Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

Signs of a U.S.-Syria Thaw?

Planned U.S. congressional delegations to Syria underscore Obama's desire to restore diplomatic relations with Damascus.

Print Friendly

(Inter Press Service)

This week, two high-level U.S. congressional delegations are setting out for Syria to meet with President Bashar Al Assad. The trips are seen as a precursor for engagement with Syria, but the extent of possible diplomatic deal-making is still in question.

Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) is spending this week touring the Middle East and is scheduled to stop in Damascus for talks with Assad, his third such visit. House Foreign Relations Chairman Rep. Howard Berman (D-CA) is expected to travel there later this month.

If, indeed, the congressional trips are a harbinger of President Barack Obama’s desire to restore diplomacy with Syria, that would represent a sharp break with former President George W. Bush’s policy of isolating Damascus. Obama campaigned on and has, since his inauguration, declared his intention to talk to U.S. adversaries to try to resolve differences.

The top foreign affairs legislators in the Senate and the House of Representatives—both Democrats—are traveling on their own. Both have said that they are not representing the administration, but both congressmen are allies of Obama, and would likely not make such a trip if the administration disapproved.

"Obama is preparing for serious engagement with Syria," said Oklahoma University professor Joshua Landis, who also writes the popular Syria Comment blog. "Obviously, Syria is trying to come in from the cold, but it’s not easy."

Indeed, an initial thaw may have gotten underway early into the Obama administration, when the United States sent spare parts to Syria to repair two grounded Boeing passenger planes. The move was assailed by many critics of rapprochement, but the Obama team insisted that it was not an end to sanctions—it was simply a way to ensure public safety.

The meetings between Assad and Kerry this week, though unlikely to bring about substantive change in and of themselves, are widely seen as the opening salvo of a diplomatic offensive. Down the road, the thaw may result in a U.S. ambassador being dispatched to Damascus. Bush withdrew his top diplomat there after Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri was assassinated almost exactly four years ago, allegedly with Syrian complicity.

But while an initial effort to reach out to Assad may result in diplomatic relations being restored, it is unclear how far those reestablished ties will go in resolving the innumerable differences between Washington and Damascus.

"These visits represent a new environment, but don’t themselves constitute a warming of the relationship," said David Schenker, director of the Program on Arab Politics at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP).

"The problem still remains and the fundamental issue in our bilateral relationship remains the same," Schenker told IPS. "You may have visits and discussions, but until you have a real Syrian commitment to change its policies on Iraq, Palestine, and Lebanon, you’re not going to have the kind of opening people are looking for."

Indeed, Syria has been accused of supporting Hamas in the Palestinian territories, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and allowing free movement of insurgents across its border into Iraq.

The porous border with Iraq has been a problem for U.S. military operations. Last fall, a militant allegedly facilitated the transportation of insurgents into Iraq. In response to the threat, the United States used several helicopters, striking miles into Syria, l helicopters in order to kill the accused militant. The incident created an uproar, but it quickly subsided.

Among outstanding U.S. concerns is Lebanon, where Syria had troops for nearly 30 years, until its withdrawal of the last 15,000 men in 2005.

"The Lebanese lobby [in the U.S.] is up in arms," Landis said about the potential thaw between Washington and Damascus. "Their stance is, ‘Okay, engage Syria. But make sure you have a laundry list of demands, all having to do with Lebanese sovereignty.’"

An emerging obstacle to U.S.-Syrian rapprochement may come from Syria’s neighbor to the southwest, Israel, which had, until its assault on Gaza in December and January, been in peace talks with Syria mediated by Turkey.

Just ahead of the Israeli elections last week, Likud party head Benjamin Netanyahu, a leading contender to form a government and become prime minister, said that he would be unwilling to achieve peace with Syria by giving up Israeli control of the Golan Heights, occupied since the Six-Day War of 1967.

Reacquisition of the Golan is considered a top priority for the Syrians in any peace talks.

"There are people who say that [Netanyahu] doesn’t mean what he says and that he’s the best choice for making peace with Syria," said Landis. "He says he is happy to talk to Syrians, but not about land. And he says he is going to build settlements."

But Landis suggests the remote possibility that, just as Menachem Begin negotiated peace with Egypt by giving away the Sinai Peninsula, thereby deflecting criticism of the occupation of the West Bank, Netanyahu may be willing to cede the Golan to keep attention off Israel’s internal Palestinian problems.

Schenker of WINEP agrees: "A government run by Netanyahu, which is to the right, may be predisposed to talking to Syria rather than the Palestinians."

But Schenker pointed to a poll indicating that Israelis were more likely to give up part of East Jerusalem than the Golan. Noting that the border with Syria is already "Israel’s quietest," Schenker said that Damascus was unlikely to deliver the type of offer that would allow Netanyahu to make a large concession with the Golan.

"In order to get peace between Israel and Syria, there would need to be a strategic realignment," he said, citing specifically the Israeli desire that Syria move away from Iran, crack down on its border with Iraq, and give up support for Hamas and Hezbollah.

He said that was unlikely because if it made those concessions, Syria would then have "the foreign policy impact in the Middle East of Yemen. That’s not how they view themselves—as a third-rate Middle East player."

But the biggest obstacle of all may not be a negotiating party or player, but rather the precarious global economic climate.

The upheaval is taking an immediate toll on the Obama administration, forcing the president to focus his initial energies on ending the crisis and getting the country’s financial vital signs back to a healthy level. Foreign policy, as many have noted, is likely to suffer from a lack of attention.

"It raises the question of, ‘Can you get anything done?’" said Landis. "How much capital can you spend on [Syria] when you need every farthing you have to spend at home?"

"If Obama is going to carry out a revolution in the Middle East, God bless him. He’s got a lot of revolutions to carry out," he added.

Ali Gharib writes for the Inter Press Service and for PRA’s Right Web (www.rightweb.irc-online.org).

Citations

By Ali Gharib, "Signs of a U.S.-Syria Thaw?" Right Web with permission from Inter Press Service (Somerville, MA: PRA, 2009). Web location:
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/rw/4983.html Production Information:
Author(s): Right Web
Editor(s): Right Web
Production: Political Research Associates   IRC logo 1310 Broadway, #201, Somerville, MA   02144 | pra@publiceye.org

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Although sometimes characterized as a Republican “maverick” for his bipartisan forays into domestic policy, Lindsey Graham (R-SC) is one of the Senate’s more vocal hawks.


Former CIA director Michael Hayden, a stalwart advocate of the Bush-era policies on torture and warrantless wiretapping, has been a vocal critic of Donald Trump


The former GOP presidential candidate and Speaker of the House has been a vociferous proponent of the idea that the America faces an existential threat from “Islamofascists.”


David Albright is the founder of the Institute for Science and International Security, a non-proliferation think tank whose influential analyses of nuclear proliferation issues in the Middle East have been the source of intense disagreement and debate.


A right-wing Christian and governor of Kansas, Brownback previously served in the U.S. Senate, where he gained a reputation as a leading social conservative as well as an outspoken “pro-Israel” hawk on U.S. Middle East policy.


Steve Forbes, head of the Forbes magazine empire, is an active supporter of a number of militarist policy organizations that have pushed for aggressive U.S. foreign policies.


Stephen Hadley, an Iraq War hawk and former national security adviser to President George W. Bush, now chairs the U.S. Institute for Peace.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

Print Friendly

The Trump administration appears to have been surprised by this breach among its friends in the critical Gulf strategic area. But it is difficult to envision an effective U.S. role in rebuilding this Humpty-Dumpty.


Print Friendly

A recent vote in the European Parliament shows how President Trump’s relentless hostility to Iran is likely to isolate Washington more than Tehran.


Print Friendly

The head of the Institute for Science and International Security—aka “the Good ISIS”—recently demonstrated again his penchant for using sloppy analysis as a basis for politically explosive charges about Iran, in this case using a faulty translation from Persian to misleadingly question whether Tehran is “mass producing advanced gas centrifuges.”


Print Friendly

Trump has exhibited a general preference for authoritarians over democrats, and that preference already has had impact on his foreign policy. Such an inclination has no more to do with realism than does a general preference for democrats over authoritarians.


Print Friendly

The President went to the region as a deal maker and a salesman for American weapon manufacturing. He talked about Islam, terrorism, Iran, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict without the benefit of expert advice in any of these areas. After great showmanship in Riyadh, Jerusalem, and Bethlehem, he and his family left the region without much to show for or to benefit the people of that war-torn region.


Print Friendly

Although the Comey memo scandal may well turn out to be what brings Trump down, this breach of trust may have had more lasting effect than any of Trump’s other numerous misadventures. It was an unprecedented betrayal of Israel’s confidence. Ironically, Trump has now done what even Barack Obama’s biggest detractors never accused him of: seriously compromised Israel’s security relationship with the United States.


Print Friendly

Congress and the public acquiesce in another military intervention or a sharp escalation of one of the U.S. wars already under way, perhaps it’s time to finally consider the true costs of war, American-style — in lives lost, dollars spent, and opportunities squandered. It’s a reasonable bet that never in history has a society spent more on war and gotten less bang for its copious bucks.


RightWeb
share