A Perspective about the Tripartite (American – Jordanian – Syrian) Agreement Regarding Sweida

We do not know exactly the benefit of concluding such an agreement on behalf of the Druze majority residents of Sweida in southern Syria. The agreement was held under American sponsorship represented by Tom Barrack, and Arab sponsorship represented by Jordan and its Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi, with the participation of Asaad al – Shaibani, the Syrian Foreign Minister. The Druze representatives, such as Sheikh Hikmat al – Hajri or the Higher Legal Committee in the Sweida Governorate, were absent. It seems that the agreement came to complete Understandings Security between the interim Sharia government and Israel, the agreement with Israel is being worked on and has not yet been announced, but it is likely that it will see the light in the coming days.

Sheikh al-Hajri’s absence from the agreement raises doubts about it, and the agreement will likely not achieve the desired success. This is perhaps because the appropriate conditions have not yet been met, especially regarding the unelected interim Syrian government, which operates ad hoc, without relying on a permanent constitution. It operates according to a constitutional declaration that lacks even the minimum level of objectivity and balance. The government operates without a parliament or transparent elections, and operates to the tune of al-Sharaa (formerly al-Julani). al-Hajri and his representatives did not attend the agreement or sign it. This is because most of the clauses that affirm the Syrian government’s control over al-Sweida Governorate lack credibility and the lack of trust between the two sides. This is due to the massacres and violations in which foreign factions and the General Security Forces affiliated with al-Sharaa’s government participated, as well as to al-Sharaa’s own incitement of the tribes in the name of “al-Faz’aa,” forgetting that the Druze are an integral part of the Syrian people.

Therefore, the people of Sweida rejected this tripartite agreement between Barak, Al-Safadi, and Al-Shaibani in its entirety, and did what… It resembles a referendum on the right to self-determination, and for this purpose, more than 10 centers were established for signing petitions expressing the voices of the Druze population in the governorate. The international and regional conditions may not currently be favorable to declaring secession and independence; however, it is an expression of the will of the population for the right to self-determination, stability, and the desire for a dignified life. Self-administration of the people of Sweida may achieve change in the interim government of Al- Shara, a new government is to be formed in Syria in accordance with UN Resolution (2254), which stipulates the formation of a new transitional government and elections. Transparent, Parliament An elected body, a permanent constitution, and there may be international committees in which the Syrian government participates to investigate crimes and massacres, but those committees You will not be trusted and credible by the Druze; They were subjected to kidnapping, rape and capture by the General Security and its rogue factions, The Druze community’s sheikhs and the elderly were also subjected to insults, murder, and tampering with their beards and mustaches.

Trust cannot be restored to this illegitimate government with its extremist jihadist background, whose sole concern is pleasing America, European countries, Turkey, and the Gulf states. The agreement also included a clause regarding the provincial council in Sweida, which would include representation from all regions, such as al-Shahba, Salkhad, and others. It also discussed the exchange of kidnapped persons and prisoners between the two sides, in order to create a sense of trust and credibility, as if the two parties were not Syrian. There is also a clause regarding the local police, which must be from the province’s residents and include other components, including Christians, tribes, and others, to achieve pluralism and participation (according to the agreement). It also discussed providing humanitarian and medical aid, compensating those affected, and other honeyed promises related to stability, reconstruction, attracting investments, and other matters, which are subject to much skepticism. It is worth noting that had there not been progress in the negotiations with Israel regarding the south, including Sweida, which borders Israel, this tripartite agreement announced a few days ago would not have been concluded. The need to settle the situation in southern Syria, mentioned above, was primarily an American need. Al-Shaibani, accompanied by Tom Barrack, visited Washington primarily to complete the agreement between Syria and Israel, and also to lift US sanctions on Syria, especially the ‘’Caesar Act’’, which it seems very difficult for Al-Shaibani and Barrack to succeed in lifting on Syria, because the law is related to Congress and not the executive authorities in the United States. From the agreement, the following can be noted:

1- The Syrian government is not serious about its agreement with Jordan and America; If she was serious, she would not have continued the killing, siege and massacres. And I summoned Sheikh Hikmat Al-Hijri or the higher Legal Committee in Sweida, and to took the initiative to take steps to enhance confidence by releasing the kidnapped women.

2- The agreement issued by Al-Shaibani differs from the agreement regarding Sweida issued by Al-Safadi through the Jordanian Foreign Ministry’s website; this raises doubts about Al-Shaibani’s credibility and his ill intentions.

3- It is also noted that the agreement was imposed by the United States and Israel as a necessity to achieve the most important agreement, and here we mean the agreement with Israel.

4- It is noteworthy that the people have lost confidence in the Syrian Interim Government; they have expressed this through petitions, referendums, and the desire for independence.

5- No purely international committees were formed to investigate the massacres and violations, noting that the Druze do not want the Syrian government to participate in international and UN committees.