Respected analysts have argued that “more-for-more” diplomacy should not be attempted in Syria.

In this op-ed for Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center's Sada, I argue that, under four principles, more-for-more is warranted to jumpstart, but not resolve, the deadlocked political process.

Principle 1: Concessions must be verifiable. Counter concessions must be easily reversible.

Principle 2: No free lunches.

Principle 3: Adopt an all-hands-on-deck approach.

Principle 4: Do it with a grand strategy in mind. Assad must go, ultimately accept UNSC resolution 2254, and be brought to justice.

The key risk in taking the more-for-more approach to dealing with Assad is in using it as a stepping stone for a face-saving end to the conflict. A resolution that does not address the root causes of the conflict is a recipe for perpetual instability.

Special thanks to Nizar Faysal Mohamad for all his excellent editorial comments on the earlier drafts of the op-ed.