some people' abstention  from responding doesn't mean that stability will not return, specially that what Syria had witnessed through its recovery path is the large part, and after the foreign intervention fell apart at the feet of the wise Syrian people.

The End..