The image that President Assad portrayed in his speech of the 6th of January about what is happening in Syria does not reflect the reality of the ongoing struggle. The steps he presented do not constitute a solution that can lead to a political program capable of ending the crises in Syria.
Despite that lately some terrorist groups have started contributing to the armed struggle against the regime, there is a large percentage of Syrians that opposes the regime and those terrorist groups at the same time. Most importantly, those Syrians refuse to resort to violence in their political struggle against the autocratic regime. Many of them have expressed this through their demonstrations that swept Syrian during the last two years. Moreover, portraying the regime as the sole victim of external conspiracy conducted by criminals contradicts completely the demonstrations and peaceful protests of the last two years and the tens of thousands of peaceful civilians killed by the security forces and the tens of thousands they arrested.
The stages of the political solution that the president presented in his speech are not enough to form a political solution that transforms the country form its current state of autocracy and crisis to stability and democracy. Despite this, what he presented can form a general basis for an eventual solution, but only if it is not overseen and sponsored by the regime itself. Instead, the regime would take part in the solution as one party to the conflict alongside all other groups.
For the regime to prove its credibility in finding a solution that satisfies all Syrians, it has to immediately release all the nonviolent activists and to stop harassing civil and political activists. It must allow political freedom for all Syrians to form their political opposition forces and to allow the return of non-violent activists who fled the country in fear of the iron fist of the security forces.
Only then we can then resort to the Geneva agreement to reach a cease-fire with international consensus and auspices. After that the conflict can be resolved through negotiations and dialogue that lead to the formation a transitional ruling council with full executive authority formed from all sides. This would decide the detailed steps of early presidential and parliamentary elections with international monitoring backed by clear international guarantees that ensure the compliance of all parties to what was agreed and to the results of the elections. Such a process would constitute the start of a democratic transition.