I disagree with that article, and let me explain why. Also note that my opinion is worth exactly what you've paid for it (US$0), but I'll try and expound on why I think I may be right and the CNN article wrong.
My point is simple - reading that article, and its description of the 'next government' being the Syrian National Council (to quote CNN, "an opposition coalition whose leadership resides outside of Syria"), was absolute deja vu for me! It's like getting into a time warp and going back to the months before the Iraqi invasion in 2003.
Then, the talk was on the Iraqi National Congress (which was, to borrow language from the Syrian National Council, "an opposition coalition whose leadership resides outside of Syria"). The Iraqi National Congress was an umbrella opposition group based outside Iraq that was for the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, and during the time leading to the 2003 invasion was headed by Ahmed Chalabi. Now, at the time Ahmed Chalabi enjoyed wide support from the US Government, but it has since come out that he was not exactly 'honest' in everything he said (and he is being investigated). Anyway, politics and motivations aside, when Saddam was overthrown the Iraqi National Congress took over from the Coalition Provisional Authority, and long story short it did not work. Most of them were outsiders, especially Chalabi.
Which is why when I see CNN and people in the Obama administration advocating for the 'Syrian National Council' I get very perplexed. If putting a bunch of outsiders did not work in Iraq, why would it work in Syria?
Additionally, will ISIS ...know what, scratch ISIS. Additionally, will the cough-cough 'moderate' non-ISIS affiliated groups be okay with an external interim government stepping in?
And finally, how exactly will they retake the over 50% of the country that is currently occupied by ISIS?
Well, I hope history doesn't repeat itself and this external opposition-centric interim government works in Syria when it didn't work in Iraq (or anywhere else for the matter ...it is like George Washington kicking out the Red Coats, and then some chaps from Bermuda who had fled when it seemed the British would win stepping in to manage things) ...anyway, I hope it works but I am highly doubtful of the plans for success, and I am surprised that the government is repeating stratagems that have been proven NOT to work!
I seriously think my view is what will crystallize in that 'country.' Just like in Iraq, Syria will be splintered into several parts ranging from an autonomous Alawite section to the west, an autonomous Kurdish section to the north, maybe a small section that will be 'ruled' by the Syrian National Council, and vast vast 'wild lands' occupied by the frenzied masses of ISIS.
To convince me the Syrian National Council would work, in a place that is chaos personified, I would have to see evidence of the Iraqi National Congress working in a country that had been handed over by the Coalition Provisional Authority. If it did not work in Iraq it is not working in Syria.
It's not expected to work....it's meant to hold and sustain temporarily....which did work in Iraq as planned. ISIS is not void of leadership or they would not be advancing as they are...leadership among the Muslim nations are assisting that control and they will have a say on when and if ISIS advances or not....
I don't know what the outcome will be...but there will be a Caliphat in time...and leaders controlling that. Who comes out on top of that leadership is up for grabs....thus war.