Well, the “problem” with Brammertz is his continuing preoccupation with silence, which albeit amply justified from a tactical perspective, is, nonetheless too unnerving for most people and parties concerned at this stage, and tend to ignore the important political ramifications of the whole affair. Brammertz should not forget that the fate of two countries and their ruling regimes is at stake here. But then, this is precisely why Brammertz might seem so overcautious to some. The stakes are just too high to allow for any mistakes, a reality with which the Syrian opposition will have to contend as well.
For this reason, and regardless of what the upcoming report might end up saying, we, the dignified and outraged, or the dignifiedly outraged, members of the opposition, should be ready with a vision, a plan and a strategy. Indeed, the upcoming meeting of the National Salvation Front will take place on June 4-5 in London, a few days before the release of Brammertz new report, and should we fail to come with something more concrete at the end of it, I doubt if we will ever be taken seriously, regardless of Brammertz’ wills and won’ts.
The air is rife with all sorts of rumors these days regarding the upcoming report by Brammertz. So, will he drop the other shoe and seal the fate of the Syrian regime? Or will he present another technical report and ask for another extension? Or will there be some room to maneuver between the two “extremes,” which will allow him to satisfy some gnawing expectations and appease some worries, but without necessarily providing a finalized list of suspects at this stage?