Abdullah attributed the confusion in the positions of the opposition to the reason that they are relying on external factors: “We are seeing a radical shift in their requests”. He pointed out that “The problem of the opposition is that it obeys to external orders and this seemed to be clear when America pushed the president of the National Coalition, Maaz Khatib, to call for dialogue with the regime”.
He pointed to the existence of a number of countries that refuse dialogue in Syria, including Qatar and Turkey: “Ankara is witnessing disagreements within the political equation on appraising the Syrian crisis because of the incurred damage, its shrinking regional role, in addition to its internal differences”.
He noted that the recent speech by the Foreign Minister Ahmed Davutoglu was in harmony with that of the Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak, who said that dialogue between the regime and the opposition will not lead to settling the crisis. However, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan condemned the Israeli raid and is trying to find a way out of the crisis”.
Regarding whether Qatar would accept defeat in Syria or no, Abdullah saw that Doha is too small than accepting or not accepting, “Because it is a tool that can be changed in accordance with the developments and data”.
Commenting on the refusal of the free army to call Maaz Khatib to engage in a dialogue, Abdullah said that America will not stop now its tools in troublemaking on the ground for it is in the negotiation stage, and negotiation does not mean throwing all the weapons directly at once, knowing that some forces may continue to fight for another term for reasons related to ideological aspects like al-Qaeda”.
He noted that the transition stages have a lot of tide until they become stable, that a political solution needs time, and that “The year 2013 will be a crucial one in this regard. This comes because solution lacks an important point i.e. to have a general internal view point, and now there is almost a Syrian consensus that confirms two certain issues: Stopping violence and going for dialogue”.
He concluded by saying that “The international and regional environment began to change, the project has collapsed, and there is no viability for the continuation of the bloody armed project, which fell with all its political, military, security, and moral particulars”.