Syria: More time than we think, Less time than he thinks

It is clear that the Syrian regime is trying to prove that is is involved in a conflict with al-Qaeda, while in reality, it is fighting the Syrian people.  This regime is still in denial that its miserable manoeuvres will no longer fool anybody. From this perspective, we can understand the regime's attempts to take advantage of the last two bombings in Damascus, in addition to the bombing of Aleppo  which have been described as acts of terrorism which killed a large number of citizens. Whoever is behind the bombings of Syria's two major cities,  they represent clear indications of the failure of this regime. If it turns out that it is the regime, then it can no longer justify its existence, given that the main duty of any regime, wherever it is in the world,  is to protect its own people and serve their interests, unless this regime - originally based on a military coup - derives its legitimacy from the ability to suppress its people and humiliate them to no end. If we take the assumption that the regime had no part in the recent bombings, this means that al-Qaeda is actually capable of penetrating Damascus and carrying out a terrorist attack in a place very close to an important security headquarters.  This should be recognised at the very least, as a sign that the  security apparatus is losing control of the country, an iron grip which  has always been the main foundation of the Syrian regime. This regime, which only has its infamous security to inspire its neighbouring countries, loses its power when it is no longer able to control the streets of the capital Damascus or the northern city of Aleppo. Looking at both scenarios, the Assad regime appears totally spent, bankrupt, which was confirmed by the seding of two letters sent from the regime to the UN International Security Council and the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon. In both letters, the regime refused to admit that there is a popular revolution in Syria, and that the regime has had its day, as its senior officials believe there is no other solution bar the security one. If the security solution could be a way out for the regime, so it should have been able to regain control of Homs, Hama, Rastan, Daraa, Douma, Idlib, Deir al-Zour, and  dozens of other cities, towns and villages over several months of fierce suppression. If the security solution is a real solution, then the regime wouldn't feel the need to ask for help from both the Security Council and the Secretary General of the UN, who persistently called on senior Syrian officials and President Bashar al-Assad in particular, to adopt a reasonable stance and stop the massacres killing innocent people who merely demanding freedom, justice and a minimum level of human dignity. Perhaps the greatest danger of the Syrian crisis, is the regime's belief that it can  keep applying the security solution forever. Over time, the revolution has mushroomed and has now taken hold in Styria's biggest cities,  Damascus and Aleppo which have now have become the centres of the public revolt. When will  the Syrian regime see the light -- that there is no other option for it but to leave? The fearful prospect is that this regime is still depending on its ability to resume an "escape to the front"  mentality  by heaping blame on external forces and accusing them of fueling the revolution as well as masterminding the terrorist operations. First of all, the Syrian regime forgets that it is backed by foreign  powers who support it through money, weapons and political stances. There  is Iranian, Russian and to some extent Chinese involvement in the ongoing suppression against the Syrian people. As for the complaint about arms smuggling, it is no secret that most of the weapons which have entered Lebanon since the 1975 civil war, came from Syria. If the Assad regime claims that the Lebanese borders are being used to smuggle weapons to Syria, then why does it still insists on rejecting the demarcation of borders between the two countries, so that this smuggling can be monitored? Why does it still insist on keeping bases for the Palestinian organisations associated to Syria within the Lebanese territories, and provide them with weapons that are directed at the Lebanese? In addition to all of this, we can't ignore that quite a number of  terrorist attacks against certain Gulf countries, were planned in Damascus or nearby. Even the current Iraqi government pointed its finger at Syria, accusing it of supporting  terrorist attacks carried out by al-Qaeda in Baghdad and other regions of Iraq. How can a regime that has mastered little bar terrorism, put blame on others for "backing terrorism", when it fails to recognise that it is facing a real revolution which voices the hopes and aspirations of the Syrian people? It is bankruptcy by definition, when this regime refuses to accept its end, and leave today, not tomorrow. Instead of directing letters to the Security Council and the Secretary General of the UN, the Syrian regime, if it has any care for Syria or Syrians, should negotiate directly on how to step down. This is the only option before it is too late, as the Syrian revolution may need slightly more time than we think to achieve victory... But much less than the Syrian president and his entourage think!