Dangerous

Anthony Shadid has an article in The New York Times about the opposition in Syria:

Scores of opposition figures met publicly in Damascus for the first time since Syria’s antigovernment uprising began. The officially sanctioned gathering underlined the changes the rebellion has wrought in Syria, as well as the challenges ahead in breaking a cycle of protests and crackdowns that have left hundreds dead. The gathering was remarkable foremost for its rarity; a public show of dissent in a country that has long conflated opposition with treason. But it also cut across some of the most pressing questions in Syria today: whether a venerable but weak opposition can bridge its longstanding divides, whether the government is willing to engage it in real dialogue and whether it can eventually pose an alternative to President Bashar al-Assad’s leadership.
The meeting offered no answers but, in speech after speech, participants insisted the three-month-old revolt could end only with Mr. Assad’s surrender of absolute power. One of the organizers, Louay Hussein, said the meeting of nearly two hundred opposition leaders, unprecedented in its size, would explore a vision for “ending tyranny and ensuring a peaceful and safe transition to a desired state, one of freedom, democracy and equality”.
The meeting was in the works for weeks and, though government officials had signaled that they would not oppose it, the leaders themselves spent days trying to find a locale in the capital that would set aside fears of government retaliation and host them. In the end, Syrian state television, long a tool of propaganda, covered the meeting.
Some activists abroad have criticized the gathering as suggesting that the government was willing to engage in dialogue and tolerate dissent, even as its army and security forces press on with a relentless crackdown from one end of Syria to the other. The Local Coordination Committees, which has sought to speak on behalf of youthful protesters, was not in attendance, and has yet to make a public statement on the meeting itself, though it has refused dialogue as the violence continues. “They contacted me but I refused the invitation as long as the atmosphere is not right,” said Hassan Abdel-Azim, a veteran party leader and opposition figure in Syria. “What kind of dialogue can you have in the midst of a security crackdown?”
Even some organizers— among them, Aref Dalila, an economist, and Hajj Yassin Hajj Saleh, a longtime activist— decided at the last minute not to participate in the gathering. “Unfortunately what I have seen on television is a silly scene,” Mr. Saleh said by phone. “That’s my impression, so I guess I made the right decision.”
But the meeting still drew some of the most prominent opposition figures in Damascus, men like Mr. Hussein, Anwar al-Bunni, and Michel Kilo, who have served time in prison for their outspokenness against one of the region’s most authoritarian governments. Mr. Hussein said that no government representatives would be invited, though dozens of security men were seen circulating outside the hall. In the meeting, convened at the Semiramis hotel, dissidents went to lengths not to claim to speak for the protesters, whose demands have grown in intensity in past weeks. “We are meeting here today to put a plan forward to solve the current crisis,” said Fayez Sara, an opposition activist who attended. “We are not saying we are representing protesters. We are not angry at those who criticized us for holding this meeting.”
So far, Mr. Hussein and others have said they will not enter into dialogue with the government as long as its forces persist on firing on peaceful protesters. But even they acknowledge that the crisis seems to be taking a dangerous turn, as the government grows more isolated, elements of an armed insurgency emerge, and the economy staggers.
“There are two ways forward; the first is a clear and non-negotiable move toward a peaceful transition to democracy, which would rescue our country and our people," Munzer Khaddam, another opposition activist, told the meeting. “The alternative is a road that leads into the unknown and which will destroy everyone.”
In a speech last week, just his third to the country since the uprising began in mid-March, Mr. Assad offered what he described as a national dialogue. The Syrian news agency said that dialogue would begin on 10 July and that “all factions, intellectual personalities, and politicians” would be invited, even though many dissidents have vowed to stay away as long as the crackdown persists. It reiterated a point Mr. Assad made in his 20 June speech: the agenda would include possible amendments to the Constitution, which enshrines the ruling Baath Party’s monopoly on power.
In the past week or so, the government has sought to improve its image as it endures some of the deepest isolation in its four decades in power. The Syrian media have acknowledged the protests, and allowed some foreign journalists into the country. But in the street, where demands have escalated into the rebellion, Mr. Assad’s moves have been met with skepticism and anger. No dialogue, some have chanted, with “tanks of the regime”.
But the government’s opponents have struggled to find their voice, as well. An opposition abroad, without set leaders or programs, has sought to unify its ranks in meetings in Turkey and Europe, with mixed success. Many activists who claim to speak on behalf of the street remain in hiding, fearful of arrest and torture. And deep fears persist inside Syria over the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood, which fought a bloody battle with the government that culminated with the events in Hama in 1982, when government forces massacred at least ten thousand people, perhaps more, in that city.
Some diplomats have looked to Monday’s meeting as offering at least the potential for a more unified opposition that could deal with the government. “Every step that helps bring together an opposition is a positive step,” said Burhan Ghalioun, a Syrian scholar and director of the Center for Contemporary Oriental Studies at the Sorbonne in Paris. “We need a unified opposition that can be engaged in a political battle with the regime to force it to transfer the country into a democratic civil state.”