Recently, there has been an increase in data indicating that the policies of many regional countries have begun to tend to re-float the regime, and some of them require some changes in their behavior, and others seek to invite him to integrate some of the opposition that is calculated to be by its side.
The situation here is, even the most hostile countries to the regime at the beginning of the revolution did not actually seek to overthrow it as much as they called for what they called an “orderly transition”, in addition to the desire for many of them to destroy the economic and human capabilities of Syria.
This proportional acceptance of these countries for the survival and continuity of the regime is accompanied exponentially by the “successive deflections”, if it’s not a confusion in most cases in the positions and policies of all the classical, devoted bourgeois, secular and Islamic opposition parties. Which, most of them, have already mortgaged themselves since the beginning of the revolution to the policies of regional and international countries and to the interests of the latter, and have practically turned into mere cards to play with as they wish, and the past ten years are full of evidence of that.
In general, there is stubbornness on the part of these “opposition” political parties, limiting the political action opposing the junta regime into the context of the Negotiating commission and the Constitutional Committee, and some of them calling for dialogue, and sometimes they call it a direct negotiation with the regime. For this purpose, meaning, for the purpose of what they call a “political solution”, they have professionally taken up traveling and trying to meet with embassies and officials of the major and effective countries, and even the least effective ones in the Syrian situation. This means that almost the only context for its activity is limiting the “opposition” political action within a tire of diplomatic communication. In order to turn these “opposition” entities into something like embassies, which doesn’t express a real physical reality, nor the interests of the Syrian people in freedom, liberation, and sovereignty, as much as it comes in response to the demands of regional and international countries.
Thus, the political action in general, and the oppositional in particular, loses its true meaning and its actual presence extent, which is interaction and work with people and reality, no matter how difficult and harsh the circumstances are, and working to change it through policies and activities that organize people and raises their awareness about the common demands and goals, and clear policies and strategies to achieve these goals.
This confinement to work only diplomatically does not exclude such opposition, because it is not only one opposition, from its effectiveness, but exacerbates the common frustration among people and the people’s disgust with such opposition and political action in general. On the other hand, because it turns political action into a state of inertia and a field for sustenance and corruption, brokerage, and manipulating.
Without the need for repeat describing the reality behind the Syrian situation, and the experience proves that to the point of bluntness, that the junta regime is unreformable, and that such opposition is in a samewise situation. No good is expected from it. Each one sees the other one identically in the mirror
In order to get out of this generalized political nonsense, we believe that the serious groupings of democratic and radical leftist forces that have not yet been contaminated by this despicable opportunism must first agree that their field of activity and work is outside this disgusting epidemic that came as the culmination of the victory of the multilateral counter-revolutionary. And that its two fields of action are in working to unify its activity on the basis of a clear program of work on specific issues imposed by the Syrian situation and to defend the interests of the public crowd, More importantly, is to be engaged with people, and organize them and raise their awareness level, in facing both the regime and its bourgeois opposition along with the occupations. with these foundations, then it is possible to mobilize and build alliances among them, clear alliances, democracy, and struggle.
Accordingly, we still see the need to unify the efforts of the militant left in a united front, because his independent voice is important and necessary in the struggle of our people, and because this allows him to have a more notable presence, and a larger, guarantor, centralized role in the necessary radical democratic alliances to confront this general rotting that afflicts our countries at all levels: economic, social and cultural, as well as the countries independence and unity.
There is no doubt that the weakness of the radical left, despite our presence and activity since the establishment ten years ago, constituted one of the factors that allowed the inconsistent bourgeois opposition to occupy the opposition scene with the support of regional and international countries.
Therefore, we focus in our policies on the importance of working to regain for the radical left to regain its prominent role and activity. This is what our people and our country need. This is what we have been steadily calling for by forming a united front for the Syrian militant left.
At a time where the revolutionary left movement adheres to its compass and its goal in political, organizational, and militant work, and attaches paramount and central importance to building the radical mass labor party.
The revolutionary left