The Anan peace plan is taking flak but it still offers the best way forward, writes Graham Usher at the UN Special Envoy Kofi Anan's peace plan for Syria is on the ropes. That at least is the view of the Syrian opposition, Gulf states in the Arab League like Saudi Arabia and Qatar and permanent Security Council members like France and the United States. "I would say it is failing," said Kathleen Hicks, an administration official, in testimony to the US Senate. "And Anan himself has indicated he is extremely worried about progress." There is an element of one-upmanship here. The US, France, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the opposition Syrian National Council were among those forces most sceptical of the Anan plan, mainly because it entailed recognition (rather than removal) of Bashar Al-Assad as Syria's leader. The obituaries are also a little premature. The UN's three month observer mission to help implement the plan has barely begun. Only 24 of the full allotment of 300 monitors are in Syria, and those few have to meet burgeoning hopes with limited resources. The UN is working overtime to try and get the entire contingent deployed by the end of the month. But the detractors have a point. While the presence of the observers has reduced violence in general, it has failed to spur full compliance with the ceasefire. In particular, it has been unable to make the regime withdraw its heavy weapons from the main Syrian cities, a key clause of the Security Council resolution that created the mission last month. And since the Syrian government signed onto the plan, more than 1,000 people have been killed, many of them civilians. The sense of the UN's impotence is tangible. "The secretary-general reminds all concerned parties, particularly the government of Syria, of the need to ensure that conditions for the effective operation of the UN military observers are put in place immediately, including a sustained cessation of armed violence," railed Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon on 26 April, in one of several pleas that have fallen in Syria like spit in a storm. Yet the mission has quietly changed the conflict in Syria. On 1 May the UN peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous briefed the press at the UN. He said the 24 unarmed military observers were on patrol in Damascus, Homs, Hama, Idlib and Deraa, all frontline territories. While their presence hasn't forced the removal of heavy weapons, it has deterred their use, he said. What's continued is smaller scale fighting between the regime and the armed resistance while bombings or "terrorist" attacks have spiked. On 30 April blasts at security buildings in Idlib and a rocket attack on a bank in Damascus left between 9 and 20 people dead, said the government and human rights monitors. Both sides blamed the other for the assaults: and each charged the other with wanting to wreck the peace plan. In other words, their referral to the UN attested to the observers' fragile yet real legitimacy in Syria. Second, while the regime has continued arrest sweeps and killings and has been obstructive on visas and freedom of movement for the observers, there have also been problems with the opposition. "The violations (of the ceasefire) are on both sides," stressed Ladsous. For example, there had been "incidents" involving rebels that raised concern about the observers' security. This is not necessarily surprising. In cities like Hama activists and fighters greeted the observers only to be targeted later by the regime, an exposure that cost some their lives. There is also a sense among some fighters that the UN mission has re-legitimised the government while casting a light on their ranks as divided and undisciplined. The result is hostility: a video aired on Al-Jazeera depicted the monitors as blind men with sunglasses tapping white walking sticks. "There is nothing new on the ground", says one. These reports may have added to certain countries' disquiet with the mission and attempts to go beyond it. On 25 April French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe said France supported the Anan plan but, should it fail, "we would have to move to a new stage with a Chapter Seven resolution" (i.e. the authority that permits the Security Council to impose measures on member states). US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton demanded an international arms embargo on Syria, as well as other sanctions. The Arab League has called on the UN to provide protection for the Syrian people. And Turkey has re-floated the idea of carving out safe havens inside Syria for refugees. All of these actions would require a Security Council resolution, and so consent from Russia. It won't happen, says a UN diplomat: "it's very unlikely Russia will agree to anything beyond this resolution [authorising the UN observers] before the end of the mission's three month mandate." In fact it's almost impossible: one of the reasons Russia and China have been so zealous in their support of the Anan plan is that it prevents a Chapter 7 resolution. Anan also needs the grace of a few more months to test his thesis: that the more the observers are deployed the greater their deterrence on the regime (and armed resistance) and the more space Syrians as a mass will start to re-participate in their revolution, shifting what is a military impasse into a political struggle. The presence of the observers "has the potential to change political dynamics," said Ladsous. "They help build calm and that helps the political process Anan is leading."
