A consensus has been developing among Syria opposition and reform leaders that the EU-Syria Association Agreement that has been on hold since 2004 should be signed. They believe that Syria’s economic opening will lead to greater social liberalism and openness as well. This is the path that the West has pursued with success in China and in Asia more generally. Many argue that intimidation has not worked, so why not try engagement.

The EU-Syrian Association Agreement would encourage various forms of cooperation between the EU and Syria, in particular it would ease tariffs to promote foreign trade and boost investment in industry, tourism and Syria’s financial institutions. But it would also open up cooperation in the arts and less obviously economic spheres of society. Greater economic growth and the expansion of elites and a middle class can only help push forward reform, just at it will surely pull down the walls of mistrust and fear that divide Europe and Syria. Syria’s opposition leaders, disappointed by the failures of the Bush years, are ready for a new strategy of change – one that is not based on intimidation and threats but on the pressure that comes from cooperation, friendship and mutual interest built of positive reinforcement.

In 2004 the progress of the Association Agreement came to a halt when language pertaining to weapons of mass destruction was added to the draft agreement. The Hariri murder in February 2005 gave the coup de grace to the process. Recent understandings between Syria and Lebanon have revived the urgency of getting the agreement back on track. In December 2008 an amended draft of the agreement was initialed, but it remains to be signed by all members of the EU.

Supporters of the process point to the efforts Syria has made in cooperating with European countries to work out a compromise on Lebanon that has permitted the election of a president, the smooth unfolding of parliamentary elections a few weeks ago with no Syrian interference, and a steady increase in Iraqi stability which has been accompanied by a decline in the numbers of recorded infiltrators making their way across the Syrian-Iraqi border.

Syria has also been helping the West in Palestine and looking for openings for itself to negotiate a final peace with Israel. Damascus has pushed for understanding between the PLO and Hamas in Palestine. Only today Abbas was in Damascus to discuss Palestinian unity with President  Assad.

Much of this progress between Syria and the West has come about because of President Sarkozy’s bold initiative in breaking with his predecessor’s policy of isolating Syria a year ago. The Doha agreement of May 21, 2008, in which Sarkozy played a key role, was a watershed. Damascus responded positively to promises of cooperation and the political paralysis which had characterized Lebanese affairs for three years ended. Almost immediately Syria and Israel announced the resumption of peace negotiations with Turkey acting as a mediator. President Obama has capitalized on this spirit of compromise which has convinced authorities in Damascus that change can be real. President Assad is eager to push forward with cooperation.

EU External Relations Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner stated last week during a visit to Syria that the EU-Syria association agreement, which was initialed on 14 December 2008, will be signed in the current year. Mr Dardari said that the agreement was due to be signed in the first half of 2009, but the signatures have not all come in yet. It would be a shame if new restrictive language is added at the last minute that could derail the final signing of the agreement. It is time for a new way forward.

Nasrallah on Election results

(Naharnet) ….Regarding elections, Nasrallah said the opposition’s goal was to obtain a parliamentary majority “in order to carry out reform plans.”

“This, however, has not been achieved,” he acknowledged.

“I will not conceal that we were looking forward to winning the elections because winning meant confronting major challenges,” he added.

“However, we dealt realistically with election results. We were not shaken because we are still where we were, and nothing has changed as far as we are concerned.

He said he will continue to maintain the atmosphere of calm.

Nasrallah said elections took place under U.S., Western and Arab “intimidation in an effort to impose their options that may not coincide with the will of the Lebanese.”

“The opposition did not lose its status, but has stood fast in the face of a true global war: lies, money and America.

Nasrallah stressed that the opposition enjoys a “popular majority,” while the parliamentary majority is a “reality under the electoral system.”

He interrupted himself to tell the pro-government parliamentary majority jokingly: “I advise March 14 (forces) not to interfere in the Iranian elections because this is an issue that they don’t understand.”

Turning to the issue of vote-buying, Nasrallah said: “There is no equality of opportunity between the loyalists and the opposition regarding the issue of brining in expatriates, particularly with regards to money.”

“We will follow up on election violations through the law and will not resort to street” protests,” he said……

Daily Star By Nicholas Blanford via FLC

“…. The March 14 victory is a setback for Hizbullah which had hoped that an opposition win would provide a protective seal around its military wing. Contrary to scare-mongering rhetoric from some Israeli and Western officials, Hizbullah had no desire or interest in assuming control of the state if the opposition had triumphed.

Hizbullah’s history of participation in Lebanese constitutional politics has always been one of necessity rather than ambition. …..Protecting its weapons, not running the Lebanese state, remains Hizbullah’s principal motivation for political participation. If the opposition had won, Hizbullah probably would have preferred to fade into the background, leaving its allies to helm the government on a daily basis.

The party has invested enormous effort and expense in rebuilding and honing its military capabilities since the 2006 war with Israel. The level of recruitment, training and rearming is unprecedented in its 27-year history….

The dilemma facing Hizbullah is that without the one-third blocking share, it is vulnerable to fresh attempts to disarm its military wing. …. what action is Hizbullah – the most powerful political and military entity in the country – prepared to take to persuade March 14 to back down and re-offer the blocking share?

Much depends on the wisdom of March 14. If its leaders feel emboldened by its electoral mandate and continued US and Saudi support to begin maneuvering to weaken Hizbullah’s hold over its weapons, it surely will provoke a fresh crisis.

Key Iran Adviser Gains Obama’s Ear (Ross kicked Up Stairs)
By JAY SOLOMON in WSJ

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama, facing a mounting political crisis in Iran, is increasingly relying on the counsel of a career diplomat who has been a staunch supporter of tough measures to curtail Tehran’s nuclear program.

The emergence of Middle East specialist Dennis Ross as a presidential confidant is being scrutinized in Washington for its potential impact on Mr. Obama’s approach to Tehran, as the nuclear issue and electoral crisis play out.

Mr. Obama has committed himself to direct talks with Tehran, but has said the U.S. should keep all options on the table to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran. He also has said the Iranian regime can be expected to be hostile to the U.S., regardless of who is declared president.

Mr. Ross is about to move to the White House from the State Department, where he served as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s point man on Iran. In his writings and speeches, he has argued for a direct U.S. outreach to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, something White House officials say they have considered.

Mr. Ross has also argued for crippling sanctions, and potentially military action, if Tehran doesn’t come to the negotiating table over the nuclear program, which the U.S. says is intended to develop nuclear weapons, a charge Tehran denies. Mr. Ross didn’t respond to requests to comment for this article.

The White House says his move there will strengthen the National Security Council and is an indication of the pre-eminence Mr. Obama is placing on the Iran issue. Two administration officials said Mr. Ross would maintain his role overseeing Iran policy while also providing Mr. Obama with advice on broader Mideast issues…..

Former U.S. officials who have worked with Mr. Ross said he could prove to be an effective ally of Mr. Obama’s in managing Washington’s prickly relationship with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Mr. Ross developed close ties to Israel’s leadership during more than a decade of work aimed at forging an Arab-Israeli peace agreement.

An Obama administration official said the president developed a personal relationship with Mr. Ross during last year’s presidential campaign, and wanted him at the White House. The official said Mr. Ross’s move is the latest in a series of hires that have brought key officials into the executive office, from health policy to energy.

Mr. Ross was a latecomer to Mr. Obama’s campaign, but helped write a number of Mr. Obama’s key foreign policy speeches, said Obama campaign staff, and worked to galvanize a Jewish-American community that was skeptical of the candidate’s pro-Israel credentials.

AFP By Lachlan Carmichael

“…Avigdor Lieberman on Wednesday reiterated the Jewish state’s refusal to freeze settlements. The Israelis say they received commitments from the Bush administration permitting some growth in existing settlements. …………..”In looking at the history of the Bush administration, there were no informal or oral enforceable agreements,” she (Clinton) said ..”

When an Israeli journalist asked how the Obama administration could envision a peace deal with the Netanyahu government placing so many conditions, Clinton suggested the government could change its stance.

She said previous prime ministers “have staked out positions that have changed over time.”

Mitchell, the special envoy for Middle East peace, is to travel on June 25 to Paris for talks with Netanyahu in the wake of the Israeli premier’s speech, Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs Philip Crowley said.

Jumblat-Nasrallah Meeting Soon, Damascus at Ease
Progressive Socialist Party leader has unveiled that he will meet with Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah soon and called for cooperation with Syria on a state-to-state basis.

The meeting “could be held this week or after the election of (Nabih) Berri as speaker. We can say that preparations got underway,” Jumblat told al-Jazeera satellite TV network Wednesday night.

Jumblat reiterated his call for “a government of national unity to face Israeli challenges.”

Lebanon is still under Israeli threat, he told al-Jazeera, adding that Lebanon has rejected an American proposal for an alliance between moderate Arabs and the Jewish state to face Iran.

On Damascus, Jumblat said: “Hostility with Syria cannot go on. We have to implement the Taef (accord), forget any hatred and grudge and cooperate with Syria on a state-to-state basis.”

Israel’s Crimes, America’s Silence
By John Dugard, June 17, 2009, The Nation

…On May 7 the Arab League published the 254-page report of an Independent Fact Finding Committee (IFFC) it had established to examine the legal implications of Israel’s Gaza offensive. This committee, comprising six experts in international law, criminal law and forensic medicine from non-Arab countries, visited Gaza in February. We concluded that the IDF had committed serious war crimes and crimes against humanity.

As the committee’s chairman, I spent five days in Gaza along with the other experts. Our views were deeply influenced by interviews we conducted with victims and by the evidence of destruction of property. We were particularly disturbed by the accounts of cold-blooded killings of civilians committed by some members of the IDF and the Israeli military’s use of white phosphorus in densely populated areas. The devastation was appalling and raised profound doubts in my mind as to the veracity of Israeli officials who claimed this was not a war against the Palestinian people.

The IFFC found that the IDF, in killing some 1,400 Palestinians (at least 850 of whom were civilians), wounding over 5,000 and destroying over 3,000 homes and other buildings, had failed to discriminate between civilian and military targets, terrorized civilians, destroyed property in a wanton manner not justified by military necessity and attacked hospitals and ambulances. It also found that the systematic and widespread killing, injuring and terrorizing of the civilian population of Gaza constituted a crime against humanity. ….

* John Dugard is a professor of law, a former UN special rapporteur on human rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, and the chairman of the Independent Fact Finding Committee on Gaza

….Israeli ambassador Israel Michaeli accused ElBaradei during a debate on Syria at a meeting of the IAEA’s 35-member board, urging him “to avoid political bias in dealing with Syria’s nuclear file.”

The IAEA chief was angered by Michaeli’s remarks, according to the diplomat and said Israel’s position was “totally distorted.” “We’re not behaving selectively but across the board. We’re implementing the
international law. When Israel bombed what was claimed to be a nuclear facility, it was not only hampering our work, but it was a clear violation of international law,” ElBaradei said.

“You, sir, your action is deplored [sic] by not allowing us to do what we’re supposed to do under international law,” the IAEA chief said.

“You’re not even a member of the regime to tell us what to do,” ElBaradei said, referring to Israel’s refusal to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. “We would appreciate it if you stopped preaching to us.” Syria was the main focus of debate on the fourth day of the IAEA meeting. The U.S. accused Syria of obstructing the IAEA’s probe.

NYTimes

“… Dr. ElBaradei, whose term of office is to expire in November, said in the interview that countries in possession of nuclear weapons were treated differently from others, citing the example of North Korea, which was invited to negotiations while Iraq under Saddam Hussein — which did not have a nuclear capacity — was “pulverized.”

“It is my gut feeling that Iran would like to have the technology to enable it to have nuclear weapons …. They want to send a message to their neighbors, to the rest of the world, ‘Don’t mess with us,’ …..“ultimate aim to be “recognized as a major power in the Middle East.”

Nuclear weapons technology, he said, was “the road to get that recognition, to get that power and prestige. “It is also an insurance policy against what they have heard in the past about regime change.”…. administration officials in Washington have said it is not clear that Mr. Moussavi would be any more flexible about Iran’s nuclear ambitions than Mr. Ahmadinejad has been.”

Syria Welcomes Iranian Election Results – MEMRI

Syria sees itself as a local peacemaker hurriyet

Helena Cobban has an excellent short summary of Syrian-Israeli peace negotiations.

Rumyal (Yossi) writes: Helena Cobban has a good post summarizing the history of Syrian-Israeli peace negotiations. She doesn’t mention the indirect negotiations mediated with Abe Suliman and Alon Liel, but otherwise it looks pretty complete.

This summary requires a bit of discussion. In case you haven’t noticed, it’s been almost two decades now since we have sat down at the table and started talking about peace. And guess what, there was almost never anything unbridgeable in the positions, certainty not after Oslo in 93, when the Syrians started viewing themselves as free to sign their own bi-lateral agreement with Israel, separate from the Palestinians.

So… why don’t we have peace with Syria? That’s because I and the rest of the citizens of Israel are a bunch of certified DUMMIES. A herd of catatonic meat-eating sheep. In almost all the negotiations with Syria, negotiations broke down due to political expediency calculations from our joker-of-a-leader de-jour. The only one who wasn’t a joker, and was dead serious—was also seriously dead, literally, because of that. I’m talking about Yitzhak Rabin of course…..

An article in the Arabic Economic News, a Syrian economic magazine, gives the following breakdown of the top 1000 industrialists: 75% are in Damascus, 10% in Aleppo, and 5% each in Latakia, Homs and Tartus.

???? ????? ???? ????? ???? 20 ????? ?? ????? ????? ???? ?????
??????? ??????????

????? ???? ??? ??????? 2009 ??? ????????? ???? ????? ??????? 75 % ????? 10 % ???? 5 % ????????? 5% ?????? 5% ???.

Boston Globe: Syrian dissident receives rare acquittal
2009-06-17 by Khaled Yacoub Oweis
A Syrian court issued on Wednesday a rare acquittal in a political case, finding dissident Walid al-Bunni not guilty of “weakening the morale of the nation.” Syrian dissident receives rare acquittal

Faysal Miqdad: “Syria’s relations with the next Lebanese government will be based on two key issues, he said, ‘The first is the way this government deals with Syria and its view of Lebanese- Syrian relations. The second is the way it deals with Hezbollah’s arms, which Syria sees as a necessity to Lebanon in the face of the Israeli occupation.'”

Israel’s Ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren said:

“When the prime minister and the government uses the word ‘state’ now, it has to attach a number of caveats to it, so it’ll be understood that what we’re talking about here is not a state in the classical sense, as is widely understood, but a state that will have some — some — substantive restrictions on its powers,”

Carter in Gaza, NYTimes

Earlier, touring the site of the American International School, a private institution in Gaza that was bombed by the Israelis during the war, Mr. Carter said, “I have to hold back tears when I see the deliberate destruction that has been wreaked against your people.” He added that he felt partly responsible because the school had been “deliberately destroyed by bombs from F-16s made in my country.”

“Tragically, the international community largely ignores the cries for help, while the citizens of Gaza are treated more like animals than human beings,” he said.

In a related development on Tuesday, two Israeli groups that advocate for Palestinians, HaMoked and Gisha, revealed a new Israeli procedure that makes it impossible for Gaza residents to move to the West Bank in all but the most exceptional of cases. For example, the groups said, under the policy, chronically ill patients, orphans and elderly invalids will not be able to receive care from their closest relatives living in the West Bank if they have any relatives in Gaza capable of caring for them.

Carter is becoming a huge problem and a growing concern for Obama,” a Washington Middle East hand said. “They are very pissed with him.” (Laura Rosen in the Cable at Foreign Policy)

Living in Exile: Young Iraqi refugees in Syria
Independent

This black ops, green beret soldier

has come to the realization that the doctrine of brute military force against foreign citizens in faraway lands is not a winning strategy in the long term. …

After watching the U.S. try and fail for years to put down insurgencies in both countries, Gen. McChrystal said he believes that to win in Afghanistan, “You’re going to have to convince people, not kill them.

“Since 9/11, I have watched as America tried to first put out this fire with a hammer, and it doesn’t work,” he said last week at his home at Fort McNair in Washington. “Decapitation strategies don’t work.”…

Arabic bloggers

are predominately young and male. The highest proportion of female bloggers is found in the Egyptian youth sub-cluster, while the Syrian and Muslim Brotherhood clusters have the highest concentration of males…..

The one political issue that clearly concerns bloggers across the Arab world is Palestine, and in particular the situation in Gaza (Israel’s December 2008/January 2009 military action occurred during the study). Other popular topics include religion (more in personal than political terms) and human rights (more common than criticism of western culture and values). Terrorism and the US are not major topics. When discussing terrorism, Arab bloggers are overwhelmingly critical of terrorists. When the US is discussed, it is nearly always critically…..

NSA gathering e-mail in America

The agency’s monitoring of domestic e-mail messages, in particular, has posed longstanding legal and logistical difficulties, the officials said.

Since April, when it was disclosed that the intercepts of some private communications of Americans went beyond legal limits in late 2008 and early 2009, several Congressional committees have been investigating. Those inquiries have led to concerns in Congress about the agency’s ability to collect and read domestic e-mail messages of Americans on a widespread basis, officials said. Supporting that conclusion is the account of a former N.S.A. analyst who, in a series of interviews, described being trained in 2005 for a program in which the agency routinely examined large volumes of Americans’ e-mail messages without court warrants. Two intelligence officials confirmed that the program was still in operation.

Iraq says Syria has been more co-operative recently but that insurgents continue to cross the border

In reading the following story about Syria and Iraq it is worth noting that Syrian officials here have been saying that Syria can help the US depart Iraq “honorably.” The implication is that the US would be embarrassed by an outbreak of violence in Iraq following US departure, something Syria can help to stop.

US troops ask Syria to thwart al-Qa’ida offensive

Iraqi authorities say militants will launch attacks in order to claim credit for American military withdrawal
By Patrick Cockburn in Baghdad, Wednesday, 17 June 2009

Iraq says Syria has been more co-operative recently but that insurgents continue to cross the border

The Iraqi government expects al-Qa’ida and Baathist insurgent groups to launch a wave of attacks so they can take credit for compelling the US military to leave Iraqi cities by 30 June, according to a senior Iraqi minister.

An American military team was dispatched from Baghdad to Damascus at the weekend to demand that Syria help choke off a guerrilla offensive by imposing greater control over its border with Iraq, Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari revealed in an interview with The Independent.

“I think the American rapprochement with the Syrians will be judged more by their co-operation, not in Lebanon, but in Iraq,” said Mr Zebari. “This is a good moment for them to come clean.” Although Syria has been more co-operative with Iraq than in the past, guerrilla fighters are still crossing over the border, he added….

“The purpose of the US military team going to Damascus is to urge Syria to do more to prevent foreign fighters from coming here,” said Mr Zebari. “According to our intelligence analysis al-Qa’ida, the Baathists and all armed groups will escalate the violence just to prove that they have won a victory.

“They want to say it was the sons of the resistance, not Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki or the Iraqi government’s agreement with the Americans, that forced them out of the cities.”

“Ahmadinejad won. Get over it”
Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett
Politico

“Without any evidence, many U.S. politicians and “Iran experts” have dismissed Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s reelection Friday, with 62.6 percent of the vote, as fraud.

They ignore the fact that Ahmadinejad’s 62.6 percent of the vote in this year’s election is essentially the same as the 61.69 percent he received in the final count of the 2005 presidential election, when he trounced former President Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. The shock of the “Iran experts” over Friday’s results is entirely self-generated, based on their preferred assumptions and wishful thinking….

Only Arabs Can Restore Arab Rights (CBS) By Bouthaina Shaaban

EU ministers said in a statement they “welcomed the initial step” of Netanyahu’s speech, but added it was not enough and that Israel had to unequivocally state its support for the two-state solution. The EU “remains deeply concerned by settlement activities” and urged the Israeli government to “immediately end settlement activities, including in East Jerusalem and including natural growth,” the statement said, reiterating the position that settlements are illegal according to international law and are an obstacle to peace.

???? ??????? ?? ??????? ??????? ????? ?? ????? ?????? ???? ??? 360 ????? ???? ????? ????? 6?301 ????? ???? ????? ??? 2007 ????? ?? ??? ??????? ???? ?? ???? ?????? ?????? ??????? ??????? ?? ????? ??????? ?? ???? ???? ????? ?????? ????? ?? ????? ?????. ???? ?????? ?????? ?? ?????? ??????? ??????? ???? ????? 60 ?????? ?? ??????? ???????? ??? ??? ???? ???? ????? ???? ??? ???? ????? 70 ?????? ?? ??? ????????? ????? ?? ????? ??????? ???? ???? ??? ?? ????? ?? ???? ????? ????? ???? ?????? ??? ????? ????????? ???????? ?? ???? ?????? ?????? ???????.

Tabler at WINEP

….Syria’s problematic finances and its potential confrontations with the IAEA and the Hariri tribunal provide Washington with leverage that it can incorporate into its diplomacy with Syria to break the status quo. Exploiting pressure from the IAEA and the Hariri tribunal should be easy for Washington, since the pressure is coming from international institutions with established mandates. Utilizing U.S. economic leverage will be trickier, however. The United States has substantial “negative pressures” it can employ from the recently renewed Syrian Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act (SALSA) and a series of executive and Treasury Department orders targeting Syrian individuals and banks. In terms of positive inducements or “rewards” in the event of peace, however, it is doubtful the United States can entice substantial foreign investment in Syria without addressing the country’s worsening corruption problems. On a political level, should Syria conclude a peace treaty with Israel and implement reforms that would facilitate large flows of FDI, the minority networks in the security services and the bureaucracy stand to lose the most. Given Iran and Hizballah’s close relationship with Syria’s security establishment, the discontent of these networks could be exploited by Tehran to derail implementation of a future peace.

Damascus has thus far refused to address its support for terrorist organizations or domestic issues — most notably human rights — in its early dialogue with the Obama administration. No doubt terrorism will be on the agenda if the United States mediates Israeli-Syrian peace talks. But rather than dumping domestic issues — a common practice in the past — Washington should add rule of law to its list of priority issues for dialogue with Syria.

Firas Azmeh, a Syrian from Damascus and now a Silicon Valley exec, has begun a smart blog on things Syrian and current affairs with a focus on the broader Middle East.  http://currenteventually.blogspot.com/

AKIVA Eldar in Haaretz

“Egypt and Syria have upped their pressure on Hamas in recent days, in support of a reconciliation agreement with Fatah. The deal would include a multinational Arab force in the Gaza Strip that would operate in parallel to joint Fatah-Hamas security forces.

An Egyptian source told Haaretz that the American administration is aware of the plan’s details and apparently special envoy George Mitchell has asked the Damascus government to use its influence over Hamas to push the plan and the Quartet conditions. The Americans promised the Syrians that if they take on a positive role in the Palestinian channel, the U.S. would act to resume negotiations in the Syrian track.

The Hamas-Fatah reconciliation plan includes the creation of a joint dozen-member committee, to be under Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’ indirect authority. The committee, only authorized to act in Gaza, would be in charge of post-Operation Cast Lead reconstruction, government reforms, and preparations for the January 2010 presidential and legislative council elections. All factions would undertake to honor the election results and allow the elected government to rule in both Gaza and the West Bank.

Military forces from Egypt, the Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Morocco and other Arab countries would assist local forces in maintaining order until and throughout those elections. ….

As part of the feverish activity to reach an agreement, Meshal met last week in Cairo with Egyptian intelligence head Gen. Omar Suleiman. A senior Fatah delegation also visited Cairo a few days ago. ..”

Iraq’s Unspeakable Crime: Mothers Pimping Daughters
Rania Abouzeid, Baghdad
Dennis Ross. AP

“The Obama administration’s pointman on Iran is moving from the State Department to the White House to better coordinate inter-agency policy on the Persian Gulf region, U.S. officials said Monday.

Dennis Ross, who is in charge of formulating President Barack Obama’s outreach to Iran as special adviser for the Gulf and Southwest Asia, will take a similar position at the National Security Council, the officials said. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because details of the switch have not yet been finalized.

The White House and State Department declined to comment on the matter but denied an Israeli newspaper report that Ross was being removed from his job. Ross worked on the Middle East peace process for the administrations of former Presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton.”

Economy: Jihad Yazigi gives us financial headlines in his Syria Report that include:

Central Bank Allows Foreign Banks to Open Representative Offices in Syria
The Credit and Monetary Council has allowed foreign banks to open representative offices in Syria

Economy: Hong-Kong Firm to establish 7m sqm Industrial Zone in Syria
Gatoson Ltd, a Chinese Holding firm, is establishing an economic zone dedicated to Chinese investments in the region of Hama.

Finance: Insurance Premiums Rise as Government Opens New Markets
Insurance premiums reached SYP 3.1 billion in the first quarter of this year according to data from the Syrian Insurance Federation.

Finance: Listed Companies Rise to Ten as Trading Remains Limited
Al-Ahliah Vegetables Oil Company saw its shares listed in the Damascus Securities exchange on June 15 after it received a formal approval from the board of the Syrian bourse.

Tourism: European Tourists up 25 Percent at end-May
The number of tourists visiting Syria, in particular from Europe, has continued to increase in the first five months of this year, according to data from the Ministry of Tourism.

Syria: These Teenagers Mean Business
By Nitin Jugran Bahuguna, Womens Feature Service

A math whiz since childhood, it seemed a foregone conclusion that Rasha Al Dabbas, 15, would take up a career in engineering or medicine. So when she informed her parents of her dream to open branches of her own bank in different provinces of Syria after graduation, they were taken aback.

Dalal Al Imadi, 15, has come up with a novel idea of creating a website on the internet to design advertisements for companies. “This is a very rare idea, giving companies an opportunity to promote their products on my website. There is no such website in Syria, yet,” she claims proudly.

Turning away from the traditional and accepted career options of doctor, teacher or engineer, young women in Syria are setting out to storm the hitherto male bastion of the business world, be it in the banking sector, web-designing or as a private enterprise.

Under the auspices of SHABAB, a Syrian NGO, young girls are being given a unique opportunity to achieve their potential in diverse fields……

According to the Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS), female participation in total labour force has increased from 12.4 per cent to 16.3 per cent between 1994 and 2006.

To encourage young women entrepreneurs, the government has started a two-fold micro credit scheme that gives women both access to finance as well as training in marketing, sales and advertising at special training centres, Assad reveals. Observes the First Lady, “We are the first country in the Middle-East to develop a micro credit legislation to support small entrepreneurs to register their companies in the formal sector so that they have more benefits like tax benefits.”

From Stratfor via FLC

Perhaps the greatest factor in Ahmadinejad’s favor is that Mousavi spoke for the better districts of Tehran — something akin to running a U.S. presidential election as a spokesman for Georgetown and the Lower East Side. Such a base will get you hammered, and Mousavi got hammered. Fraud or not, Ahmadinejad won and he won significantly. That he won is not the mystery; the mystery is why others thought he wouldn’t win.

For a time on Friday, it seemed that Mousavi might be able to call for an uprising in Tehran. But the moment passed when Ahmadinejad’s security forces on motorcycles intervened. And that leaves the West with its worst-case scenario: a democratically elected anti-liberal….

The question now is what will happen next. Internally, we can expect Ahmadinejad to consolidate his position under the cover of anti-corruption. He wants to clean up the ayatollahs, many of whom are his enemies. He will need the support of Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. This election has made Ahmadinejad a powerful president, perhaps the most powerful in Iran since the revolution. Ahmadinejad does not want to challenge Khamenei, and we suspect that Khamenei will not want to challenge Ahmadinejad. A forced marriage is emerging, one which may place many other religious leaders in a difficult position.

Certainly, hopes that a new political leadership would cut back on Iran’s nuclear program have been dashed. The champion of that program has won, in part because he championed the program. We still see Iran as far from developing a deliverable nuclear weapon, but certainly the Obama administration’s hopes that Ahmadinejad would either be replaced — or at least weakened and forced to be more conciliatory — have been crushed. Interestingly, Ahmadinejad sent congratulations to U.S. President Barack Obama on his inauguration. We would expect Obama to reciprocate under his opening policy,…

What we have now are two presidents in a politically secure position, something that normally forms a basis for negotiations. … For the moment, the election appears to have frozen the status quo in place…”

Der Spiegel: Landmark Court Decision: Will Germany Loosen Trade
2009-06-16 By Holger Stark

German businesses have long complained about tough restrictions on trade with Iran, claiming that bans on certain exports only benefit their foreign competitors. Now a far-reaching court decision is posing a challenge to the government’s rigid policies.

The tone of the letter to the German Foreign Ministry may have been polite, but the content was pointed. Over five pages, Martin Jäger, the chief lobbyist for carmaker Daimler, explained why Berlin’s export restrictions on trade with Iran place German industry at a serious disadvantage.

A truck carries a Ghadr-1 missile during a military parade in Tehran: Berlin is worried that German vehicles could be used to launch Iranian rockets.
Zoom
REUTERS

A truck carries a Ghadr-1 missile during a military parade in Tehran: Berlin is worried that German vehicles could be used to launch Iranian rockets.
According to Jäger, the German government’s rigid position achieves only one thing, namely that goods being exported to Iran are no longer coming from Germany, but from countries like France and Sweden. Instead of Daimler, the companies that benefit from trade with Iran include Renault, Volvo and Iveco, which are able to sell their goods largely unencumbered by restrictive regulations. Jäger asked if that was really what the German government wanted. …

Fact of the day provided by Ehsani:

US CONSUMERS ARE 4.5% OF WORLD POPULATION. THEY SPEND $10 TRILLION A YEAR….. CHINESE AND INDIAN CONSUMERS MAKE UP 40% OF THE WORL POPULATION THEY SPEND A COMBINED $2 TRILLION A YEAR IN OTHER WORDS, US CONSUMERS ARE 10% OF CHINA AND INDIA IN TERMS OF POPULATION BUT THEY SPEND 5 TIMES MORE GLOBAL RECESSION IS BASICALLY INEVITABLE IF THE US CONSUMERS ARE ON STRIKE.

Syrians were split on the Ahmedinehad victory. Damascene friends called me to express their contentment when they believed that Mousavi was slated to win, as al-Jazeera suggested early on. I was with family in Latakia over the weekend when the Ahmadinejad landslide was announced. Many people in that coastal city smiled happily when they asked me what I thought of the Iranian election results. They were particularly gratified to have an American reaction. I plan to write about my trip soon and about the building boom taking place in Syria.

Juan Cole presents Six arguments for why the Iranian Presidential Election Was Stolen.

Gary Sick: “The willingness of the regime simply to ignore reality and fabricate election results without the slightest effort to conceal the fraud represents a historic shift in Iran’s Islamic revolution. All previous leaders at least paid lip service to the voice of the Iranian people. This suggests that Iran’s leaders are aware of the fact that they have lost credibility in the eyes of many (most?) of their countrymen, so they are dispensing with even the pretense of popular legitimacy in favor of raw power….”

Tritta Parsi: “It’s one thing if Ahmadinejad had won the first round with 51 or 55 per cent. But this number … just sounds tremendously strange in a way that doesn’t add up … It is difficult to feel comfortable that this occurred without any cheating.”

(Addendum) T_Desco does not argue that Ahmeddinejad won, as I first wrote. See his correction of me in the comment section. Brian collects arguments that he won fairly, also in the comment section below.

T-Desco explains the elections – here, here and here.

The WSJ argues that Ahmadinejad’s victory is good for Syria. (Thanks T_desco and Norman)

“Not all big Arab states stand to lose with Mr. Ahmadinejad’s victory. Former U.S. Sen. George Mitchell, Mr. Obama’s top Mideast envoy, is in Damascus Saturday for talks with Syrian officials.

With Mr. Ahmadinejad likely staying put in Tehran, Washington may have more interest in trying to woo President Bashar Assad away from Iran’s orbit. That could translate into leverage for Damascus amid U.S.-Syria negotiations. For instance, Syria wants the U.S. to loosen economic sanctions imposed on it for alleged links to terror financing.”

Also in the WSJ

“… Sen. Mitchell flew into Damascus after a stopover in Beirut, …. A big part of the thaw has been the dramatic rehabilitation of Syria’s Mr. Assad in the eyes of many Western and Arab officials.

The Bush administration and its Western and regional allies spent years isolating Syria. ….. But Mr. Assad also proved instrumental in a Qatar-backed peace plan last Spring that ended a long political standoff in Lebanon. Shortly after, he entered into indirect peace talks with arch-foe Israel.

Mr. Assad’s hands-off approach in recent months in Lebanon has encouraged some Western officials and analysts into thinking he’s eager to play a supporting role in cooling Mideast tensions further.

The Lebanon elections, though they went against Syria, may help pave the way for more productive talks with Washington, says Joshua Landis …

If Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad holds onto power in Friday elections, Mr. Assad could be a useful ally for Washington in pressuring Iran into meaningful talks. Sen. Mitchell’s stopover follows lower-level visits by U.S. diplomats in recent weeks. U.S. officials are pressing for help stabilizing the Iraq-Syria border and for support in Arab-Israel peace efforts….”

Mitchell Cites Syria’s Role in Mideast Peace Effort
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: June 13, 2009

DAMASCUS, Syria (AP) — George J. Mitchell, the Obama administration’s Middle East envoy, said during a visit with Syrian leaders here on Saturday that the country had a vital role to play in forging peace in the region…..

“Syria has an integral role to play in reaching comprehensive peace,” Mr. Mitchell said. Syria and the United States share an obligation “to create conditions for negotiations to begin promptly and end successfully,” he told reporters after a 90-minute meeting with President Bashar al-Assad in the capital, Damascus.

A senior Syrian official described Saturday’s talks as “very positive” and said Mr. Mitchell and Mr. Assad also discussed the security situation in neighboring Iraq. …..

“I’ve held substantive discussions with President Assad and on the full range of serious issues in our bilateral relationship,” Mr. Mitchell said. “We seek to build on this effort to establish a relationship built on mutual respect and mutual interest.”

Despite the diplomatic overtures, the Obama administration renewed Bush-era economic sanctions against Syria last month as a way to keep pressure on the country to cooperate.

The following article by Scarlett Haddad (copied below in part) explains why Hizbullah and Syria are content with the election loss in Lebanon. It reviews a number of parliamentary seats that Hizbullah and Syria withdrew candidates from, resulting in March 14th or Jumblatt victories. It also argues that Saudi Arabia and Syria are coming to terms on Lebanon, as they did in the 1990s. Saad Hariri will preside over the government, but Syria’s and HIzbullah’s political interests will be respected. This makes sense for it goes a long way to explain the outcome of the elections as well as the behavior of all sides and accords with the new dynamic of compromise that is taking hold in the region now that Bush is gone.

If Walid Jumblatt is the bellwether of Lebanese politics, his recent mia culpa is significant:

Walid Jumblatt today spoke about his mistakes in being aggressive in criticizing Bashar Assad in the past and he said that Syria is Lebanon’s natural depth and he said that 1559 was the worst thing to happen to Lebanon … and that all that must be put behind them as they all work together as one …

Et si le Hezbollah ne voulait pas vraiment gagner les élections? (Thanks Why Discuss)
Par Scarlett HADDAD | 13/06/2009 l’Orient (Read the whole article.)

….De plus, le Hezbollah avait aussi saisi avant tous ses autres partenaires au sein de l’opposition le désintérêt de la Syrie à l’égard du processus électoral libanais. Alors que certains alliés de la Syrie annonçaient sans relâche que Damas comptait entrer dans la bataille électorale par le Akkar, la Békaa-Ouest et Tripoli, rien ne s’est passé jusqu’à la fermeture des bureaux de vote. Même auparavant, certains piliers de l’opposition s’étaient plaints auprès des dirigeants syriens d’un afflux d’argent en provenance d’Arabie saoudite, contrairement à l’accord conclu entre le roi Abdallah d’Arabie, l’émir du Qatar et le président Bachar el-Assad au cours de leur rencontre au sommet du Koweït, lorsqu’ils s’étaient mis d’accord pour ne pas intervenir dans le cours des élections libanaises. Là aussi, les autorités syriennes n’avaient pas réagi, tout comme elles n’étaient pas non plus intervenues dans la composition des listes de l’opposition, laissant quasiment tomber certains de ses alliés. De l’aveu de certains chefs de l’opposition, la Syrie n’a donc rien fait pour favoriser une victoire de ses alliés. Et lorsque la question a été directement posée aux dirigeants syriens, ceux-ci ont laissé entendre que le résultat des élections ne compte pas, à partir du moment où les relations entre Damas et Washington sont en train de s’améliorer, tout comme celles de Damas et de Riyad. Les autorités syriennes seraient donc prêtes à ouvrir une nouvelle page avec Saad Hariri devenu Premier ministre, du moment que leurs relations avec les dirigeants saoudiens sont devenues plus cordiales. D’ailleurs, comme toujours, c’est Walid Joumblatt qui a donné le ton en déclarant hier au Akhbar que « Saad Hariri peut dialoguer avec la Syrie, et cela est inévitable ». Mais plus important que les considérations internes libanaises, la Syrie a des défis régionaux et internationaux à relever. Elle s’apprête à relancer le processus de négociations avec Israël et souhaite montrer de bonnes dispositions à l’égard de l’Occident. Pour elle, les élections libanaises ne constituent pas un enjeu très important, d’autant que ses alliés libanais restent forts et en mesure de s’opposer à d’éventuelles décisions qui visent à les marginaliser…

En somme, les résultats des élections législatives arrangent un peu tout le monde, l’équilibre des forces est pratiquement inchangé, ce qui rassure l’Occident, et la victoire indiscutable de Saad Hariri lui permet de jouer un rôle nouveau sur la scène interne et régionale. Seuls ceux qui espéraient un véritable changement sont déçus…

US could lift Syria sanctions: Carter

DAMASCUS (AFP) — Former US president Jimmy Carter said on Thursday he believed the new US administration of President Barack Obama could lift sanctions on Syria and upgrade ties by sending an ambassador to Damascus.

“I think the United States will respond… to any positive steps that Syria takes,” Carter said at a press conference after meeting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and Foreign Minister Walid Muallem.

“There’s no doubt on my mind that the American president wants to have full and cooperative relationships with Syria, and that involves the lifting of sanctions in the future and that also involves the appointment of an American ambassador to Damascus,” he said.

State media accuses Israeli PM of rejecting all peace initiatives by conditionally accepting Palestinian state.

Netanyahu’s speech:http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1092810.html

Obama’s response:

“The president welcomes the important step forward in Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech,” White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said in a written statement. “The president is committed to two states, a Jewish state of Israel and an independent Palestine, in the historic homeland of both peoples. He believes this solution can and must ensure both Israel’s security and the fulfillment of the Palestinians’ legitimate aspirations for a viable state, and he welcomes Prime Minister Netanyahu’s endorsement of that goal.”

Syrian state media on Monday slammed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for “torpedoing peace” in a speech accepting a Palestinian state but shackled by unacceptable conditions.

“Netanyahu’s speech torpedoes all peace efforts” wrote the mass-circulation Al-Watan in its report of Sunday’s speech.

Al-Baath, the mouthpiece of Syria’s ruling party, commented: “Netanyahu has confirmed that he rejects the Arab initiative for peace along with all the initiatives and resolutions of the Security Council relative to peace” in the Middle East…..

Another Syrian newspaper, Ath-Thawra, said Israel appeared to be far from thinking about peace.

The Israeli leader’s speech “shows it is useless to await any change in the programme of Netanyahu or the Israeli government,” it said.

“The United States, which is working for peace, finds itself today with two alternatives: they can either go back and maintain the status quo marked by crisis, which we hope doesn’t happen, or assume their responsibilities in pushing Israel to talk seriously in order to bring about peace and security.”

Suleiman: Netanyahu’s Rigid Stance Calls For More Arab Unity, Safeguarding the Resistance

“The Israeli stance expressed by PM Netanyahu is characterized with rigidity, whether in dealing with the issue of peace, or on the level of settling the issue of Palestinian refugees. [This] calls on Arab leaders for more unity and to safeguard the spirit and willingness of the resistance,” Suleiman said.

Iraq and Syria

U.S. commander sees fewer foreign fighters in Iraq
Mon Jun 15, 2009

BAGHDAD, June 15 (Reuters) – Iraq has seen a significant fall in the number of foreign fighters arriving to battle U.S. and local forces, and efforts by neighbouring Syria are starting to bear fruit, U.S. General Ray Odierno said on Monday….

“We have seen a significant decrease in the flow of foreign fighters into Iraq in the last eight to 10 months,” Odierno, the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, told a news conference alongside the Iraqi defence and interior ministers. “For the most part it has just been a trickle … We have seen some fighters coming through Syria, but Syria has been taking some action over the last few weeks, so hopefully that will continue,” Odierno said. Violence in Iraq has dropped sharply in the past year…..

Stable Iraq Key to U.S.-Syria Dialogue
By Peter Harling
1 June 2009, Defense News

Engagement with Syria has been featured among the U.S. administration’s prom­ised foreign policy changes, yet so far a mechanism for coopera­tion has elud­ed both sides. Renewed negotiations with Israel must wait for the political dust to settle in Jerusalem.

Damascus is unlikely to ac­cede to U.S. requests for shifting poli­cies toward Hamas or Hizbollah, and certainly will not do so before signifi­cant progress has been made on oth­er fronts. The United States has renewed sanctions.

That leaves the topic of Iraq, where both sides expected the road to be smoothest because of apparent shared interests. In­stead, U.S. officials accuse Dam­ascus of allowing — if not abet­ting — the infiltration of militants across the border to Iraq.

Securing this border was sup­posed to be the most straightfor­ward of issues, but the question is more complicated than it first appeared and will require a broader discussion about politi­cal reconciliation in Iraq and a better understanding of Damas­cus’ fluctuating relationship with Sunni armed groups.

Different Perspective

When Iraq’s former regime col­lapsed, Syria openly supported those resisting the occupation, busing militants across the bor­der and creating an image that has shaped U.S. opinion ever since. However, the intensifying conflict transformed Syria’s threat perception from one cen­tered on the U.S. agenda for the region to one more concerned about Iraq’s breakup, sectarian dynamics, the influx of refugees and the uncomfortable expansion of Iranian influence.

Syria’s policy also was driven by the government’s desire to de­flect its own jihadi problem and rid itself of home-grown activists while placating the jihadi move­ment as a whole. That policy eventually backfired: Those who didn’t die came back more expe­rienced, better connected and ful­ly indoctrinated — more of a risk than before.

As Iraqi Sunnis turned away from foreign volunteers and Dam­ascus adjusted its own posture, Syria lost both a useful outlet and the indulgence of the jihadi com­munity. A series of violent inci­dents culminating in the 2008 bomb attack in the Syrian capital underscored this shift.

Syria’s dysfunctional border controls are also an important factor. Corruption has long been rife, enabling cross-border net­works to operate with cover from high-ranking officials. Moreover, technology is deficient; Damas­cus only recently introduced a centralized computer system to monitor entries and exits.

Despite an antiquated approach to illegal crossings, notable ef­forts have been made, such as en­gaging tribes, improving routine controls, and even cracking down on corrupt magnates in order to better protect Syrian territory.

Ironically, Syrian officials now complain that the United States and Iraq aren’t doing enough on the Iraqi side to seal the border.

Two issues stand out. First, the ambiguous links that Washington accuses Damascus of enjoying with al-Qaida and other armed groups provide Syria with far bet­ter intelligence on the former and more leverage on the latter than the search-and-destroy approach typically pursued by the United States. In other words, Syria may think twice about severing ties that bolster its security and en­hance its political clout,

Second, opening and closing the tap of insurgents going into Iraq likely will remain a valuable pressure point for Damascus in future negotiations with the United States. That said, while U.S. demands on Syria are clear, Syria’s expectations are clouded in strategic ambiguity.

There are other obstacles to ef­fective security cooperation. The uneven quality of U.S. intelli­gence, particularly human intelli­gence from questionable Iraqi sources, along with a propensity to favor short-term benefits over long-term infiltration, has gener­ated skepticism in Syrian quar­ters. It will take time before enough trust exists for the Syrian regime to allow the U.S. to by­pass political interlocutors and engage the intelligence communi­ty directly.

Perhaps most important, no matter what is done in Damas­cus, U.S. efforts to eradicate the insurgency will only go so far without a political breakthrough in Iraq. Less violence and suc­cessful elections in Iraq have led only to token reconciliation and little reform. Simply arresting ever more opponents is not a so­lution while fundamental issues go unaddressed. Security steps are not what will make the biggest difference in Iraq now.

Political ones will. And that is also the arena where cooperation with Syria may prove the most fruitful.

Today, Damascus has a keen in­terest in Iraqi stability, after hav­ing paid a high price for promot­ing the reverse. Moreover, at a time when its economy is danger­ously ailing, it wants to become an outlet for Iraq’s oil products, a supplier for its emerging markets and a route for transit trade. De­veloping economic ties will en­hance Syrian buy-in.

Officials also have realized that an unstable Iraq serves Iran, not Syria, and now see value in recon­ciliation. If Washington pressures Baghdad to implement a genuine reconciliation process, Syria can help by using its access to impor­tant insurgent players. In that context, sifting unredeemable al­Qaida elements from more main­stream resistance will become easier. Only if it is built on a shared vision, with promise of sustainable economic benefits rather than immediate security gains, can the U.S.-Syrian dia­logue on Iraq succeed.

By Peter Harling , the Damascus-based director for Iraq, Syria and Lebanon with the International Crisis Group, an independ­ent, nonprofit, non­governmental organization working to prevent and resolve deadly conflict.

Why is Dennis Ross being ousted as Obama envoy to Iran? (Thanks T_desco)
By Barak Ravid, Haaretz Correspondent

Dennis Ross, who most recently served as a special State Department envoy to Iran, will abruptly be relieved of his duties, sources in Washington told Haaretz. An official announcement is expected in the coming days.

The Obama administration will announce that Ross has been reassigned to another position in the White House. In his new post, the former Mideast peace envoy under President Bill Clinton will deal primarily with regional issues related to the peace process.

Washington insiders speculate that a number of reasons moved the administration to reassign Ross. One possibility is Iran’s persistent refusal to accept Ross as a U.S. emissary given the diplomat’s Jewish background as well as his purported pro-Israel leanings. Ross is known to maintain contacts with numerous senior officials in Israel’s defense establishment and the Israeli government.

Diplomatic sources in Jerusalem surmised that another possibility for Ross’ ouster is his just-released book, “Myths, Illusions, and Peace – Finding a New Direction for America in the Middle East.”

Ross, who co-wrote the book with David Makovsky, a former journalist who is a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, argued against a linkage between the Palestinian issue and the West’s policy against Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

Ross and Mokovsky also raised the possibility of military action against Iran.

“Tougher policies – either militarily or meaningful containment – will be easier to sell internationally and domestically if we have diplomatically tried to resolve our differences with Iran in a serious and credible fashion,” they wrote.

Another possible reason for the reshuffle could be Ross’ dissatisfaction with his present standing in the State Department, particularly given the fact that Washington’s two other envoys to the region – George Mitchell, who is overseeing the Mideast peace process; and Richard Holbrooke, who is dealing with Pakistan and Afghanistan – wield great influence and are featured prominently.

A diplomatic source in Jerusalem speculated that perhaps Ross preferred to work for the National Security Agency, which answers directly to President Barack Obama, and would thus be considered a more enhanced role. (…)

Josh Hersh, in the New Yorker (Thanks FLC)

“… Perhaps the only thing Carter hadn’t found time for, of late, was an epic e-mail from Jeffrey Feltman, the State Department’s envoy to Syria—“It’s this long,” Carter said, spreading his hands wide as if he were taking measure of a prize fish. Carter, who has been outspoken in his support for more American engagement with the Syrian regime, and groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, which are on the State Department’s list of terrorist organizations, has a particular disdain for Feltman, who as Ambassador to Lebanon during the Bush Administration, consistently antagonized Syria. “For some ungodly reason, when Hillary decided to send some representative to Syria they picked out Feltman,” he said.

Carter praised Obama for his recent speech in Cairo but stopped short of agreeing with those who claimed it had helped March 14 win the election. Instead, he credited much of the progress to Obama’s “general attitude toward this region” and “the favorable attitudes that people now have toward the United States.

As for the future of Hezbollah, Carter said, “Oh, I don’t think Hezbollah’s going to create any problems for Obama, or for Lebanon. I think they’re satisfied to maintain the status quo.” This may be optimistic. Carter said, “We’ve met with Hariri, we’ve met with other leaders today, and I think that withdrawing weapons from Hezbollah is out of the question. I don’t think they’re going to even bring it up. And that’s the main thing that Hezbollah wants.”

Helena Cobban of Just World News writes:

With Mitchell now due to be in Syria either Friday or Saturday you can find the transcribed highlights of my June 4 interview with FM Walid Moualem here. You can find the news-analysis piece I did on this for IPS here:

Talking To: Blogger Elias Muhanna
Elias Muhanna talks about his blog, “Qifa Nabki,” and the election results

UPI: “Syria ‘ready to help,’ officials say”

I am very eager to see a real improvement in our relations with Washington,” said Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem in an interview with Foreign Affairs magazine. “But nothing has happened yet.” Moallem acknowledged the Washington sanction decision was based on Syrian support, along with Iran, for the Lebanese Hezbollah and the Palestinian Hamas. “But it’s very strange that you condemn me as a ‘terrorist’ at the same time as you call on me to help you combat terrorism in Iraq and elsewhere,” he said, referring to Washington. “It doesn’t make sense!” He noted, however, that Damascus was ready to step forward to act as a possible intermediary regarding Washington concerns over Iranian proxies and its controversial nuclear program. “We are ready to help,” he said.

Will Syria play key role in Obama’s Mideast peace efforts? US envoy Mitchell was in Egypt Thursday, and arrives in Damascus Friday. Syrians hope for a new rapprochement under an Obama administration.
By Julien Barnes-Dacey in CSM

George Mitchell is due to arrive in Syria on Friday for what promises to be a crucial visit. Syria wants a place in any emerging Obama peace plan for the region. Washington would be short sighted not to include Damascus. The Lebanon has been a leading factor in Syria’s isolation and Washington’s dominant concern in the Levant for five years very much to Syria’s detriment. Because of the election results, Lebanon can now take a back seat to other regional considerations.

The Lebanon elections produced results confirming the political status quo among Lebanon’s competing factions. The Doha, power-sharing agreement that resolved the Lebanon question last year – or something closely approximating it – is likely to be reformulated for the new government. All sides seem to be in agreement about the general outlines of a new government, eliminating the temptation on the part of all sides, including the US and Syria to renegotiate the regional balance of power. Lebanon has effectively been placed in deep freeze.

Obama has yet to speak the word Syria. He has spoken clearly and emphatically about the Palestinian track in resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict, but not about the Syrian track.

For Syria, this means that the moment of truth for Washington has arrived. If Mitchell is interested in coming to an understanding with Syria, Damascus will be very responsive. Damascus does not want to be left out of a regional peace plan. It is eager to come to an understanding with the US that recognizes its long-term interests. Those interests are: 1. Getting back the Golan and signing peace with Israel. 2. Getting out from underneath sanctions imposed on it due to its struggle with Israel. 3. Working with the US and Baghdad to assure the stability, security, and political balance of Iraq. 4. Moving forward with border delineation in Lebanon; and 5. Encouraging Hamas to work with the PLO in supporting an emerging Obama plan to resolve outstanding Palestinian-Israeli differences.

Damascus fears that Washington intends to “cherry pick,” or to push Syria forward on the Iraq and Lebanon issues, which are relatively easy to resolve, without committing itself to including Syria in the Obama peace plan or to getting the Golan restored, which is much more difficult. After all, the sanctions which weigh on Syria are a result of its on-going struggle with Israel as are the claims that it supports “terror.” Syria want normal relations with the world, but it will not abandon its right to the Golan.

Syrian authorities are unlikely to give to Obama what they refused to give to Bush. Damascus will give gratification on the issues important to Washington if it gets gratification on the Golan, Sanctions, and diplomatic normalization in return. This is why Syria insists on a comprehensive approach to the region’s problems. It does not want to repeat the experience of the 1990s, when it was abandoned at the alter in 2000 after eight years of cooperation in Lebanon, Palestine and Iraq.

News Round Up follows

Aoun: We Will Contest the Elections, Murr’s Victory

MP Michel Aoun announced Wednesday he planned to contest the elections before the Constitutional Council and said he was not opposed to giving President Michel Suleiman veto power “within the constitution,” in his first public appearance following March 8’s defeat in the June 7 elections…..On his loss in the elections, Aoun said: “We had the support of 70% of Christians at a time when we had nothing in the government. Now we have 27 deputies. Explain to me how does that indicate we lost?” “They admit today that I represent half (of the Christians), then I want half of the Christians’ share in governance,” he added. He said that although the opposition did not win parliamentary majority, it “maintains popular majority.”

Feltman Insists U.S. Will Not Deal with Hizbullah (Naharnet, 10 Jun 09 – via T_desco)

U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Jeffery Feltman said Hizbullah should be disarmed and become a political party that functions in accordance with the Lebanese constitution.

Feltman, in an interview with Alhurra Arabic language satellite TV network, said that Hizbullah should abide by U.N. Security Council resolutions that call for the disarming of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias.

Feltman reiterated that the U.S. does not and will not deal with Hizbullah. He said Washington does not deal with a party that threatened its people through the use of arms in May 2008.

He told Alhurra that the U.S. looks forward to cooperate with the new Lebanese government and its people in order to strengthen its institutions, independence and sovereignty.

On U.S. aid to Lebanon, the top official reiterated that assistance depends on the moves the new government will make.

Asked about possible cabinet ministers, Feltman said that it is up to the Lebanese people to decide the formation of the cabinet. (Naharnet, 10 Jun 09)

Hezbollah, in a statement on the Web site of the group’s al-Manar television station, said it “strongly condemns the continued harsh and overt interference of the United States in the internal affairs of Lebanon, especially in terms of the statements of its officials on the results of recent parliamentary elections.” (Darhally in “Lebanon’s Winning Bloc Must Try to Placate Hezbollah”

(Naharnet, 09 Jun 09)

“A high-ranking State Department source” “said the U.S. and Lebanon’s friends were not comfortable with the experience of veto power in the government because many issues were frozen in the previous period.

A high-ranking State Department source also told pan-Arab daily Asharq al-Awsat that it would be easier to cooperate with a Lebanese foreign minister who is not allied with Hizbullah.

About U.S. aid to Lebanon, the source said: “Washington’s assistance to Lebanon depends on what it wants and what it expects from the Lebanese government in terms of its partnership with the U.S.”

Aid also depends on the upcoming cabinet’s formation and policy statement, the official added.”
(Naharnet, 09 Jun 09)

Geagea: Veto Power with Minority Will Cripple Country (Naharnet, 09 Jun 09)

Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea reiterated his opposition Tuesday to giving the minority veto power in government warning it could lead to the “complete paralysis” of the country.

“I support awarding veto power to the president of the republic because he is neutral and was elected through consensus,” Geagea said following talks with U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon Michele Sison in Maarab.

“Regarding the need for a “second Doha Agreement” to form the next government, Geagea believed that the picture conveyed by these elections was clear and did not point in this direction, revealing: “I am against the hindering third. However, this issue will be discussed with all the other forces of March 14. Personally, I am in favor of giving that power to the President of the Republic”, recalling the campaigns that used to be waged by some, even until now, against the president of the republic, who is a consensus president. (Naharnet, 09 Jun 09)

Hariri in al-Hayat:

“Al-Hayat asked Al-Hariri if the March 14 forces have developed a plan for dealing with future decisions, in relation to the leadership of parliament and government, its formation, and representation in it. Al-Hariri answered: “The March 14 forces are working now to formulate the plan and we will meet to decide on it.” Asked if his candidate for heading the government has been decided, he answered: “Only one person decides who the prime minister will be and this person is Saad al-Hariri, of course, in consultation with the allies.” When asked for his opinion of some speculations that it would be difficult for President Michel Sleiman to play a bigger role after the elections following the failure of an independent bloc in the Jbeil district, he replied: “The president’s role is that of the wise man, judge, and protector of the constitution. As for the bloc, my entire bloc is for the president of the republic.”

A.L. Butters in TIME

The temptation to make too much of Hizballah’s failure to unseat Lebanon’s Western-backed government in Sunday’s election is obvious. For past three years, the Shi’ite Islamist movement has been on a roll, withstanding an Israeli invasion, then paralyzing the U.S.-backed government, eventually humiliating its militias in a street confrontation, in the process winning veto power over cabinet decisions. Many had feared that the election would see the Iran-backed movement lead an opposition coalition to victory. Instead, voters on Sunday affirmed the status quo, prompting some observers to claim that the region’s political tide had turned against Iran and its “rejectionist” allies.

One Israeli official claimed that “Hizballah was punished for the [2006] war,” while New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman announced, “President Barack Obama defeated President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran” in Lebanon’s vote. Yet these are somewhat far-fetched claims for an election that was decided by Christian swing voters — and that affirmed the raw sectarianism of Lebanese politics.

Sectarianism is the organizing principle of Lebanese democracy, because the constitution allocates a fixed number of seats in parliament to each religious group — on the basis of a formula derived from the population statistics in 1936. (The slicing of the political pie no longer matches the demographic reality: Christians, for example, are allocated half of the seats in parliament, but probably comprise little more than a third of the population; Shi’ites are allocated 20% of the seats but their share of the population is closer to double that proportion.)…

Thomas L. Friedman’s one sentence summary of the region…

… Ballots were the only weapons the March 14 coalition had against an Iran-Hezbollah-Syria alliance that is widely suspected of having been involved in murdering Rafik Hariri … (Ballots Over Bullets: NYT, June 9, 2009) thanks T_desco

Milli Schmidt added in the comment section of the last post:

How wonderful that attention is drawn to Rafik Shami! He is very well known in Germany (he publishes in German), particularly for the absolutely wonderful book “A Handful of Stars” – a moving, beautifully written, funny account of his childhood in Bab Tuma, when the old city was still a collection of Christians, Jews, Muslims, Armenians and a handful of madmen and women thrown in. I’m also just now reading a collection of stories that expands on one character out of A Handful of Stars (the old coach driver Salim), called Damascus Nights – all highly recommended!

Also, very interesting and well written piece on the Iraqi refugee crisis in Syria, contains a wider analysis of the country’s economic and political situation:

A.B. Yehushua in Ha’aretz: “Why do we insist on a ‘Jewish’ state?”  (Thanks Shai)

Addendum: (My first numbers are wrong. They were hastily taken from a reader. A more correct number is a 9% win for the opposition in the popular vote, not 15% as I first reported. Here is a smart account by “B-side Beirut.” shooting blanks and the popular vote:

According to a study cited by al-Akhbar (bottom of the page), the opposition received 54.5% of the popular vote, whereas the ruling coalition received 45.5%. I find it funny that the total adds up to 100%. As far as I know, we have not succumbed to the two-party system yet and there was a visible amount of votes cast for people not running on either lists, especially in Hizballah and Amal’s backyards.

Now I am no professional, but here are the numbers I got when, instead of taking the voters as blocks of with or against, I added the total number of votes cast for the total number of candidates in three categories: opposition 50.4%, ruling coalition 46%, and other 3.6%. I only did the numbers once and I might have missed an affiliated independent or two, but not any with a considerable number of votes attached.

(Original Post) The popular vote in Lebanon favored the opposition by roughly 15%, but due to the vagaries of Lebanon’s electoral system, March 14 won. Aoun will speak today. Syria and Hizbullah have conceded gracefully.

These are the official numbers of the June 2009′ Elections
Friday Lunch Club.

The aggregate averages of voters in each district in Lebanon, shows that the ‘losers’ got 54.8% of the total votes (839,371 votes) and the ‘winners’ racked up 45.2% of the votes (692,285 votes).

Syria satisfied with Lebanon polls, praises spirit of reconciliation
9 June, 2009

Damascus- Syrian Arab news agency ( SANA ) quoted Presidential Political and Media Adviser Bouthaina Shaaban on Tuesday as saying “the Lebanese elections are an internal Lebanese matter” and said she expressed ‘Syria’s satisfaction over the safe and stable course of the elections.’

Shaaban underlined in a statement Syria’s concern for the” unity, stability and prosperity of Lebanon, and its readiness to help it in all fields to attain these goals.” SANA reported

Shaaban added according to SANA “Syria encourages the spirit of reconciliation shown by all the Lebanese parties, hoping that it will be turned into tangible steps through the national program in the coming phase.”

Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah delivered a graceful concession speech on TV Monday in which he admitted defeat ‘with sportsmanship and democratic spirit’ , congratulated his opponents and confirmed the acceptance of the election results.

In the Daily Star

Nasrallah uttered one sentence that effectively left the door open for challenging the entire democratic process. The Hizbullah leader drew a distinction between what he called a “parliamentary majority” and a “popular majority,” thereby indicating that although the March 14 alliance won the elections, they failed to earn the loyalty of a majority of citizens.

Nasrallah is right on this score: The numbers show that the opposition garnered over 100,000 more votes than March 14 did on election day. But the electoral law gave greater weight to votes in some districts than it did to those in others.

This might make for a useful piece of ammunition in Hizbullah’s arsenal of arguments were it not for one thing: All of the parties, including Hizbullah, agreed to the rules of the game in advance. In fact, the law that was used to govern this year’s parliamentary elections was agreed to during negotiations that took place in Doha after the May 2008 clashes. Hizbullah, having demonstrated its superior military prowess during those street battles, could have tried to force a different electoral arrangement, but the party chose not to. There can be no turning back on that agreement now.

Lebanon feels the Obama effect
by Simon Tisdall
9 June 2009, Guardian Unlimited

The pro-west coalition’s narrow win in Beirut is the first indication that the US president’s Middle East message is being heard

Foreign policy experts and commentators have been trying to elucidate an “Obama doctrine” ever since the new US president took office. Lebanon’s surprise election result, in which a pro-western coalition narrowly triumphed, suggests these analysts have got things the wrong way round. Whatever the theory may be, the Beirut turnabout is the first, circumstantial evidence of a tangible “Obama effect” in the Middle East. It could be catching.

It would be fanciful to claim that Obama’s bridge-building speech to the Muslim world in Cairo last week, attractive though it was, crucially influenced Lebanese voters. But the calmer, unconfrontational tone adopted by Washington on Middle East issues since George Bush trudged home to Texas appears to have struck a chord in a country that was teetering on the brink of sectarian civil war one year ago.

Pre-election visits by Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, and Joe Biden, the US vice-president, underscored the importance that Obama attached to the poll. Some resented these interventions as unwarranted interference. But many Lebanese, particularly the nearly 40% of the population that is Christian, seem to have approved of Washington’s increased engagement; and to have heard its implicit message that a vote for Hezbollah and its allies would be a backwards step.

That refrain was underscored by exaggerated claims that Hezbollah and its Tehran backers, if further empowered, would turn Lebanon into a second Gaza. And if that was not enough, an eve-of-poll demarche by Boutros Sfeir, spiritual leader of the country’s Maronite Christians, may have done the trick. He warned the country was in danger. It was clear from whom he believed the danger emanated.

By giving the nod to Saad Hariri and his 14 March bloc of Sunni Muslim, Druze and Christian parties, which won 71 parliamentary seats against 57 for the opposition, Lebanon has provided Obama with his first significant regional policy success. The result is a setback for Iran, which has sought enhanced influence via Hezbollah. And it confirmed Lebanon’s 2005 rejection of Syria as the master manipulator of its affairs, confounding suggestions that Damascus was inching back.

The results are also a boost for western-leaning Arab regimes, such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia, that helped prevent Lebanon falling into the abyss after the assassination of Hariri’s father, the former prime minister Rafiq Hariri, and the subsequent, disastrous Hezbollah-Israel war of 2006. Saudi Arabia’s rapprochement with Syria, and a parallel warming of ties between Syria and the US, will be all the easier to pursue as a result of Sunday’s election.

Syria’s 2008 Inflation Rate: Jihad Yazigi reports a correction: Syria’s inflation rate stood at 15.15 percent, and not 5.4 percent, last year the Central Bureau of Statistics said. Read

From Thomas Dine – via the Pulse and FLC

Since the Obama Administration came into office in January, it has approached the Syrian regime with a certain coolness and caution. … Today, the U.S. sees Syria as promoter and supporter of terrorism, host of the leaderships of Hamas, Hezbollah, and Islamic Jihad. In brief, the prospects of coming off the official terrorist list in the near future are nil. Syria has covertly tried to develop supplies for if not its own nuclear weaponry, accused again by the IAEA of such activity this weekend. Syria, according to American forces, continues to support anti-American violence in Iraq and thus a delegation of military officials to discuss joint efforts to shut off Arab and other insurgents operations inside Iraq is a necessity. Friction between Syria and Lebanon is an ongoing concern, and the election results will not ease the strain in American and Saudi views of Syrian activity and influence inside Lebanon’s body politique. Achieving respectful behavior toward Beirut is a problem on which the Americans remain greatly concerned and focused.

Syria Declares Emergency For Drought-hit Northeast: Authorities “have begun to distribute food aid in the worst drought-affected regions in the northeast” as part of a series of emergency steps. “Nearly 5,200 food rations have been distributed in Al-Hasakah and 15,000 more rations will arrive in the next few days,” said provincial governor Najib Salloum. He added that each food ration comprised 150 kilograms of flour, 25kg sugar, 25kg semolina, 10kg lentils, 2kg animal fat, 1kg tea, and 1kg oil, distributed to the worst-affected families.

David Butter, who writes for the Economist Intelligence Unit dropped me a line to say:

I am also deeply into Rafik Schami’s The Dark Side of Love, a magnificent Marquez-like novel of 20th century Syria that is a must-read for anyone interested in Syrian history and society — and deserves a much wider readership. It has just been published in English (from original German) — I fear it may never come out in Arabic — too much sex and politics.

Here is a link to a review by Robin Yassin-Kassab, who is an SC reader and writer. He states:

“Egypt, with its unending metropolis, is the home of the Arabic novel, and Egypt produced the Arabs’ master of fiction, Naguib Mahfouz. But a flame equally bright now burns from Damascus, via Germany, as shown by what may turn out to be the first Great Syrian Novel.”

All the best
David

Also read this review by The Armenian Odar Reads who read the book in two days.

Here are some other puffs from Amazon:

Rafik Schami’s dazzling novel spans a century of Syrian history in which politics and religions continue to torment an entire people. Simultaneously, his poetic stories from three generations tell of the courage of lovers who risk death sooner than deny their passions. He has also written a heartfelt tribute to his hometown Damascus and a great and moving hymn to the power of love.

“A grandiose book–one of the richest, most venturous, and most beautiful projects of capturing the world…”
–Deutschlandradio

“A cascade of stories, which again and again inflame themselves… An Arab variation of Romeo and Juliet with a happy ending… A wonderfully easy read… A modern Arab genre tableau… an immense declaration of love to Damascus with its East-West tensions…”
–Neue Züricher Zeitung

“The strangeness of the Arab world in Schami’s novel becomes immediately familiar–in 896 pages, in 300 stories, between grief and laughter, crime and poetry.”
–Süddeutsche Zeitung

“Rafik Schami’s novel is a festival for the imagination…”
–Süddeutsche Zeitung

On May 24th JAD posted an article in which the lawyer Michel Shammas argued that “Syria would be the first country in the world to allow Christians to marry two wives.” A heated debate among SC readers followed about Syria’s new Personal Status draft law.

????? ??? ??? ??????? ???? ??? ??????? ??????? ?? ??????
??????? ????? ???? : ( ???? ????? )
25/ 05/ 2009
???? ????? ?????? ??????

???? ?????? ???? ????? ????? ??????? ??????? ??????

Tyler Golson, who lives in Syria and has been following this issue, writes to correct Shamas and set the record straight. He writes:

I know this comment comes a bit too late, but I have to add a critical correction to one of the very first comments:

Michel Shammas (??????? ????? ????) mistakenly claims that the new Personal Status draft law permits polygamy for Christians (“???? ???????”).

This is completely wrong.

He cites as evidence Article 639 which states that: “Each spouse may ask for divorce on account of the other’s adultery, or a second marriage.” (“???? ??? ?? ??????? ?? ???? ??????? ???? ??? ????? ?????? ?? ????? ??????”) However, it is clear that the “second marriage” referred to here is an illegal, invalid, or unrecognized “marriage” performed without the consent either of the other spouse or the state.

We know this because, as Mr. Shammas himself notes in the very next line, Article 624 very explicitly prohibits multiple marriages: “Neither spouse may take another in marriage as long as he/she remains married”. (“?? ???? ???? ??????? ?? ???? ????? ??? ?? ??? ????? ?????”)

Article 639, providing the grounds for divorce, does not speculate as to how a man or woman might accomplish a “second marriage”–trickery? fraud? bribing the judge? going to another country?– but we know that such an act is illegal as stipulated by the preceding Article 624.

The idea, in summary, is that polygamy is illegal for Christians. Period.

With respect to Mr. Shammas, there are so many real, morally repugnant aspects of the Personal Status draft law that we don’t need to manufacture imaginary ones.

?? ???? ????? ??????? ????????? ????? ???????…?? ??? ????? ???? ???? ?????. ???? ?? ??? ?? ?? ???? ??????? ?? ?????? ??? ??????? ??????? ???????? ??? ???? ???????? ????? ??????? ???? ??? ???? ????????…