Why is the Syrian political opposition clinging to Resolution 2254? 

PARIS — The Istanbul-based National Coalition of Syrian Revolution and Opposition Forces announced its support on Monday for the interim government in Damascus formed at the direction of Ahmad al-Sharaa (Abu Muhammad al-Jolani)—the leader of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS)—following the overthrow of the Assad regime on December 8. 

The opposition body called the government, led by caretaker Prime Minister Muhammad al-Bashir, “necessary as a temporary executive authority to operate state institutions and deliver services to the people until early March.” Al-Bashir led the HTS-backed Salvation Government in Syria’s northwestern Idlib province before al-Sharaa tasked him with overseeing the current government in Damascus. 

The Monday statement also emphasized the National Coalition “rejects any guardianship” over Syria while calling for the implementation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 2254 of 2015, which lays out a roadmap for a political transition in Syria. 

The National Coalition was established in November 2012 following disagreements within the Syrian National Council—the first political body representing the opposition at home and abroad after the start of the revolution in 2011. The following year, Qatar sponsored the formation of the National Coalition as the opposition’s highest political authority. A number of institutions and bodies fall under it, including the Syrian Interim Government (SIG). 

The National Coalition’s most recent statement followed an earlier declaration in which it welcomed the final statement of a December 14 meeting of the Arab Ministerial Contact Committee on Syria in Aqaba, Jordan. 

That meeting had sparked controversy among many Syrians, including opposition politicians such as Burhan Ghalioun, the former chairman of the Syrian National Council. The following day, Ghalioun posted on social media saying the meeting signaled “a desire to impose guardianship, and appears much more like a conspiracy than a desire to show solidarity and support for Syrians.” 

At the same time, Syrians launched a social media campaign against the National Coalition on social media, saying the body did not represent them and questioning its reasoning for adhering to Resolution 2254 following the overthrow of Assad through armed resistance, not negotiation. 

The final statement of the Aqaba meeting—attended by Arab countries including Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Lebanon, Egypt, Bahrain and Qatar—pointed to the need for a transition process to a new Syrian government and constitution in accordance with Resolution 2254. The December 2015 resolution calls on representatives of “the Syrian government and the opposition” to engage in formal negotiations on a political transition. 

The resolution “does not currently apply to the situation in Syria, except as a roadmap for the formation of a transitional governing body tasked with transitioning to a national state of good governance, with a constitution and elections within a set timeframe,” Yahya al-Aridi, a former member of the National Coalition’s High Negotiations Committee, told Syria Direct. 

Implementing the resolution in its current form—on the basis of negotiations between the opposition and a regime that no longer exists—is not the intent, he added. Rather, the resolution could serve as a basis for a “Syrian-Syrian dialogue, with the participation of the full spectrum, including trustworthy individuals, technocrats, experts, patriots—people with clean records who can build,” al-Aridi said. 

Ghalioun also held that any implementation of Resolution 2254 would involve “updating it,” as he put it. “In other words, there will be no negotiations between the regime and opposition, but rather between the Syrian people.”

Syrian political opposition institutions “have an interest in [2254] being the reference for any political transition,” Ghalioun said. “Without this resolution, [these entities] will not exist” in the future, he added. 

Bypassing 2254?

While many Syrians read Resolution 2254 through the lens of negotiations between the regime and opposition, it includes other relevant clauses such as drafting a new constitution and holding free and fair elections in accordance with it. 

The formation of al-Bashir’s interim government is “a period of quasi political transition, which is important,” al-Aridi said. This government’s task is to “achieve safety, security and stability, and to address day-to-day issues at all levels, thereby paving the way for a transitional governing body entrusted with the tasks laid out in 2254,” he added. 

Regional and international actors are also invested in Resolution 2254. “Many countries have an interest in the resolution being the point of reference, and will not grant legitimacy to the new system except on this foundation,” Ghalioun said. 

“After the Aqaba summit, and statements by Western countries, the resolution cannot be bypassed. It is the only way for the countries concerned to participate in building the new system,” Ghalioun added. Abandoning it would mean “they have no role in Syria’s future.” 

The Aqaba meeting and its final statement showed “discomfort” from the countries involved, al-Aridi said. “When these countries are sure that Syrians want to restore their country for all Syrians, they will realize this is in the interest of the regional and international community,” he added. 

Al-Aridi believes the international community should not be concerned. “The Syrians who uprooted an exclusionary authoritarian system will not accept less than a free, civil, sovereign and independent state with a democratic approach for all its people,” he said. 

For Syrians themselves, he called for “responsible patience” during the current phase. “The transition from revolution to statehood is no easy task, and it requires [the involvement of] all Syrians.” 

This report was originally published in Arabic and translated into English by Mateo Nelson.