One of the most controversial points among Syrians now is the issue of the future role of President Bashar al-Assad. Opinions hugely vary with regards to this question, and they go between two extreme parties, the first of which want President Bashar al-Assad to rule Syria forever, and the second wants to get rid of President Bashar al-Assad the Qadhaffi way.

It is obvious that moving towards a real plural democracy is one of the demands that are agreed upon among wide segments of the Syrian people. The regime tried to respond to this demand through moving from a referendum system into multi-party election and to fix presidential terms as a maximum two, for any president to remain, in the Syrian constitution that was approved at the start of 2012.

The argument with regards to the future role of President Bashar al-Assad did not stop, however, and it is useful that discussing this issue should take into consideration the following elements:

• The real popularity of President Bashar al-Assad, avoiding disruption and propaganda exaggeration, whether positive or negative.
• The role that President Bashar al-Assad plays in the unity of the army and its coherence, in addition to the importance of the continuity of Syria’s regional and international role.
• Suspicions and fears of the opposition with regards to regime’s non willingness, inability or misunderstanding of how to run impartial and free presidential elections.
• Syrian national dignity and not heeding to foreign demands, in this domain, but approving that which possesses real popular and national interests.
• Some opposition factions regard the president to be responsible for all that happened and for the Syrian blood that was shed in the crisis, therefore they won’t accept dialogue with him or the idea of him being a candidate for the next election.

In light of these elements, organising Syrian presidential elections in 2014 can be discussed, or early presidential elections under the supervision of a national unity government and with the presence of international monitors from friendly countries that did not directly get involved in the Syrian crisis. President Bashar al-Assad would be a candidate for these elections like any other candidate within constitutional and legal constrains that would allow all candidates to benefit from the state resources in their election campaigns in an equal, fair and orderly fashion, including national media, and would also allow running election campaigns without any harassment from state apparatuses. These election campaigns should be transparent and explain the sources of spent money, along with preventing any of the candidates to receive election support from any foreign parties and limiting election support to a maximum, with regards to domestic parties, with transparency guaranteed.

This solution takes into consideration the feelings and needs of many Syrians who believe not in exclusion or foreign demands but in ballot boxes, and it allows enough time for the opposition for agreeing on one or more candidates who would stand against President Bashar al-Assad in the elections.