BEIRUT – As they rush to buy time under pressure from the US, the new Syrian regime is set to hold parliamentary elections next month, which will increase the number of seats from 150 to 210, with at least 20% being allocated to women.
This delayed announcement coincides with a series of internal, regional and international developments regarding Syria, including the coastal region and the Sweida massacre, as well as loose negotiations between the new regime and the SDF (Kurdish-led Syrian Democrat).
Congressional elections, which should include all Syria, come when the northeastern regions of the country (the self-governing area led by the SDF) and Governor Sweida in the south are not under the authority of Ahmed Al-Sharaa (Abu Muhammad al-Jurani), and about a third of the country’s northeastern regions (the self-governing area) are not president.
This means that the assumed representations of these regions are merely symbolic and do not reflect the will of the residents, adding additional uncertainty to the country’s dark political image.
It is also worth noting that Election Day in September was also chosen to coincide with the US efforts to invite the Hayat Taharil al-Sham administration to attend the UN General Assembly.
For at least 30 months, until the permanent constitution is adopted, the newly formed council is expected to play a key role in establishing the legislative structure of a new Syrian “state.”
Moreover, it can also pass and amend laws, discuss general budgets, and ratify international treaties.
Additionally, the election will take place after determining the proportion of representatives of each governor based on the 2011 census. That is, each governor is assigned proportional representation of the population (emphasising a prominent focus on female representation).
Observers have many questions about SDF. This is considered a pillar of the centralized system of government, especially in the context of future parliaments being prepared, as it advocates the principle of decentralization, and as the Arjurani government controls it with a heavy hand.
The election move also falls in the context of his continued and relentless efforts to integrate his influence. Because it constitutes one of his pretexts to defend allegations of “constitutionality” of his foreign administration.
Analysts therefore view the move as a continuation of previous measures taken by Arjurani to attempt to outline the contours of his questionable “nation”, including the recent publication of a report on the coastal genocide.
It is also worth noting that the aforementioned report has been subject to serious criticism as the conclusion reached by the Board of Inquiry exoneration of authorities of negligence or accomplice in these systematic sectarian massacres.