Sayyida Ruqayya

Dispatch from Damascus 6 (25/10/2008)
From: Ali Khan –

[Landis: Ali Khan is an Indian student in Damascus, He has been sending out emails discribing his life in Syria. They have made their way to me. All are excellent. This one captures the rhythms and feel of Damascus.]

I had a mid-term exam this week and so mostly I have been studying for it. The day before the exam there was some sort of fault with the power grid system in my area and so we had no electricity for the whole day and the whole night. Obviously this posed a slight problem as I still had some grammar and vocabulary to revise. After sunset, I went to Seyyida Ruqayya’s shrine to study there. The entire complex has its own back up generators and so there was plenty of light.

Unfortunately, a huge group of Iranian pilgrims had just arrived and had occupied most of the forecourt and the adjoining courtyards. I went to the mosque and sat there for a while but the pilgrims started to bring their bags and settled into the mosque. The Iranians always bring lots of bags into the shrine and create a little corner for themselves and if one didn’t know otherwise, one would assume that they were going to spend the night there. The shrine closes for maintenance after the ‘*isha, *evening, prayers. Normally, they start announcing the closure of the shrine forty-five minutes before they actually shut the doors. It is sometimes quite funny to watch the *khuddam *[s], or custodians of the shrine trying to persuade elderly Iranian ladies, with their billowing *’abayas* (the black tunics they were over their clothes), to gather their bags and leave. I had managed to find a quiet  corner to study in and the sudden announcement on the sound system broke my concentration.

However, I was happy to find that someone had left two sweets for me by my books. A lot of pilgrims bring sweets, *baklava*, candy and all sorts of other confectionery and after their prayers distribute them amongst the other people there. Normally, children are given this task and I suppose this is the few times when they actually want to do what they are told to. I was probably too engrossed in learning the vocabulary and therefore didn’t notice the person who left me the sweets.

Since the announcements became more regular and the old ladies became even louder in passionately telling the custodians that they were not going to budge, I left the shrine and made my way home, hoping that the problem had been fixed. Unfortunately, the house was still in darkness.

Nut Shop Damascus

My house is above a bakery and below the bakery there is a nut shop. The owners of the nut shop have gradually realized that I live upstairs because they see me leaving for university early in the morning. They had a generator and so all their lights were on, including a huge spotlight that lit up the front of the shop. The light is cleverly placed so that the buckets of pine nuts, cashews, pistachios and all the different types of almonds look all the more alluring. There are almonds with sugar coatings that make them look like white candy, plain roasted almonds, almonds roasted with chilies, smoked almonds, almonds with a crunchy
coating, like the Japanese nuts and many other different kinds.

Muhammad is one of the young men who serve the customers. He loves shouting hello to everyone who walks past the shop but he also shouts equally loudly when someone is right next to him. I went downstairs hoping he was still there and sure enough, as soon as I put my head around the corner I was greeted by his bellowing voice. I put my rucksack down and started to chat to him. He asked me if I knew Shahrukh Khan personally, a famous India actor and I said no. He said he did and then in Hindi/ Urdu he said “*achcha hai*” or he is good. Apparently, they show many Bollywood films here and these are particularly popular amongst the younger generations. After a while I asked him if I could study in his shop because there was not electricity and he graciously said yes and gave me his stool, which was more like a log of wood. Thankfully customers are few and far between at ten o’clock at night and so I managed to study in relative quiet. The owner of the shop came a while later, said hello and then asked Muhammad to shut shop. He deliberately took a while to pack everything up so that I could study a while longer. Every time he would pass me he would quietly mutter ‘*achcha hai*.’ When he finally had to close the shutters he gave me a fistful of pine nuts and asked if I wanted the log so that I could study under the streetlight. The idea had not occurred to me and I thanked him and took him up on his offer.

Later, my friend who has a French *Patisserie* opposite my house saw me and called me to his shop. He asked what I was studying and I showed him my book. The Arabs are generally always very happy that foreigners come to learn their language and he told me how much he admired Indians because they are diligent and disciplined when it comes to their studies or work. Obviously, he does not know me that well yet! He insisted that I take his chair because the log looked uncomfortable and he made me sit in his shop and study. I must admit, I had a harder time concentrating because of the smell of fresh *pain au chocolat *and croissants wafting out of their bakery. I was thirsty and so I was going to go back and get some water but when I got up, he asked where I was going and then said that I should not break my concentration. Then he went to the back of the shop and came out with a glass of water. The *patisserie* remains open until 1 or 2 in the morning and so after I had finished revising everything I needed to, I left to go back home. The exam went well and thankfully was not as hard as I thought it would be.

In other news, my landlord has given me a desk that actually fits in my room and is not the size of a small bed. He also asked me whether I wanted a diesel heater, an electric heater or a *samovar*, which is heated
using coals. I haven’t told him yet but I suppose the electric heater will probably be the best option.  lthough, it would be wonderful to have a *samovar* on which I could have a kettle all the time but I am not sure how good the makeshift chimney is in my room. Actually it is more of a hole in the wall with a removable metal pipe attached to it.

Please do keep sending me all your wonderful emails. Until the next Dispatch, Ma’as Salaam.

youtube: Sayyida Ruqayya’s shrine in Damascus, Syria

Breaking The Iran-Syria Link: U.S. Should Lend Push To Israel-Syria Talks
By TRUDY RUBIN, October 25, 2008, Hatford Current

No one is certain what Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad really wants.

However, a Syrian-Israeli peace is worth pursuing because it would change the strategic picture in the region. Iran would no longer be able to ship arms to Hezbollah through Syria, and Hezbollah would have to rethink its policies toward Israel. Iran’s post-Saddam expansion of regional power would be reversed. This, in turn, would undercut Hamas and help expedite Israeli-Palestinian talks.

Progress on the Israel-Syria front could mesh with Israel’s new interest in reviving the dormant Saudi plan for a comprehensive peace between Israel and the Arab world. At the same time, a new administration could reach out to a chastened Iran.

… Last week, Syria formally recognized Lebanon for the first time, thus abandoning its historic dream of a greater Syria. Can the United States afford to sit this process out any longer?

“While Turkey mediates between Syria and Israel, the United States is on the sidelines,” I was told by Dennis Ross, a Mideast negotiator in the administrations of Clinton and George H.W. Bush, and an adviser to the Obama campaign. “Until the parties (in the region) see U.S. effectiveness, they will hang back.

“It makes sense to work on all components of the peace process, but work to get some things done. Test Assad.”

Russia decries US sanctions on arms exporting company: Los Angeles Times

Russia reacted angrily Friday to U.S. sanctions leveled this week against an arms trading company, calling them an “arrogant application” of American laws abroad.

Foreign Minister Sergei V. Lavrov said the U.S. move to ban government agencies from dealing with Rosoboronexport, a state-owned company managed by a close friend of Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, was “absolutely incompatible with the new realities in the current world structure.”

In addition to the Russian firm, the U.S. State Department imposed sanctions against companies in China, South Korea, Sudan, Venezuela and the United Arab Emirates for allegedly selling technology to Iran, North Korea and Syria that could lead to weapons of mass destruction. …

“If somebody in Washington thinks that in this way the United States will make Russia more accommodating in accepting the U.S. approach to the solution of the Iran nuclear problem, this is a mistake,” Lavrov told reporters Friday…

… Igor Danchenko, a research analyst at the Brookings Institution in Washington, said Russia sells a variety of “defensive, not strategic” weapons to Iran, including missile air defense systems. “The U.S. has been making informal accusations against Russian companies for some time, but they don’t hold any water,” Danchenko said. “This is a formal step that makes the Russians look bad.”…

Danchenko noted that the sanctions were limited to one branch of the conglomerate, and that Rosoboronexport also sold titanium to Boeing Co. for use in building jetliners.

Anders Aslund, a senior fellow who follows Russia at the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington, said the sanctions would have little practical effect on the company, which is Russia’s largest arms export firm.

“Still, it’s something that President Bush felt was important to do before he left office,” Aslund said, …

… “It stems from the same old unipolar world philosophy,” Lavrov said. “We will be taking this into account in our practical matters, in the relations with the United States both in trade and other spheres.”

Russia’s envoy to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Dmitry Rogozin, said in an interview with the Interfax news agency that the measures “are far-fetched. Moreover, they are quite provocative and insulting to Russia as a nation.”

EU’s Solana targets deal with Syria next year
AFP, 23 October 2008

EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana held talks on Thursday with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad on the Middle East peace process and regional issues, highlighting improved ties between them….

“Syrian-European ties continue to make progress,” Solana said, according to SANA. He voiced hope that both sides might next year sign an “association” agreement…. “The EU totally backs the indirect negotiations between Syria and Israel,” he said. Since May, Syria has been engaged in indirect peace talks with Israel under Turkish mediation.

SANA quoted Assad as saying Europe’s “role in the peace process is important and essential.

“Peace guarantees security and stability to the people of the region and this reflects positively on Europe and the world.”

… His return to Damascus comes after Syria and Lebanon formally established diplomatic ties on October 15, for the first time since independence 60 years ago. … the EU diplomat praised the “importance of developments which recently occurred in Lebanon,” namely the setting up of diplomatic ties between Beirut and Damascus, SANA reported.

The Geopolitics of Sino-Syrian Relations
By Chris Zambelis
China Brief from the Jamestown Foundation, 10 October 2008

Solidifying the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) burgeoning relationships with the countries of the Middle East remains a top priority for Beijing. The impetus behind China’s resurgent efforts to extend its influence within the Middle East stemmed from Beijing’s pursuit of energy resources to sustain its rapidly expanding economy. As the world’s fastest growing consumer of oil and third-largest net importer of oil, energy will continue to be the most important motivating factor shaping China’s foreign policy toward the Middle East in the foreseeable future [1]. The looming global economic downturn will also prompt China to seek out new consumer markets for Chinese-made goods amid rising consumer fears and shrinking global demand from developed markets…

The Syrian government organizes meetings with Saudi opposition members at the Univ. of Damascus (in Arabic)

* ?????? ?????? ???? ?????? ???????? ??????? ?? ????? ????

Syrian minister to visit UK
By Roula Khalaf and James Blitz
Financial Times, 23 October 2008

Syria takes another step on the road to international rehabilitation when its foreign minister visits London next week for the highest level encounter between the Syrian and British governments since 2002.

…Analysts in Damascus say Syria is hedging its bets at a time of great uncertainty in the region. It has yet to be reassured that a new Israeli government, now being formed, will be serious about peace negotiations and willing to return the Golan Heights, occupied in the 1967 Middle East war, or that a new US administration will be willing to broker the talks, as Mr Assad wants.

The perception in Damascus, moreover, is that a military confrontation with Israel is still possible.

“Syria has to keep three lines of foreign policy open: it has to keep the possibility of war on the table, the possibility of a status quo in which it needs to ride out crises, and the possibility that there will be peace and openness,” says one analyst close to the government.

UNHCR starts to help hundreds of Iraqi Christian refugees in Syria
UNCHR, 23 October 2008

The UN refugee agency has begun helping hundreds of Iraqi Christians who fled to Syria to escape violence and threats in the northern Iraq city of Mosul.

Thousands of Christians have left Mosul over the past fortnight. Most have found shelter in villages elsewhere in Ninawa province, but about 400 have crossed into Syria. It is still not clear who is behind the intimidation.

“Many Christians from Mosul have been systematically targeted recently and are no longer safe there. We are ready to provide support for those Iraqis that seek refuge in neighbouring countries,” said Laurens Jolles, UNHCR’s representative in Syria. “We are grateful that Syria continues to welcome refugees,” he added of a country that is hosting at least 1.2 million Iraqi refugees.

UNHCR has fast-tracked the registration of Christian refugees from Mosul who have turned up at the agency’s offices in the cities of Damascus and Aleppo, while a team of field officers has travelled to the Qamishli area close to Iraq, where some people have been arriving. Following registration, families facing financial difficulties are assessed for emergency grants and food assistance.

140 Iraqi refugees in Syria head home
Tehran Times, 22 October 2008

Some 140 Iraqi refugees living in Syria headed home Wednesday on a free trip organized by the Iraqi government. Many cited improved security in Iraq and dwindling savings as reasons for their return….

Ayman Gharabiyah, a UNHCR official, said most of the Iraqis were returning home because their savings have run out. Each returning family, he said, will receive around $850 in cash along with an extra monthly payment of $145 for the next six months. The returnees would also get their houses and jobs back, he added…. Damascus has said the cost of the Iraqi refugees’ stay in Syria is estimated at $1.6 billion per year.

Lebanese City’s Strife Reflects 2 Conflicts
By Alia Ibrahim
Washington Post, 22 October 2008

Despite two decades of lost battles, Samir Hassan sees no alternative to more fighting.

Hassan, a 39-year-old Sunni resident of this northern Lebanese port city, recently picked up his gun to lead a group of street fighters. “When you are torn between your wanting to live and your feeling that you are in real danger, you choose to defend yourself, even if you know you could die, and even when you know your death would be gratuitous,” he said.

The on-again, off-again battle in Tripoli pits Sunnis against Alawites, a branch of Islam whose members include the leadership of Syria, Lebanon’s often meddlesome neighbor. The conflict here is fueled by Lebanon’s internal divisions and a slow-burning proxy war that involves Iran, Saudi Arabia and Syria…. we’re hiding the guns for now, but they will be out in a second when [the two sides] disagree again,” said Hassan, a part-time soccer coach. More than 20 people died in street clashes in late spring and early summer.

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said last month that any progress in Lebanon is meaningless before the “eradication of extremists and Salafis moving freely in northern Lebanon.” ….  Hassan and other residents say the role of Islamist fighters in Tripoli is being exaggerated to justify further violence…

Syria envoy: Future generations will pay if Israel scuttles peace talks
Haaretz.com, 22 October 2008

Syria’s ambassador to the United States on Tuesday warned that should Israel scuttle peace negotiations with Syria, the citizens of each country will pay the price….  Ambassador Imad Moustapha said in an interview with the Syria Comment Web site….

UN Resolution 1701: A View from Lebanon
By Nicholas Blanford
The Washington Institute, 21 October 2008
Read the two companion PolicyWatches, “UN Resolution 1701: A View from Israel” and “UN Resolution 1701: A View from the United States.”

Two years after the 2006 summer war, Hizballah and Israel [are]… focusing on preparations for the inevitable second round of conflict. … the Shiite organization has developed a new line of defense north of the Litani River and completed a massive, unprecedented recruitment, training, and rearmament drive. …

Buildup South of the Litani? : Hizballah’s military preparations north of the Litani River and in the Bekaa Valley are well known. Vast tracts of land in this mountainous spine running north from the Litani to the lower reaches of the Barouk Mountains have been placed off-limits. The sound of explosions and machine gun fire has become commonplace in parts of the Bekaa Valley where Hizballah conducts its training.

What is less evident is the scale of Hizballah’s military preparations near the southern border….

Despite the tepid endorsement of 1701, Hizballah’s bottom line remains the same: it will not scale back its preparation for the next encounter with Israel because of UN Security Council edicts. …

Conclusion: Given what has transpired in Lebanon over the past two years — both on the ground and in the air — it would appear that Hizballah and Israel will continue to breach, and not honor, Resolution 1701. Preparing for the inevitable second round of conflict has taken priority — for both parties — over complying with the UN resolution.

“UN Resolution 1701: A View from Israel”

Under the lull provided by the ceasefire, the organization has managed to avoid paying a price for triggering the 2006 war and has reasserted itself even more forcefully in Lebanese politics.

Hizballah Undeterred: UNSCR 1701 provided Israel with a reasonable exit from a military dead end, and was a way for the United States and France to reassert influence in Lebanon, at least ostensibly. Yet the increased involvement of Washington and Paris has been of little value,…

many Israelis have a strong sense that an opportunity was missed following the 2006 debacle. Hizballah’s buildup over the last two years accentuates Israel’s desire to undermine the organization’s position in Lebanon. Logic suggests this can only be achieved by a successful military operation followed by a clear diplomatic solution. Such an outcome would close the loopholes of UNSCR 1701 and force the Lebanese government and the international community to take concrete measures to implement UNSCR 1559, which calls for the disbanding and disarmament of all militias inside Lebanon.

Conclusion: Another war with Hizballah appears inevitable, and the Israeli military currently is making preparations to ensure that the next round is decisive….

 “UN Resolution 1701: A View from the United States.”

….. The ceasefire, however, proved to be the easy part. More difficult was dealing with the domestic ramifications of the conflict in Lebanon — Hizballah was emboldened and Lebanon’s central government was weakened. Their ensuing struggle for power culminated in May 2008 in a bloody street battle that claimed sixty-five lives, eventually leading to Hizballah’s temporary occupation of Beirut.

In the Doha Agreement that followed, Hizballah gained new political power, albeit at the cost of credibility lost in turning its weapons against its own people. The pro-sovereignty forces, on the other hand, made painful concessions to the opposition but in many respects stood their ground and even made gains by electing a president, forming a government, and promulgating a strong cabinet statement. The true test of their strength will be in how President Michel Suleiman and Prime Minister Fouad Siniora handle ongoing discussions of Hizballah’s arms, and how the majority fares in the 2009 parliamentary elections. ….

Events during this period, however, have underscored that while foreign aid can provide vital leverage to Lebanon’s government, real change must be led by the Lebanese themselves. For example, international security assistance gave the LAF an edge in its hard-fought victory over the radical Sunni organization Fatah al-Islam in the Nahr el-Bared refugee camp in mid-2007. But the operation’s success ultimately stemmed from the LAF’s determination and public support. Hizballah at first sought to limit the LAF’s freedom of action, but was forced to backpedal when it became clear that the tide of public opinion supported the government.

The Challenge of Hizballah

The violence in May 2008 underscored one of the premises of Resolution 1701: that any gains made by the Lebanese government could easily be countered by Hizballah with massive military force…. Ehud Barak asserted that Hizballah’s arsenal of rockets has nearly tripled since 2006.

Arms smuggling and an emboldened Hizballah pose a threat to the region that is difficult to overstate. As a vanguard for Tehran, Hizballah frustrates progress on regional peace and stability and acts as a proxy through which Iran can operate without risking direct retaliation. This strategy holds true not only in the Levant, but also throughout the Middle East — such as Hizballah’s training of Iraqi Shiite militants — and as far away as South America, where Hizballah agents engage in terrorist financing and other activities. Compounding the problem, the Iran-Syria arms pipeline supplies al-Qaeda-linked terrorist groups in Palestinian refugee camps, as well as other Syrian proxies in the region.

Next Steps: In the short term, it is critical to stop the flow of arms to the militias that hold Lebanon hostage….The EU should also emulate the British government’s recent designation of Hizballah as a terrorist organization. … Finally, measures to stop the arms before they arrive at the border should be examined in earnest.

The long-term challenge for Lebanon’s allies will be to strengthen the Lebanese state by increasing military, diplomatic, and economic assistance to Beirut. The Lebanese government, in turn, can demonstrate its authority by continuing to address the country’s security challenges and wresting control of the Lebanon-Israel relationship from Hizballah and Iran by taking up Israel’s offer of bilateral talks…

Israeli leaders should see the Lebanese government as a partner and refrain from actions that indirectly benefit those seeking to undermine it, such as Hizballah. While Hizballah, despite its claims of defending Lebanon, dragged Israel and Lebanon into a war neither wanted, the Lebanese and Israeli governments should pursue the peace that both countries need.

Michael Singh is a Boston-based associate fellow at The Washington Institute and former senior director for Middle East affairs on the National Security Council.

Rafsanjani says Israel lacks ‘goodwill’ in talks with Syria
Tehran Times, 23 October 2008

TEHRAN – Israel lacks “goodwill” in negotiations with Syria, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani told Ahmed al-Hassan, a member of the leadership council of Syrian ruling party.

However, Rafsanjani said, “Peace with Syria is very important for the Zionist regime because it will reduce many local and international pressures on this regime.”… Rafsanjani said the return of Golan Heights to Syria is a “strategic demand” of all regional countries.

…Rafsanjani also praised Syria’s good relations with Palestinian and Lebanese groups and its positive efforts to strengthen Lebanon’s independence in line with promoting regional security and stability. “The Arab and non-Arab friends of Syria in the region can be very influential in promoting stability by helping Syria in its fight against terrorism and anti-security measures.”

Rafsanjani said Syria plays very important role in regional security. “Definitely, the U.S. and Israel will lose from the security and stability of Syria and the expansion of its international relations with other countries.” Rafsanjani added the “terror and anti-security acts in Syria in recent months are indications of this dissatisfaction.” Al-Hassan thanked Iran for its principled policy in the region and its friendly relations with Syria.

Iran Says “No”—Now What?
By George Perkovich
Carnegie Endowment, Policy Brief No. 63, September 2008

A new IAEA report says that Iran continues to defy UN Security Council resolutions and enrich uranium while refusing to answer IAEA questions regarding possible weaponization activities. If the United States is to induce Iran to halt enrichment activities, both the costs of defiance and the benefits of cooperation must be greater, warns George Perkovich in a new policy brief.

Perkovich argues that the United States should pursue a revised strategy showing Iran’s leaders that the more they advance enrichment capabilities, the less valuable cessation of those activities becomes for negotiating incentives packages.

A three-step approach for the next U.S. president:

Give Iran one last, time-limited chance to negotiate suspension ….  If Iran rejects the opportunity, break off negotiations and focus on developing a consensus to maintain international sanctions as long as Iran remains in violation of Security Council and IAEA resolutions. Rather than defending a redline Iran already crossed, the United States should build resolve within the UN Security Council and among allies for continued sanctions and robust consequences should evidence emerge of new Iranian weaponization activities.

Finally, clarify the international redline. … the international community could define its redline for Iran as weaponization,…“An underappreciated factor in Tehran’s unwillingness to answer the IAEA’s questions is that Iranian leaders must wonder what would happen if they did ‘come clean,’ perhaps acknowledging that past nuclear activities were related to acquiring at least the option to produce nuclear weapons. The fact that neither the United States nor the Security Council has told Iran how it would react if Iran admitted to past nuclear weaponization violations may pose a genuine quandary in Iran. The UN Security Council could clarify that Iranian admission of past weaponization activities, coupled with willingness to accept that the NPT violation required ‘restitution,’ would not necessarily lead to further sanctions or punitive sanctions…”

Iran: Is Productive Engagement Possible?
By Karim Sadjadpour
Carnegie Endowment, Policy Brief No. 65, October 2008

Iran continues to be a critical national security challenge for the United States, …  A different approach is required. In a new policy brief, Karim Sadjadpour explains that the relevant question is not whether to talk to Iran but how to talk to Iran, and prioritizes U.S. engagement with Iran on six critical issues: Iraq, Afghanistan, nuclear proliferation, the Arab–Israeli conflict, energy, and terrorism.

The next U.S. president should: Focus initially on areas where the United States and Iran share common interests, such as Iraq and Afghanistan, rather than issues with little or no common interest, like the nuclear issue or the Israeli–Palestinian conflict….

Both Obama, McCain Free Of “Axis Of Evil” Taboo – Analysts
AFP, 21 October 2008

Whether under Barack Obama or John McCain, the next U.S. administration will pursue negotiations with Iran, North Korea and other anti- American regimes, analysts predict.

To be sure, they say, Obama might be more willing to talk than McCain.But the way has been clear for such negotiations since President George W. Bush himself changed course after crashing into the limits of U.S. power in Iraq and breaking the taboo he created, they say….

“The truth is the Bush administration view of not negotiating with these hostile regimes is already dead,” analyst Peter Beinart said. “They’re negotiating. McCain will negotiate, Obama will negotiate.”… Obama, they say, instinctively wants to reach out to the leaders of countries like Iran, North Korea, Syria, Cuba and Venezuela, but he faces practical and political limitations.

… In September, a poll by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs showed a majority of Americans backed future U.S. talks with the leaders of Cuba, North Korea, Iran, and Myanmar as well as the Islamist groups Hezbollah and Hamas. The analysts thought it unlikely either McCain or Obama would talk to the Islamist groups, which are labeled as terrorist.

Canadian ‘role in Syria torture’
BBC, 21 October 2008

A Canadian inquiry has concluded that officials there contributed indirectly to the torture of three Canadian citizens in Syria. The men were arrested in Syria on suspicion of involvement in terrorist activities, but were released in 2004. Returning to Canada, they said they were tortured and that Canada supplied Syria with questions to ask them…. Ahmad El Maati, Abdullah Almalki and Muayyed Nureddi, all of Middle Eastern origin, were separately arrested by Syrian military intelligence between 2001 and 2004….

Former Obama Adviser Meets Syria’s Assad
By Ayman Abdel Nour
Forbes.com, 21 October 2008

Syria’s official media was keen to deliver special coverage of President Bashar Al-Assad’s Oct. 16 meeting with Robert Malley, head of the Middle East program at the International Crisis Group and erstwhile informal adviser to U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama.

The lead story the next day in government newspapers reported that Al-Assad and Malley discussed Iraq, Palestine, Lebanon and prospects for peace in the Middle East, and that Malley explained the role the ICG would have in briefing the new U.S. administration about Syria’s important role in the region.

What really attracted attention, though, was that on the same day a Web site closely associated with the government published a translation of a lecture Malley had delivered at Yale, offering effusive praise for it.

The site referred to Malley as a senior adviser to Barack Obama on the Middle East, even though the Obama campaign says Malley’s role was never official. In any case, the campaign dropped him as too controversial after it was reported that he had met with Hamas officials. The Web site further stated that Malley’s opinions would shape the next U.S. president’s ideas about the Middle East, noting that, unlike the Bush administration, Malley supported a peace agreement between Syria and Israel–which would weaken Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas.

The site noted that Obama had twice echoed Malley in stating that the failure of the war in Iraq had strengthened Iran’s influence. But if the Obama campaign has indeed severed its ties to Malley, it seems that Syrian officials are overestimating his influence. (Malley last met with the Syrian president in April 2007.)

The date for Al-Assad’s latest meeting with Malley is no accident–the U.S. election is nearly upon us and, with the Syrian regime expecting an Obama win, it wanted someone it believes has Obama’s ear briefed on the latest developments by the president himself. It is no coincidence that another Obama foreign policy adviser, Daniel Kurtzer, a career diplomat who served under George W. Bush, Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush, also recently visited Damascus, where he met with Syria’s foreign minister.

The general atmosphere in Damascus is one that sees these experts as genuine peace seekers and believes in what they are doing. These visiting diplomats want to meet all parties to any possible future peace negotiations in order to gain their confidence. I wish them success in their missions.

Sleiman hails Sarkozy’s ‘brave move’ to repair ties with Syria
Tehran Times, 21 October 2008

President Michel Sleiman described his French counterpart Nicolas Sarkozy’s openness toward Damascus as a “”brave move”” which helped end Lebanon’s 18-month political crisis, the state-run National News Agency said. Sleiman held a half hour meeting with Sarkozy on the sidelines of the 12th Francophone summit in Quebec, Canada on Saturday.

Diplomatic dynamics with Syria
The Boston Globe, 20 October 2008

While the conclusion of your Oct. 16 editorial “Syria’s blowback problem,” regarding the need for the United States to revive diplomacy and engage with Syria, is on point, the premise of the editorial is not.

To connect the agreement of diplomatic exchange between Syria and Lebanon to a change in Syrian policy, namely an act of regime preservation, is inaccurate. Syria’s policies and positions stand unchanged for several years now. We have continuously called on France and the United States to move past the futile policies of isolation and try to engage us. President Assad has called for diplomatic exchange with Lebanon since 2005, and we have repeatedly invited the Israelis for the past eight years to return to the peace negotiations table. In fact, it is the new vision of President Sarkozy of France to engage Syria, the new political process in Lebanon, and an ostensibly new vision of peace in Israel that have resulted in the new dynamics vis-à-vis Syria.

Moreover, it is not only Syria, but all Arab countries, including Egypt and Saudi Arabia, that fought against extremist religious fanatics – the same ones that the United States was funding, training, and arming to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan. As for the urban myth of what occurred in Hama, we invite the Globe editorial board to visit the “bulldozed” old quarter and verify the facts for themselves.

AHMED SALKINI
Press secretary
Embassy of Syria
Washington

US commander sees future troop cuts in Anbar
AP, 23 October 2008

The U.S. commanding general in Iraq’s Anbar province is voicing optimism about troop reductions next year.

But Marine Maj. Gen. John Kelly also warns that security gaps along the Syrian border and al-Qaida cells still pose risks.

Kelly told Pentagon reporters today that his 25,000-troop force is focused more on training Iraqis and helping them shore up their western border with Syria and doing less combat….

Ambassador Imad Moustapha

Interview with Ambassador Imad Moustapha: Peace Talks, Hizbullah, Palestine
by Camille-Alexandre Otrakji
Syria Comment, October 21, 2008

Camille gathered questions from a wide number of Syria Comment readers of various nationalities. He summarized them before giving them to Ambassador Moustapha. Many thanks to Camille and Ambassador Moustapha. Next week, we will publish part two. [Joshua Landis]

PEACE WITH ISRAEL

1) If peace is signed between Israel and Arab countries, how do you see the future role of Israel in the Middle East?

[I.M.] It is important to understand that any Syrian approach to peace with Israel falls under its endorsement of the Pan Arab Peace Initiative. Therefore, any long-term relationship with Israel will ultimately fall within a broader Arab strategic plan.

Ultimately, the onus is on Israel in regards to her role in the Middle East, which will inevitably stem from her handling of the Palestinian question and especially its two thorniest issues: Jerusalem and the right of return for refugees. Israel’s ability to address these issues along with the return of all occupied land will help define how the Arab nation regards Israel in the region.

It is unreasonable to expect the Arab states and nation to have warm, friendly relations with Israel while the latter continues to occupy Arab land and to humiliate the Palestinian people.

2) Is a nuclear free Middle East a possibility? Will Syria continue to accept Israel’s current military superiority (nuclear and conventional) years after a successfully implemented peace settlement? 

[I.M.] Is it a possibility? We believe it is a necessity.  We cannot envision a region bristling with nuclear weapons to be one with prospects for peace and prosperity.  If a peace agreement is to be achieved, Israel’s position towards its nuclear weapons will be another determining factor towards its standing and role in the region.  You cannot expect to be a partner in peace while you continue to stockpile the most advanced conventional weapons, as well as weapons of mass destruction. There is a contradiction here that Israel has to recognize and address.

The fact that Israel has maintained a conventional military superiority in our region has not provided it with the ability to dictate events; it has not caused us to surrender our rights. Israel should have realized by now that it cannot depend on sheer military superiority to sustain its occupation of Arab lands while dreaming of attaining security.  Ultimately, in order to nurture peace in the region, Israel needs to adhere to international law, and understand that there cannot be a two-tiered legal system in our region in which Israel is judged by one set of standards and code of conduct, while the Arabs are judged by another.

3) Syria’s regional allies in the resistance camp who do not clearly recognize Israel’s right to exist, such as Iran, Hezbollah, and Hamas, do not publicly oppose the talks between Syria and Israel which were taking place in Turkey. Is this because your allies do not expect those talks to succeed, or because Syria has fine-tune its peace strategy with its allies? Are they ready to support a successful outcome of those negotiations? Or, can Syria be “flipped,” where by it repudiates its allies who will reject Syria’s settlement with Israel?

[I.M.]I strongly contest the premise of this question. The Hamas leadership has stated time and again that they cannot recognize the borders of the state of Israel when Israel continues to be vague about what it considers as its final borders. Blaming the occupied for not recognizing the ‘rights’ of the occupier is immoral. It is an attempt to overturn the table of justice and to blame the victim. Before setting preconditions, mighty Israel should acknowledge the suffering and despair of the Palestinian people. It must recognize their right to an independent and viable state.

Our allies have always known and appreciated the fact that restoring our sovereignty over the Golan is a matter of utmost national priority. They recognize that Syria will not hesitate to use any means necessary in order to attain this objective.

As for the notion of ‘flipping’ Syria, we find that both, absurd and counterproductive. The U.S. needs not create a rift between Syria and, say, Iran. Instead, the U.S. should benefit from the dramatic paradigm-change in the region to capitalize on Syria’s strong relations with Iran. We can help bridge the stark differences between Iran and the U.S.; we can help find a regional settlement to the many contentious issues of the region. We can help avoid the perils of yet another major conflict in our region. The same applies to Hezbollah, which we regard with much pride and consider a very close ally.

Syria builds its policies on a framework of principles and national interest, just as other countries do. We have many regional and international allies, such as Russia and Turkey. And while our foreign policy reflects first and foremost our national interest, we constantly touch base with our allies and friends, updating them  on major developments in our foreign policy.

The fact that we disagree at times is a testament to our close relationship, where differences in strategies or tactics, are not only accepted, but respected. Syria’s position regarding the peace process and the principle of land-for-peace lies at the heart of the Syrian foreign policy and stands unchanged for decades. Any party, whether an ally or not, understands this position, and therefore, no one can forge and alliance or friendship with Syria without grasping, and accepting, this reality.

4) Opinion polls frequently show that Israelis do not want to give up the Golan. If Israel leadership is incapable of changing its public’s mind over matters of utmost significance to their future and to that of their children’s future, isn’t it time for Syria to consider addressing the Israeli public more directly? Isn’t it possible to do this without officially recognitzing Israel — something Syria understandably believes must take place at a later stage?

[I.M.] We strongly believe that it is up to the Israeli government to decide whether it wants to make peace or to continue its policy of occupation. If it chooses peace, it will ultimately have to convince its own public of the advantages of peace. We do not expect the Israeli government to address our public on why we should engage in peace negotiations to get back the Golan. Syria’s leadership has for decades prepared the Syrian public of the necessity of a peace and the need to regain our occupied land. We have rallied domestic public opinion around peace. If the Israelis have made peace extremely difficult by moving settlers onto the Golan, investing money there, annexing it, and by demonizing Syria, they have themselves to blame. Surely they cannot now expect our government to explain to their people why peace is necessary. Still, Syria’s position towards peace is well known and constantly repeated. We spare no effort to reiterate that our strategic choice is peace. We go one Western TV; we give interviews to Western print media; we do everything in our power to make our position christal clear.

5) Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said that the United States and Syria maintain low level contact. How do you see the current relationship between the two countries following the recent meeting between Rice and Mouallem? What will it take to bring the Americans to sponsor the peace negotiations?

[I.M.]  The term ‘low-level’ is not applicable any more. During September and during the visit of our Foreign Minister to New York, Secretary Rice asked for a meeting with him, which was then followed by a longer meeting with Assistant Secretary of State, David Welch. Many issues were discussed in detail. Welch voiced the US’s interest in some sort of a political dialogue and re-engagement with Syria. If what they have both expressed will not be vetoed by other centers of power within the Bush administration, then we expect to see more of these high level contacts in the near future.

During the meeting, the Americans expressed interest in the current indirect talks between Syria and Israel. They expressed their willingness to get more involved. While we believe it might be too little, too late, we have made our position very clear regarding the pivotal role for the US as a sponsor of such talks once they mature into the direct-talks stage.

However, the far more important position is that of the US Congress, whose leaders have unequivocally called on this administration to engage diplomatically and politically with Syria. This goes as far back as the Baker-Hamilton report, and as recently as September, when during a hearing held by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, ranking Republican and Democrat members explicitly asked none other than Mr. Welch himself why the US administration has yet to engage with Syria. We also know that both presidential campaigns have sent signals that they are interested in greater involvement with Syria. Ultimately, the Americans will sponsor the peace talks only when they believe it is in their national interest and in Israel’s national interest to do so, (not to mention the Arabs’). When they realize that a peaceful conclusion to the Arab-Israeli conflict is in their interest, the US will return to the table as a sponsor.

6) The Israelis claim that Lake Tiberius has shrunk in size by few hundred meters since 1967 because of receding water levels. Will Syria still accept an Israeli withdrawal from the Golan Heights to the 4th of June 1967 line that does not give Syria access to the eastern shore of today’s smaller lake?

[I.M.] The line of June 4, 1967 is clearly demarcated based on international agreements. We have made it very clear in Turkey that we can only restart the peace process with the understanding that this line constitutes the Syrian-Israeli border. Early signs indicate that the Israelis accept this premise. Attempting to change the rules of the game will be a nonstarter. Now, when you start discussing details, the answer is simply that very difficult negotiations will need to be conducted over each and every issue, and I believe you must agree with me that we cannot conduct peace talks over the Internet.

7) After three failed attempts to reach a Syrian-Israeli peace agreement — first with Prime Minister Rabin who was assassinated by an Israeli extremist, then with Ehud Barak who “got cold feet” according to President Clinton’s memoirs, and most recently with Ehud Olmert who was forced to resign — have you concluded that Israel is only interested in the peace process and not in peace itself?

[I.M.]  The past cannot constitute the framework or basis for our future policies. It does, however, serve as a lesson. In this case, our past experience negotiating with Israelis informs our understanding of what it takes for Israel to ‘make’ or ‘break’ a deal. A truth in politics is that while caution is necessary, opportunities are very rare and must not be missed. This does not mean that we blindly jump at every opportunity. This is the primary reason for our involvement in several rounds of indirect talks with the Israelis through our Turkish friends.

We need to ensure that if we move to direct-talks, their chances of success will be higher than that of previous talks. The past and present are not the only elements at play here. Any future talks will run a greater risk of failure if these peace talks collapse. As parties approach these talks, this fact needs to be made very clear. Thus, if the Israelis are merely interested in the ‘process’ and not the ‘peace’, they will ultimately be held accountable, morally and politically, for missing the opportunity for peace. History will be Israel’s harshest judge; but most importantly, future Israeli and Arab generations will pay a dear price for this shortsightedness and obstinacy.

LEBANON/HIIZBOLLAH

8. Many Lebanese who listen to Mr. Nasrallah’s speeches are worried that Hizbollah does not want to stop fighting Israel until Israel is wiped off the map of the Middle East. Can you reassure them that their country will not necessarily continue to be paying the heavy price for its “resistance culture” after Syria signs a peace treaty with Israel?

[I.M.] If certain speeches by Mr. Nasrallah have worried some Lebanese, they should address their concerns directly to the leader of Hezbollah. Asking a Syrian official to ‘reassure’ them regarding the Lebanese resistance reflects a profound and disturbing refusal to come to terms withthe fact that Hezbollah is part and parcel of the Lebanese political and social fabric. The notion that Hezbollah gets its orders from outside Lebanon is both absurd and counterproductive. Those in Lebanon who have a problem with the “resistance culture” should understand that it grew out of a purely Lebanese context. I find it embarrassing that I need to explain to anybody in the world, let alone to Lebanese individuals, that this culture evolved as a result of decades of continuous and extreme Israeli violence committed on Lebanon.

By insisting on perpetuating this remarkable state of denial, those who refuse to accept that Hezbollah is a partner in what they consider ‘their’ Lebanon, will do themselves and ‘their’ Lebanon a great disservice. What I urge them to do is to accept that Lebanon belongs to all its constituent parties and not exclusively to one or another. Once they accept that, they will then need to start by conducting a comprehensive national dialogue among themselves in order to reach answers and solutions – not direct their questions to us, or even to the Americans.

9)Hizbollah officials have made it clear that they intend to take revenge on Israel for its probable assassination of Imad Mughniyeh. Has Syria advised Hizbollah against taking revenge for Mughniyeh?

[I.M.]  We don’t usually advise Hezbollah on what sort of actions they should take. This is strictly their business; they know what is best for the Lebanese resistance. Obviously, decisions of war and peace are taken by states according to a complex set of criteria and considerations.

On the one hand, strategic military decisions cannot be discussed publicly unless you want us to make rhetorical statements. On the other hand, we are confident that Hezbollah is capable of defending Lebanon and inflicting another humiliating defeat on the Israeli military machine if it decides to launch yet another war of aggression on Lebanon. We also believe that the Israelis fully realize this simple fact.

PALESTINE

10) Egyptian and Saudi journalists these days argue that Syria, which successfully led the Arab world’s decade long boycott of Egypt after President Sadat signed a separate peace treaty with Israel, now appears to be interested in a similar deal that achieves nothing for the Palestinians. How are Syria’s negotiations with Israel, thirty years after President Sadat’s Camp David Accords, different from Sadat’s? Will Syria insist on negotiating towards tangible gains for the Palestinians in addition to recovering its occupied Golan Heights?

[I.M.] This is an extraordinary question based on a totally false premise. When Kissinger came out with his famous dictum that ‘there could be no war without Egypt and no peace without Syria,’ he realized two important facts. First, by drawing Egypt into a separate peace with Israel, the US effectively eliminated the largest and most powerful military in the Arab world from the Arab-Israeli conflict, thereby, shifting the balance of power in the region decisively in Israel’s favor. Second, it established a new precident in Arab politics: separate negotiations with Israel. Such a culture of every man for himself dashed any hope of a comprehensive pan-Arab peace agreement with Israel. Only sticking to a unified strategy could have given the Palestinians more leverage in their negotiations with the Israelis.

For this reason, Syria staunchly opposed the separate Egyptian peace agreement; we spearheaded a campaign to convince the rest of the Arab states not to be trapped into individual negotiations with Israel.

Unfortunately, we failed and Israel won. After Camp David there was the Wadi Araba agreement, which was then followed by the Oslo agreement. Syria’s position was not that Arabs should not negotiate peace agreements with the Israelis, but rather, that they should not do so separately. The golden adage of divide and conquer has rarely proven more accurate than in this instance. As each additional Arab state signs a separate peace with Israel, those that remain find it more difficult to negotiate peace and achieve their demands.

Today, the Palestinian Authority is negotiating its own peace agreement with the Israelis. We understand their circumstances and appreciate how difficult it is for them to live under the draconian law of occupation. To see one’s land being steadily confiscated by the Israelis cannot be easy. We are not happy with the state of Arab disunity and lack of political coordination that prevails among us, but this, unfortunately, is the sad reality in the Arab world. This is the legacy of the Camp David Accords.

11) This year, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas attended the Arab Summit in Damascus despite pressure from his Saudi and Egyptian main Arab allies not to. He is also visiting Damascus more frequently this year, compared to previous years. What is the reason behind Syria’s improved relations with President Abbas? How will Syria manage to keep its Palestinian friends and allies happy given that each Palestinian group have different expectations for a settlement with Israel? Will Syria be able to keep moderate Abbas, islamist Meshal, and Marxist Hawatmeh happy?

[I.M.] It is not Syria’s task to keep all Palestinian factions happy. Sadly, deep differences and strongly entrenched mistrust divide the Palestinian factions. This is very damaging to the Palestinian national interest. It is our moral duty in Syria to extend every possible means of support to our Palestinian brethren. Right now we believe that the best support Syria can offer is through attempting to heal the rifts among the Palestinians and reach a national consensus on matters of paramount importance. For this reason, we are keen on maintaining the closest possible relations with all factions, without exception. Fortunately, all Palestinian parties trust us and lean on us for support at this critical juncture. Syria happily assumes this this role and duty.

Asma al-Assad receives Italian Presidential Gold Medal

Wife of Syrian President Discusses Role in Syria
2008-10-20, BBC MidEast
Excerpt from report by Italian leading privately-owned centre- left newspaper La Repubblica, on 18 October.[Interview with Asma al-Asad, wife of Syrian President Bashar al-Asad, by Alix Van Buren in Damascus; date not given: “‘I, the First Lady, Will Help Syria To Take On a New Appearance'” – first three paragraphs are La Repubblica introduction]

Damascus – One knew that Asma al-Asad, Syria’s first lady [previous two words in English in original], has a reputation as a modern woman, with a taste for going against the trend. And she did not fail to live up to her character, in turning up at the wheel of her metallic gray SUV: she plugged in her iPod, put the car in gear, and announced: “Let’s go into town, without a bodyguard. Nobody will notice.” On the back seat her young assistant, Leyla, smiled indulgently.

Al-Aqilatu[?] al-Rais, that is what the Syrians simply call her: the wife of the President. In the view of the Israeli daily, Haaretz, she is “the first lady who outshone Carla Bruni,” when she appeared this summer in Paris, alongside her husband, President Bashar al- Asad, marking Syria’s return after years of international isolation. In the view of Paris Match, she “conjures up the image of an eastern Lady Diana.” And a prestigious Jewish newspaper in New York, The Forward, ran the headline: “What Michelle Obama can learn from Asma al-Asad: a woman with a strong personality, in one of the toughest regions in the world.” These are surprising compliments, given the marked contrast with the gray image projected by Syria in the 40- year old Ba’athist Socialist regime, which has arrived at the difficult transition which the country is embarking upon. Despite the signs of an open approach on the part of Europe, Damascus remains on the US list of nations which support terrorism: chiefly Hamas and Hezbollah. [passage omitted: Asma al-Asad’s background]

It is perhaps no coincidence that the Syrian first lady has been in Italy since yesterday [as published: the interview apparently took place prior to her trip to Italy], a guest of the Pio Manzu International Study Days, where she is to receive a gold medal from Italy’s President [Napolitano] “for her role as an extraordinary ambassador of change, and of commitment to ensuring that economic growth in Syria is translated into benefits for the whole population.”

[Van Buren] Mrs Al-Asad, doesn’t that seem too ambitious a commitment?

[Asma al-Asad] What counts is asking ourselves where we are, and what route to embark upon. And two factors have an impact here: first, domestic conditions, and I refer to how far ordinary people are involved in the reform process, because the mental stance also has an influence on the timescale of implementation. The second factor relates to external circumstances: we live in a region which has not yet known peace. And this is an uncontrollable, ungovernable element which dictates our pace.

[Van Buren] How much of a part do you play in influencing the decision-making process?

[Asma al-Asad] One thing should be clear: the President is the President. That said, at home we are a team, composed of a husband and wife. Exchanging ideas is natural, in fact it’s healthy. My contribution comes from the experience which I have built up, from the initiatives which I support. I bring information gathered on the ground, in my direct contact with the people.

[Van Buren] It has been said that on your return to Syria you travelled the country incognito. Why?

[Asma al-Asad] I did that to establish a relationship on the ground with the people, founded on communication, which means rolling up one’s sleeves and trying to get something done together. For too long development projects have been drawn up at conferences or in offices which are distant from actual reality. And for too long the government has taken the responsibility for leading development, reform, and modernization. There is no reason for this: the private sector has an important role, as does society at large. And people get excited. They make criticisms. They offer suggestions. There is so much to do: every excluded individual is a waste of resources.

[Van Buren] This is a very different picture from the image of a Syria which is so impenetrable that, according to the Israeli press, the military intelligence services of that country have introduced a virus in the electronic mail, so as to monitor your correspondence with the President, who is judged to be a “mysterious” person. How did things really go?

[Asma al-Asad] My computer was penetrated, I found out from the press. But I am not losing my composure. It happened, period. In any event, I do not communicate with my husband via emails. I prefer the direct approach, and pardon me if I smile.

[Van Buren] The fact remains that the President is described in Washington as a dictator, the head of a state which promotes terrorism. What is your answer?

[Asma al-Asad] This: that I see a contradiction in what you say. What is the explanation for the fact that on the one hand we lead the life of an ordinary couple, who go out to dinner and to the theatre with friends, and to the playground with our children, who live in an apartment in a normal city district, with our children playing in the street with our neighbours’ children, while, on the other hand, the President is allegedly a tyrant, and distant from the people. The two
things cannot exist side by side. As for the President being “mysterious,” it is enough to observe, and to listen: our positions are clear, explicit, and consistent. Perhaps this very fact does not help us.

[Van Buren] And what is the President like in private?

[Asma al-Asad] He is a father who is present, and attentive. If you want to know what attracted me to him, I will tell you about his optimism, his open-mindedness, his readiness to explore every possibility. These are necessary skills for anyone, and all the more so at this historic time, which is full of obstacles. But I married him for what he is, not as the President.

[Van Buren] You are a Muslim, brought up in the Church of England, a Christian school, and here in Damascus you frequent the convent of the Salesian nuns. Have you retained good relations with Christians?

[Asma al-Asad] You must excuse me if I correct you: I do not have “good relations” with Christians, just as I cannot have “good relations” with myself, with my legs and my arms. We Syrians are a single body. Our history did not start yesterday: it is a history that is thousands of years old; St Paul and the Ummayad mosque are part of who I am as a human being. In Europe there is talk of coexistence, and that is a good thing. But that is why, in Britain for example,
Indians, Britons, Hindus, Sikhs, and Muslims are not part of the historical legacy, the roots of the country. Here we are one enlarged family.

[Van Buren] Mrs Al-Asad, you have lived in Europe, a long way away from wars. Does this give you a different perspective?

[Asma al-Asad] The culture of peace which exists in Europe does not exist in the Middle East. I have been fortunate. I hope that this generation can know the same peace which I lived in when I was growing up in England. If we are to allow our potential to thrive, as a region, then we deserve that same right.

Originally published by La Repubblica, Rome, in Italian 18 Oct 08 pp.
1, 46.

Sent by Ray Close:

This message was sent to me today by a Jewish lady friend whom I admire very much.   See what she says about the “Muslim issue” in these comments about Colin Powell’s endorsement of Barak Obama:

Friends: 

If you missed Powell on Meet the Press today, it’s worth a listen. Powell concludes, with eloquence and gravitas, that Obama is a transformational figure; his comments about the McCain campaign (including the robocalls, which for the moment haven’t received nearly the coverage they deserve) were withering.  If you missed Powell on Meet the Press today, it’s worth a listen. Powell concludes, with eloquence and gravitas, that Obama is a transformational figure; his comments about the McCain campaign (including the robocalls, which for the moment haven’t received nearly the coverage they deserve) were withering.  

But my favorite part (aside from the endorsement itself) was Powell’s discussion of the “Obama as a Muslim issue.” Obama, he said, is of course a Christian but, he added (unlike everyone else), what if he were a Muslim? So what?  He then elaborated with a moving anecdote of a Muslim American mother mourning her son, killed in Iraq, at Arlington National Cemetery.  You can’t read it without choking up.

This is a position that the Obama campaign has felt unable to take (unfortunately), for the obvious reasons. To have someone of Powell’s stature (mainstream to the core) stand up and say this is most welcome. It’s time already to rewrite the hate script of the past seven years. Powell didn’t have to include that in his statement today, but he did

And I give him a lot of credit for using this occasion (in front of a huge national audience) to have his say. Let us not forget how many hundreds of Muslims John Ashcroft rounded up and jailed (with no justification) after 9/11. Muslims became just the latest in the right-wing arsenal of “hate” issues, part of the mother of all of today’s many “hate” issues that have poisoned our nation.  

Hear the statement from Powell by clicking on this URL.  It’s a short statement, but well worth listening to, especially the anecdote about the American Muslim soldier who died in the war.

A nothing government
By Gideon Levy, 19/10/2008, Haaretz

Tzipi Livni will be prime minister, Ehud Barak will be probably the most senior deputy and potential opposition head, and Israel will gain another nothing government….. Rivals Livni and Barak will act with the utmost vigor to prevent the tiniest bit of achievement from coloring the other’s name. If Barak wants to make peace with Syria, Livni will block him. If Livni seeks peace with the Palestinians, count on the defense minister to undermine her efforts.

Thus far in the coalition negotiations, they have only talked about who would conduct the talks with Syria, not their content – proving how little remains of the first Barak, the prime minister who appeared more daring than all of his predecessors.

The media will cite the confidants, who squabble over every semblance of an achievement, and bad blood will flow between the two bureaus, threatening to engulf us all. Livni and Barak will make us miss Olmert’s government, not to mention previous odd couples Rabin-Peres in Rabin’s first government and Shamir-Peres in the second national unity government. ….All they both want is to gather strength for the elections in two years. This is their purpose in setting up the government, and since it’s a zero-sum game, it will come at each other’s expense and at the expense of us all. …Together, these two will lead us to the brink of an abyss. …

Syrian Opposition Leader Flees Lebanon after Uncovering Assassination Plot
By Talhah Jibril, 19/10/2008, as-Sharq al-Awsat

Washington, Asharq Al-Awsat- Mamun al-Homsi, a leading figure in the Syrian opposition group known as the “Damascus Spring,” has revealed to Asharq Al-Awsat the shocking reasons behind why he fled Beirut for the United States……

Iran, Hezbollah Order Agents Out Of Syria
By David Bedein, 10/20/2008

Jerusalem – The Middle East Newsline has confirmed that Iran and Hezbollah, amid a spate of assassinations, have ordered their agents to leave Syria.

Iran and Hezbollah have warned their representatives that they could become targets in Syria.

Over the last month, the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has sustained at least three major attacks in Damascus, including a car bombing outside the offices of Syrian intelligence as well as a shootout with Palestinian gunmen at a Palestinian refugee camp.

The Iranian intelligence community has recommended that senior officials stop visiting Syria. They said the warning was issued in August in wake of the assassination of Mr. Assad’s military adviser, Maj. Gen. Muhammad Suleiman.

The Israeli daily Yediot Aharonot said Maj. Gen. Suleiman secretly visited Paris in August and disclosed Hezbollah plans to abduct Israeli executives in Thailand and a Gulf Cooperation Council state. Several weeks later, he was assassinated.

Hezbollah also banned its representatives from visiting Syria. It assessed that its members could meet a fate similar to that of its late operational chief Imad Mughniyeh, who was assassinated in a car bombing in Damascus in February.

Hamas has not yet ordered its members out of Syria. Hamas leaders have reinforced security for its headquarters and leadership in wake of the assassination of the aide to Hamas political bureau chief Khaled Mashaal in September.

David Bedein can be reached at [email protected]. His Web site is www.IsraelBehindTheNews.com

The following Haaretz report sounds completely untrustworthy. How could Abbas and his entourage be “unaware of the content of Bush’s letter,” for Assad and yet the Palestinian who has presumably leaked the contents to Haaretz was in the know? How could Jack Khoury publish something that sounds so improbably silly?

Before publishing the previous paragraph, written yesterday, I woke up this Sunday to read that Haaretz is denying its previous report:

Jerusalem sources denied over the weekend any knowledge of a U.S. proposal to Syria, to the effect that Israel would pull out of the Golan if Syria severs its ties with Iran, as reported in the Kuwaiti newspaper al-Jarida on Friday.

Bush offered to press Israel to quit Golan if Syria cuts Iran ties
By Jack Khoury, Haaretz Correspondent, 17/10/2008

U.S. President George W. Bush has apparently offered his Syrian counterpart, Bashar Assad, to press Israel to withdraw from the Golan Heights if Damascus promises to cut its relations with Iran, the Kuwaiti newspaper al-Jareida reported on Friday.

According to the report, Bush made the offer in a handwritten letter transferred to Assad by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.

A Palestinian source close to Abbas told the newspaper that the U.S. had presented the offer in a meeting with Syrian officials day earlier. If Assad agrees to the American proposal, he will carry out his end of the deal in the coming weeks, said the report.

Bush is keen on implementing the deal before the upcoming U.S. elections, said the newspaper, in order to significantly advance the peace process before the end of his term.

The Palestinian source said that Abbas and his entourage were unaware of the content of Bush’s letter, as it was meant to remain covert and away from diplomatic eyes, according to the report.

Even the American envoy in Damascus was not privy to this information, said the newspaper.

Despite this, the Palestinian source said that Abbas’ latest visit to Damascus was intended for the principle purpose of passing on this letter, said the newspaper. While on the visit, he scheduled no meetings with Palestinian officials or other diplomats in the area.

The US Gives More Arms to Lebanon:

“Since 2006, the United States has committed more than $410 million in security assistance to the Lebanese Armed Forces, and the United States will continue to provide equipment and training to the LAF,” US announces.

[Landis Analysis]For the time being, it appears as if the LAF will only be receiving “additional automatic grenade launchers.” There was no mention of the attack helicopters that Lebanon has been requesting. But Intelligence chief Hayden and other top US officials have been to Lebanon of late in an effort to access whether the LAF can be counted on to fight Hizbullah rather than to coddle it. The LAF’s anti-Hizbullah credentials will ultimately decide the quality of US aid.  Israel has been very critical of the Lebanese government, accusing it of being little more than the handmaiden for Hizbullah and terror in the region. Indeed, Israeli officials recently revealed that their military has a plan to flatten government controlled regions of Lebanon if Hizbullah travels off the reservation as it did in 2006.

Corruption on the Rise in Syria….Syria was ranked 147 out of 180 countries in the international watchdog Transparency International’s 2008 corruption perception index, released last month. This poor placing is getting steadily worse, falling from 93rd in 2006 to 138th last year. Of the Arab countries, only Sudan and Iraq had lower rankings in 2008, at 173 and 178 respectively. …

Wary of Islam, China Tightens a Vise of Rules, New York Times
By EDWARD WONG

A People’s Liberation Army political poster in a town in Xinjiang, China, a region largely inhabited by Uighurs, an ethnic group uneasy with the government’s rule.

China places intricate restrictions on Muslims in a vast autonomous region in an effort to control Islam’s spread……..

Tony Karon, in TIME, here

“…Other key factors in tamping down violence may yet be the cause of further violence and instability; these include the truce declared by the radical Shi’ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, and the anti-Qaeda alliance the U.S. forged with the Sunni insurgents of the Awakening Movement. Deep distrust remains between the Awakening Movement, many of whose members were aligned with the Saddam regime, and the Shi’ite dominated Malikigovernment….. But it may not be the situation on the ground in Iraq that determines the future of the U.S. military mission there. For one thing, the fragile calm in Iraq coincides with an increasingly perilous Taliban resurgence in Afghanistan,……Then, there’s the financial crisis and looming globalrecessionthat will inevitably impose a far greater austerity on Washington. America’s military deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan are expected to cost close to $200 billion for 2008 alone, and maintaining that commitment will become considerably more burdensome as Washington is forced to funnel many hundreds of billions of dollars into simply averting financial collapse….”

U.S. policies may have contributed to Iran revolution, study says
By Borzou Daragahi
Los Angeles Times, 17 October 2008

A new report based on previously classified documents suggests that the Nixon and Ford administrations created conditions that helped destabilize Iran in the late 1970s and contributed to the country’s Islamic Revolution.

A trove of transcripts, memos and other correspondence show sharp differences over rising oil prices developing between the Republican administrations and Mohammed RezaShahPahlavi in the mid-1970s, says a report to be published today in the fall issue of Middle East Journal, an academic journal published by the Washington-based Middle East Institute, a think tank.

The report, after two years of research by scholar Andrew Scott Cooper, zeros in on the role of White House policymakers — including Donald H. Rumsfeld, then a top aidetoPresident Ford — hoping to roll back oil prices and curb the shah’s ambitions, despite warnings by then-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger that such a move might precipitate the rise of a “radical regime” in Iran.

“The shah is a tough, mean guy. But he is our real friend,” Kissinger warned Ford, who was considering options to press the monarch into lowering oil prices, in an August 1974 conversation cited by the report. “We can’t tackle him without breaking him.”

Analysts and historians often contend that President Carter, a Democrat, fumbled Iran, allowing the country to eventually become one of the chief U.S. opponents in the region. But the report suggests that his Republican predecessors not only contributed to the shah’s fall but also were inching toward a realignment with Saudi Arabia as the key U.S. ally in the Persian Gulf…

FT interview: Fouad Siniora, Lebanese prime minister
Published: October 16 2008

…. Q: Do you think the March 14 [ruling coalition] can win?

A:I strongly believe that the commitment of the majority of the people is in getting back to a situation where the state is in control. If it is a state run by Hizbollah, fine. But somebody is in charge. There is one captain. This situation is unsustainable where there are many captains.

I believe in March 14 and the people who subscribe to what they say it stands for: democracy, openness, tolerance, independence, excellent relations with Syria. I am fully in favour of excellent relations with Syria but on the basis of mutual respect and on an equal basis. Equal partners. Syria is our neighbour and we have a history of thousands of years together, and we will be together for thousands more. Israel is an enemy, Syria is not an enemy. But we cannot and we should not continue to be a satellite state to Syria.

These Sunni extremists are a scarecrow. I don’t mean that there are no Salafis [al-Qaeda-linked fundamentalist Sunni Muslims]. There are Salafis. But they are really creating this giant and magnifying it in order to create a perception that there is a need for a policeman. And at the same time, to intimidate. [If] they are coming from Anbar [in Iraq] they are coming from where, through where? They are coming through Syria? They are not coming by parachute. Instead of waiting for them to come in from Lebanon, they would do better to control them when they are coming from Iraq. All the people caught or killed in Nahr al-Bared did not come via legal Lebanese points of entry, they came through these porous points.

Q: Are you ready for security coordination with Syria?

A: On any issue we are fully ready to talk like two mature brothers. Syria is not an enemy it is a sister country, we are ready to co-operate on any matter that is good for both countries with all sincerity and openness. But as two mature brothers.

Q: It is surprising that you say Syria is not an enemy, when there is a suspicion that Syria was responsible for the assassination of Rafiq Hariri?

A: This matter is in the hands of the investigators and there is an international tribunal…..

Peres: Drop in global oil price serious blow to Iran
Haaretz.com, 17 October 2008

President Shimon Peres on Friday said the global financial crisis will seriously damage the Iranian economy, saying “the recent drop in global oil prices is a serious blow for Iran.”

Sitting under the sukkah of Sephardic Chief Rabbi Shlomo Amar, the president further predicted that Tehran “won’t be able to bear the increased spending in military and to continue its nuclear armament all at the same time.”

If oil prices continue to fall, Peres said, Iran will not be able to fund terrorist activities.

He added that Israel should become a central player in the field of alternative energy, saying “Israel should run ahead. We will overcome the Iranians and all other threats.”

Peres also visited the sukkot of Shas spiritual leader Rabbi Ovadia Yosef and Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi Yonah Metzger.

The issue of Hamas’ release of abducted Israel Defense Forces soldier Gilad Shalit also came up during Peres’ conversations with the rabbis. The president said that he “welcomes the renewal of talks on the issue of Gilad Shalit.”

“However,” the president added, “it is a complicated matter that could yet take time because we are dealing with a group of crazed extremists who do not hesitate to deal in human life for personal gain.”

UN rejects Iran’s bid to join Security Council
By Shlomo Shamir and Reuters
Haaretz.com, 17 October 2008

The UN General Assembly on Friday elected Japan, Turkey, Austria, Mexico and Uganda to seats on the Security Council for 2009-10, rejecting bids by Iran and Iceland.

As expected, heavyweight Japan defeated Iran, which is under Security Council sanctions because its nuclear program, for an Asian seat coming vacant on Jan. 1. Japan had 158 votes from the 192-member assembly and Iran only 32, mostly from Arab countries.

In a three-way contest for two European seats, Iceland – an apparent victim of its grave financial crisis – scored 87 votes, well short of the two-thirds majority required. Turkey went through easily and Austria by a narrow margin.

The election of Mexico and Uganda had been virtually assured since they were unopposed in their regional groupings.

The General Assembly votes once a year for five of the 10 non-permanent seats on the 15-nation council, the powerhouse of the United Nations with the ability to impose sanctions and dispatch peacekeepers.

The new make-up of the council is seen as favorable to Israel, after South Africa, which has championed a persistently anti-Israel policy, stepped down.

Prof. Gabriela Shalev, the Israeli ambassador to the UN, said that the international community demonstrated responsibility for preventing the accession of a “state that endangers peace and supports terror.”

“The notion of considering the nomination of a state that has threatened to wipe Israel off the map is unacceptable,” she said.

Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni welcomed Japan’s accession to the council.

“By thwarting Iran’s bid to join the Security Council, the United Nations managed to save face,” Livni said.

She also urged the international community to “continue its efforts to restrict Tehran by any means possible.”

The permanent members, which have veto power, are the United States, Russia, Britain, France and China.

U.S. and British envoys were exultant about the low vote for Iran. British Ambassador Sir John Sawers said Iran had been “thrashed.”

Bush backs Golan-for-Iran offer?
JTA.org, 17 October 2008

President Bush offered Syria an Iran-for-Golan deal, a Kuwaiti newspaper reported.

Al Jarida said Friday that Bush made the offer in a handwritten letter delivered through Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian Authority president.

According to accounts of the story appearing in Israeli media, Bush wants an accelerated Syria-Israel peace process that would give Syria the Golan Heights, the strategic plateau Israel captured from Syria in the 1967 Six-Day War, for Syria’s agreement to distance itself from Iran.

If true, the proposal would mark an about-face in the U.S. position, which has been to discourage Israel from talks it is already pursuing with Syria. Israel wants to reduce Iran’s influence in the region, but until now the Bush administration’s position has been that the Bashar Assad regime is not a reliable partner.

Syria indicts opposition figure for spreading ‘lies’
AFP, 16 October 2008

A Syrian author and opposition figure has been indicted on a charge of spreading lies undermining the state, a human rights group said on Thursday.

Habib Saleh, who was arrested in May “has been indicted for having spread lies aimed at weakening national sentiment,” the Syrian League for the Defence of Human Rights (SLDHR) said.

Saleh, 61, is also accused of having provoked “dissension aimed at triggering confessionalstrife,” and is due to appear before a Damascus criminal court, at an unspecified time, a statement added.

Syrian human rights groups said earlier this year that Saleh disappeared after being arrested on May 7 by the security forces in the northwest town of Tartus as he was walking through the market.

He went missing after having posted on the Internet political articles calling for the establishment of reform and democracy in Syria.

In 2001 he was arrested along with nine other opposition militants and jailed for three years. He was again arrested in May 2005 for posting “lies” on the Internet and released in September 2007.

Amnesty slams probe into Canadians jailed in Syria
Reuters, 17 October 2008

Three Canadians who say they were tortured in Syria have been denied due process and fairness by a commission investigating Ottawa’s role in their detention, Amnesty International said on Friday.

Retired Supreme Court Judge Frank Iacobucci, who headed the 22-month inquiry, is due to deliver his report to the government on Monday. A shorter version — stripped of sensitive information — will then be made public.

Ahmad El Maati, Abdullah Almalki and Muayyed Nureddin were arrested separately when entering Syria between 2001 and 2003. They say they were tortured and interrogated, and some of the questions they were asked were based on information that could only have come from Canada…

“…On Iran, Olmertarguedthat Israel had lost its “sense of proportion” when stating that it would deal with Iran militarily. “What we can do with the Palestinians, the Syrians and the Lebanese, we cannot do with the Iranians,” Olmert said, in stark contradiction to his own earlier warnings on Iran as well as the rhetoric of many of his hawkish cabinet members. “Let’s be more modest, and act within the bounds of our realistic capabilities,” he cautioned. Olmert’s interview dashed the hopes of neoconservatives in Washington hoping for an Israeli post-November surprise through the bombing of Iran’s nuclear facilities …Olmert’s statement may signal a long-overdue shift towards Israel’s Plan B on Iran….. Warning about being “boxed into the corner,” a recent Haaretz editorial offered a clear break from Israel’s Plan A: “The best chance of calming the atmosphere and reducing the threat lies in starting negotiations between the United States and Iran… [I]t is the only route not yet tried and is likely to help moderate Iranian policy…”

Are Syria’s Textile Manufacturers Headed for Failure?
The Collapse of Kouefati Industries.
By Ehsani, Syria Comment, October 17, 2008

Last Sunday, Syria’s second largest city was rocked by the collapse of one its larger businesses and the flight of a prominent industrialist and all his family members. The Kouefati group http://www.kouefati.com/about.html with a 25-year history of manufacturing Jeans, cosmetics and fashion accessories seems to have gone bankrupt under a heavy load of debt and other liabilities.

Aleppo’s business and especially Christian community is abuzz with the sensational news that has come out thus far. Here is what I have heard from sources in the know:

Camille Kouefati and his married children disappeared from sight in the early hours of Sunday.

Regrettably, it is hard to believe that the Kouefati Group is an isolated case. Syria’s textile and manufacturing base is under attack from many sources.

While local manufacturing enjoyed protection from overseas competition for decades, cracks in that protective shield have been opening up for the past few years, making Syria’s businesses vulnerable.  Arab countries have agreed to eliminate import duties. This has meant that Syrian manufacturers have had to compete against their Saudi and Gulf based counterparts. This is not a competition that Syrian businesses can win. The recent political rapprochement with Turkey may have helped the country geopolitically. However, the rise in Turkish exports to Syria have made life very difficult for the local manufacturers who have now been asked to compete against much more efficient and powerful business groups to their north. Trade policy has exacerbated the problem.  Chinese products have flooded the market. Many come through Dubai, where local labels are added that claim the products are “made in UAE.” They arrive in Syria duty-free. Local corruption is also at fault. It is no secret that Syrian importers often present false receipts low-balling the true prices of imported products to customs officials. Recently a law was passed to slow this trend, but there is little chance that it will be more successful than most other anti-corruption measures. This practice not only deprives the Government of import duties but it also ensures that local manufacturers face stiff and unfair competition from imported products which face little if any import duties.  

In sum, the bankruptcy of the Kouefati Group is not surprising. Under heavy debt burden, facing high Syrian interest rates, an uncompetitive exchange rate (high value of SYP), competition from Gulf and Turkish manufacturers, Syrian manufacturers are sailing into a perfect storm. After decades of protection and “himaye wataniye”, local industry has been asked to compete and survive in a brutally efficient and competative global economy. Sadly, I don’t think that many Syrian industrialists are ready for the battle ahead. The Kouefati family, may not be the only business group that folds up its tents in the dead of night, leaves the lights on in their parlors for cover, and slips silently across Syria’s border in a hurried attempt to escape collapse.

….

DAMASCUS, Syria: A fire in a commercial building in northern Syria killed 10 people and injured 15 others Friday, said the country’s official news agency.

The fire broke out in a five-story building in the city of Aleppo, some 355 kilometers (220 miles) north of Damascus, said SANA. An initial investigation showed the fire was likely caused by an electrical short-circuit, said the report.

Bush Administration Explores Possible Opening With Long-Shunned Syria
By Thomas Omestad
US News and World Report, 15 October 2008

Late in the life span of the Bush administration, U.S. officials have cautiously reached out to Syria through contacts that, until recently, they had shunned because of alleged Syrian support for terrorists and for efforts to destabilize Lebanon and Iraq.

It is too early to tell whether recent high-level meetings involving State Department officials, including Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and senior Syrian officials will lead to any breakthrough in relations. But Syria clearly hopes so.

The unexpected moves amount to “a tentative opening,” Syria’s ambassador to the United States, Imad Moustapha, said in an interview with U.S. News. He interprets the contacts as perhaps reflecting an administration now disposed to “reconsider U.S. policies toward Syria.”

They also reflect a shift in Syrian thinking. Just this week, Syria formally established diplomatic ties with Lebanon for the first time since independence six decades ago, shaking off a long-held reluctance to acknowledge a French colonial decision to carve Lebanon from territory that had been Syrian…

… Moustapha says he hopes the new contacts will continue and will “let us narrow the differences.” He adds, “For the past four years, we have told the U.S. that we want to improve relations.”

Moustapha says he found particularly encouraging the administration’s support for a Syrian-Israeli peace track, given that U.S. officials have focused instead on trying to move along Palestinian-Israeli talks, where Washington plays a key brokering role. U.S. officials, the Syrian ambassador added, even encouraged him to keep them briefed on Syria’s perspective on how those talks are going when they resume.

Company News Alert: Carrefour Confirms Syrian Entry (Syria)
2008-10-16

Following a long period of speculation, French retail major Carrefour has confirmed that it will enter the Syrian market. Carrefour is present in the Middle East through a partnership with its local franchise operator Majid Al Futtaim Retail (MAF Retail), a part of the Majid Al Futtaim Group, which has confirmed that it will invest an initial US$1.7bn to build Syria’s largest ever mixed-use development. The hotel, residential and commercial complex will be anchored by a Carrefour Hypermarket and will be located outside of Damascus on the Beirut to Damascus Highway which has been identified as a key development area.

Hugh Macleod, Extremists turn their wrath on Syria, Lebanon,” in San Fran Chronicle

After years of watching Baghdad burn while turning a blind eye to their own Muslim extremists, Lebanese and Syrian officials are now worried that al Qaeda-linked violence has gripped both nations. Two car bombs in two… 

“In the past, Syria has killed many people here under the pretext of fighting terrorism,” said Mr. Daqmaq, the cleric. “But the difference now is that there is a big lion called Al Qaeda, and the Syrians fear it.”

Boston Globe

Syrian Diplomacy: In an editorial, the paper comments on the establishment for the first time of diplomatic relations between Lebanon and Syria, and says the U.S. too has an opportunity to revive diplomacy with Syria – and needs to make the most of it.

Washington Times

Anti-Arab Bigotry: Edward Ayoob, a lobbyist, says he was right to fear that this presidential campaign was going to result in anti-Arab American bigotry because Barack Obama’s middle name is Hussein. … What really has been shocking and outrageous is how the media, the political establishment and the candidates themselves have so openly tolerated racism and bigotry against Arabs.

Syria’s Choice by Hassan Mneimneh, a native of Beirut, is a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute in the Weekly Standard

Damascus should not be rewarded for its ‘nuanced’ position on Islamist terrorism.  …. Syria’s choice should be simple: an end to support for all terrorism and respect for Lebanon’s independence, or America will sit on the sidelines and watch a dictatorship that lived by the sword die by it.

What is Behind the Veil — a Deeper Look into Syria,” by Sondja at The Agonist

…Yet as an American girl on my own, I was cautious about visiting Syria. After all, they are the opposite of us, for we symbolize democracy, freedom, women’s rights, and they … well how can such liberties exist when women’s faces have been blacked out as if by an eraser?….

Orhan Pamuk, Turkish Novelist Denounces Government at Book Fair, NYTimes

DAMASCUS (AFP)

 — A Syrian author and opposition figure has been indicted on a charge of spreading lies undermining the state, a human rights group said on Thursday.

Habib Saleh, who was arrested in May “has been indicted for having spread lies aimed at weakening national sentiment,” the Syrian League for the Defence of Human Rights (SLDHR) said. Saleh, 61, is also accused of having provoked “dissension aimed at triggering confessional strife,” and is due to appear before a Damascus criminal court, at an unspecified time, a statement added.

In 2001 he was arrested along with nine other opposition militants and jailed for three years. He was again arrested in May 2005 for posting “lies” on the Internet and released in September 2007.

Saudi Arabia hosts Taliban talks to bolster Pakistan.

Saudi Arabia is mediating between Taliban and Afghan officials to prevent its ally Pakistan from sliding into Islamist violence and to wean the Taliban away from al Qaeda, diplomats said on Wednesday. Saudi Arabia is mediating between Taliban and Afghan officials to prevent its ally Pakistan from sliding into Islamist violence and to wean the Taliban away from al Qaeda, diplomats said on Wednesday

U.S. protests to Syria over detained journalists
Reuters, 15 October 2008

The United States has officially protested to Syria for not immediately notifying Washington about the arrest of two American journalists, the State Department said on Wednesday.

The two journalists complained to diplomats that their request to notify the U.S. government of their arrest immediately was ignored, said State Department spokesman Sean McCormack.

140 Iraqi refugees in Syria head home
By Albert Aji
The Associated Press, 15 October 2008

Some 140 Iraqi refugees living in Syria headed home Wednesday on a free trip organized by the Iraqi government. Many cited improved security in Iraq and dwindling savings as reasons for their return.

The refugees boarded a chartered Iraqi Airways flight to take them to Baghdad, where they will receive an official reception at the airport. The Iraqi Embassy says it is planning several such trips in the coming weeks. …

An official at the Iraqi Embassy, Adnan al-Shourifi, said Wednesday’s trip — which was organized for the first time in cooperation with the U.N. agency for refugees — reflects international recognition of the improved security situation in Iraq. He urged all refugees to return home to take part in rebuilding their country, saying they will be given cash and other incentives. Ayman Gharabiyah, a UNHCR official, said most of the Iraqis were returning home because their savings have run out.

Each returning family, he said, will receive around $850 in cash along with an extra monthly payment of $145 for the next six months. The returnees would also get their houses and jobs back, he added.

Hamid al-Dulaimi, a 50-year-old who has been living in Syria for the last two years, was returning with his wife, three children and mother.

“But if I find the security situation in Iraq is still bad, I will be back here,” he said….

Damascus has said the cost of the Iraqi refugees’ stay in Syria is estimated at $1.6 billion per year.

Syria-Turkey Gas Link Extension Planned
Moscow Times, 15 October 2008

Stroitransgaz, a Russian pipeline builder partly owned by Gazprom, plans to extend a gas link from Syria to Turkey that may help supply a project to Europe.

Stroitransgaz has signed an accord with state-owned Syrian Gas and the new pipeline will link Aleppo, in northern Syria, with the Turkish border, Syrian Oil Minister Sufian al-Alao said in comments published late Monday by the Syrian state-run news service Sana.

Syria began receiving gas from Egypt this year through a pipe that crosses Jordan and plans to import gas from Iraq’s Akkas field, which is close to the border, by 2010. Stroitransgaz, which built the Syrian section of the pipeline from Egypt, will now construct the 62-kilometer extension in 18 months, at a cost of 52 million euros ($71.2 million), Alao said.

Cristobal Burgos-Alonso, an adviser at the European Union’s Energy Directorate, on Oct. 2 said Iraq and Egypt might provide gas for Nabucco, a pipeline project to supply Europe through Turkey, bypassing Russia.

n National Iranian Oil managing director Seifollah Jashnsaz was to visit Moscow on Tuesday for talks with Gazprom, including on a joint venture to build a pipeline from the Caspian Sea to the Sea of Oman, the Tehran Times newspaper reported.

[Landis Analysis] The following EIU economic overview (copied below) is good. One nit to pick.

Since the consolidation of Bashar al-Assad’s authority at the Baath Party Congress of 2005, it has become common for analysts to repeat the following wisdom: “[Assad] has entrenched his control, albeit at the cost of narrowing his power base.”

Here are a few examples:

1. “In the aftermath of the latest Baath Party Conference, the Assad family consolidated its grip on power by narrowing the base to its inner-most circles.”

2. Zisser in 2006: “the question of how long Bashar can survive remains valid given Syria’s internal discord and growing international isolation. Bashar has wrecked many of his father’s achievements, if not his life’s work. Syria is no longer the stable and strong state it was when Hafez al-Assad died. Threats to the regime’s domestic stability have increased…. Bashar must realize that delegation of power to family members is not enough to ensure security. Rumors of tension within the ruling family are rife as are hints that Asaf Shawkat and Mahir both have ambitions to replace Bashar. … The Syrian elite simply does not fear Bashar the way they feared his father…

3. Kirsten Maas and Heiko Wimmen of the Heinrich Böll Foundation: “It appears clear, however, that despite initial rhetoric hinting at reform, the power base of the regime has narrowed since Bashar’s succession to power, and is more and more restricted to the immediate Assad family and its entourage.”

I wish someone would explain how Assad’s base has narrowed? Is it because the old guard was jettisoned? i.e. Khaddam, Kanaan, Shihabi… These people didn’t support Bashar. They were trying to take control for themselves. Khaddam thought he should be president – not a very dependable social base! More important, however, Khaddam had no social base independent of his state position as V.P. If one wants to argue that with the defection of Khaddam, Bashar has lost Sunni support, I would have to chuckle. Today Sharaa is V.P. He is a Sunni and has as large a social base as did Khaddam.

Bashar jailed the 12 leading civil society opposition members. That is true, but they were certainly not part of his social base. On the contrary, they were calling for democracy and an end to the present leadership. We cannot count them as previous members of his social base.

Bashar has placed his brother-in-law in a principal internal security position to replace Bahjat Suleiman. OK, but is this narrowing his social base? No. The Mukhabarat leaders have always gone to candidates close to the president’s family. Rifaat al-Assad – Hafiz’s brother – was the main security guy for Hafiz for 14 years. Bashar is just replicating a working arrangement that has been in place in Syria for 40 years. This is not narrowing his base. Did Bahjat Suleiman, Bashar’s first security chief offer a broader social base than Asef Shawkat? No. He was touted to be Bashar’s “God father,” who helped him transition into the presidency – super loyal to father and son. He had a social base of Bashar.

Bashar has allowed his cousin, Rami Makhlouf to become Mr. 10% in the economy thereby supposedly allienating the Sunni business class which objects to the nepotism and, hence, have left Bashar’s social base. If this is the argument for a “narrower social base,” it doesn’t pass muster. The economy has been expanding at a steady clip since Bashar 2000, undergoing liberal reforms and seeing new foreign investment. The vast majority of this investment has gone into Sunni pockets, despite the emergence of Mr. Makhlouf as the central figure tying it all together and bringing it under the patronage umbrella of the first family. Sunni merchants are happy to have a sympathetic and capitalist friendly technocrat like Dardari as economy Deputy Prime Minister. They are happier now than they were under Hafiz, expanding the leadership’s social base. 

The “loyalty” and expanded social base this offers Bashar was on view for all to see during the campaign parties or ‘huflat” of the summer of 2007, when Bashar renewed his presidency. The Sunni magnates of Damascus turned out to fete the authority and leadership of the president. By consolidating power, Bashar broadened his social base. That is the essential verity of authoritarian states. The elites, realizing that there is no alternative to the present state, put aside their hesitancies and luke warmth in order to make money, carve out a future for their families, and embrace the central authority that they must make peace with. That is what has happened in Syria. Consolidation of power has meant the broadening of the president’s social base not its narrowing. The Iraq example has broadened the government’s social base immeasurably and helped the Sunni elites cast aside any Bushian dreams of democracy and freedom agenda’s for the time being.

I think one has to argue that Bashar al-Assad has broadened his social base over the last 3 years rather than narrow it.  

[end of commentary]

Syria: Economic Overviews, 2008-10-14,
COUNTRY VIEW: FROM THE ECONOMIST INTELLIGENCE UNIT, OUTLOOK FOR 2009-10

* The president, Bashar al-Assad, is expected to remain in power in 2009-10 and there is little threat to his rule. However, tensions within the ruling elite, exacerbated by external pressures, could prompt more political assassinations.

* Mr Assad will continue to try to reduce Syria’s political isolation, although any significant and open interference in Lebanese politics would alienate new interlocutors such as France’s president, Nicolas
Sarkozy.

* There is unlikely to be progress on negotiations with Israel, following the change of Israeli leadership and widespread public and parliamentary opposition in Israel to returning the occupied Golan Heights to Syria.

* The main policy challenge will be to offset the impact of declining oil production by increasing investment and encouraging entrepreneurship, particularly in sectors that will boost export earnings.

* Inflation will decline from its 2008 peak, but will remain high at 11.2% in 2009 and 10.1% in 2010. There is an upside risk to these forecasts, associated with how secondary inflationary effects work through the economy.

* The current account is forecast to slip into deficit in 2009, to the tune of around US$500m (0.9% of GDP); in 2010 the deficit will narrow slightly as export earnings increase.

DOMESTIC POLITICS: Mr Assad’s control of the country is supported by key elements in the security services and by the ruling Baath party, and his position remains secure, although the regime will face significant challenges in 2009-10. Since assuming power following the death of his father, Hafez al-Assad, in 2000, Mr Assad has continued the repression of local opposition groups and activists, and has appointed close allies to  key posts. This has entrenched his control, albeit at the cost of narrowing his power base. The core of the elite is largely drawn from Mr Assad’s minority Alawi sect, and is acutely conscious that to move against him would risk endangering the Alawi hold on power. However, there are tensions within the elite, which sometime result in political assassinations, more of which are expected over the outlook period as result of external pressures, particularly the UN investigation into the killing of Rafiq al-Hariri, a former Lebanese prime minister. (The assassination in August 2008 of Mohammed Suleiman may have been related to his role as an interlocutor with the International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN nuclear watchdog, in its investigation of Syria’s alleged nuclear programme.)

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS: Since mid-2008 Syria’s international isolation has begun to ease, largely because of its support for the May 2008 Doha agreement between the opposing factions in Lebanon and its agreement to normalise diplomatic relations with Lebanon, but also because of its engagement in indirect talks with Israel, which are being brokered by Turkey. The early fruits of these developments have included financial assistance from Gulf Arab states and a visit to Damascus, the Syrian capital, by the French president, Nicolas Sarkozy. However, Syria’s diplomatic links with the region’s heavyweights, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, remain strained and there is no obvious catalyst for improvement over the outlook period. A rapprochement with the US would also be difficult, although the most likely next president, Barack Obama, has a stated policy of dialogue with enemy states, including Syria. However, Syria still considers Lebanon to be within its sphere of influence and Mr Assad is therefore likely to get entangled in fresh controversy in the run-up to the 2009 Lebanese parliamentary election and after it, if the anti-Syrian “March 14th” coalition emerges victorious. A further threat is the Hariri investigation, and the UN prosecutor is expected to release a list of suspects, which may include some senior Syrian officials, in early 2009.

POLICY TRENDS: Syria has been gradually reforming its centrally planned economy, a process that has been led by the deputy prime minister for economic affairs, Abdullah al-Dardari, and is expected to continue in
2009-10. The overriding policy challenge will be to offset the impact of the recent (albeit temporarily checked) decline in oil production by making established businesses more dynamic and encouraging investment and entrepreneurship, particularly in sectors that can boost export earnings.

As credit is likely to be difficult to secure in the context of the ongoing global financial crisis, Syria’s spending will be constrained by its revenue, which will entail fiscal prudence. The reduction in fuel subsidies in May 2008 was a significant step, but the simultaneous increase in public-sector salaries largely offset the fiscal benefits and will stoke secondary inflation. Although the introduction of a value-added tax (VAT) has been approved in principle, and would diversify government revenue, its implementation may be put off until late 2009 or 2010.

INTERNATIONAL ASSUMPTIONS: World GDP growth (at purchasing power parity exchange rates) is expected to slow to 3.2% in 2009, owing largely to the impact of the global credit crunch on the US and other OECD economies, before recovering to 4% in 2010. As oil demand in emerging markets partly offsets the slowdown in the OECD, oil prices will remain high, averaging US$96/barrel over the outlook period, although this is well below the July 2008 peak of US$147/b.

ECONOMIC GROWTH: Real GDP growth will accelerate to 5.4% in 2009, driven largely by a partial recovery in agricultural exports (following this year’s drought and poor harvest) and a pick-up in investment, both foreign and domestic, albeit from a low base. Growth will slow but remain solid in 2010, at 4.8%, still above the estimated average of 4% in 2007-08. Growth in private consumption is likely to weaken in 2009-10, because of a drop in disposable incomes (owing to the cuts in fuel subsidies and to inflation) and a decline in the contribution from Iraqi refugees as they run down their savings, find it more difficult to enter the country and return home in growing numbers.

INFLATION: Consumer price inflation, which the Economist Intelligence Unit estimates will have averaged 14.4% in 2008, is expected to decline but remain high in 2009-10. It will take some time for the secondary effects of the rise in fuel prices (owing both to lower subsidies and higher international fuel prices) and the 25% increase in government salaries and pensions to work their way through the economy. In 2009 a decline in oil prices and an easing of non-oil commodity prices will help to bring down inflation, to a forecast 11.2%. Any significant return of Iraqi nationals to their homeland could lower it even further by reducing demand pressures, although that is more likely to happen in 2010, when we forecast inflation will ease to 10.1%.

EXCHANGE RATES: The Syrian pound has been pegged to a basket of currencies based on the IMF’s special drawing rights (SDR) since October 2007, resulting in a marked appreciation against the US dollar. Although the new regime is less rigid than the previous peg to the dollar, the authorities remain unlikely to let the pound float freely, placing a high priority on exchange-rate stability. The dominant position of the state-owned banks and the Central Bank of Syria’s control over foreign-currency transactions (even as some laws are relaxed) mean that the regime is well placed do this. The pound has declined slightly from its May 2008 peak of SP45.8:US$1, and we do not expect any substantive change over the outlook period, with the pound weakening slightly as the dollar recovers against the SDR. As a result, the exchange rate is forecast to average SP47.5:US$1 in 2009-10.

EXTERNAL SECTOR: We expect Syria’s non-oil export earnings to rise steadily over the outlook period, but as oil export revenue will continue to account for over one-third of the total, the headline exports figure will fluctuate in line with oil prices. We forecast that exports will grow by 1.2% in 2009–as the rise in non-oil export earnings offsets the decline in oil export revenue–and by 10.2% in 2010 as oil prices strengthen. We forecast reasonably good harvests over the outlook period, but if drought persists it will have a significant impact on wheat and other food exports. Oil production is increasing at a number of small fields so that, despite the ongoing decline in the larger mature fields, overall production will increase slightly in 2009 to an average of 383,000 barrels/day (b/d), declining to 375,000 b/d in 2010. In any case, the net impact of oil on the trade account is relatively neutral because Syria is now importing almost the same volume of refined products as it exports in crude oil. However, non-oil exports are continuing to benefit from strong
regional demand and the relaxation of foreign-exchange controls, which has led to more exports moving out of the black economy and being officially recorded. Import spending growth will remain strong over the outlook period, partly because of the ongoing process of tariff liberalisation, but also because of healthy demand for capital goods related to some large infrastructure and construction projects. With all these factors taken together, the trade deficit will widen to about US$900m (1.6% of GDP) in 2009, before narrowing to about US$650m (1% of GDP) in 2010.

Google Blocks Chrome Browser Use in Syria, Iran
by Jessica Dheere
PBS.org, 13 October 2008

Recently, I learned from Joshua Landis’ Syria Comment, my main source for news and analysis concerning Lebanon’s eastern neighbor, that Google has blocked the use of its new web browser, Chrome, in Syria.

A quick Google search turned up a post by Syrian blogger Yaser Sadeq with an account of his abortive attempt to take the new browser for a spin, and another by Feras Allaou that chronicled his own unsuccessful attempts to download Google applications. …It seems like a strange move for a company that has focused so intently on the Middle Eastern and North African markets, with versions of Knol, Blogger, iGoogle, Docs, and, most recently, Chat in Arabic. But he was right.

… According to a Google spokesperson, in order for the company to abide by U.S. export controls and economic sanctions, “we are unable to permit the download of Google Chrome in Cuba, Syria, North Korea, Iran, and Sudan…”

Bush Says Syria Must Respect Lebanon’s Sovereignty
Naharnet.com, 14 October 2008

U.S. President George Bush warned Syria on Monday that it must respect Lebanon’s sovereignty and urged Damascus to establish full diplomatic ties with Beirut. “We discussed the need for Syria to respect Lebanon’s sovereignty, to cease its support for terror, and to open full diplomatic relations with Lebanon’s elected government,” Bush said after talks with Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi…. “Together, we are giving support to rising democracies, and defending the innocent against the violent,” Berlusconi earlier said as Bush welcomed him to the White House.

“Italy has shown that commitment by deploying forces to the NATO mission in Afghanistan, and by leading NATO training operations in Iraq. Italian forces are also serving the cause of peace and stability in Lebanon and Kosovo and Bosnia,” he added.

Syria sends first ambassador to Iraq in decades
Reuters, 13 October 2008

Syria has sent its first ambassador to Baghdad in decades, the Iraqi government said on Monday, the latest move from a fellow Arab country to strengthen diplomatic ties with Iraq.

Foreign Minister Hoshiyar Zebari received newly appointed Syrian Ambassador Nawaf Aboud al-Sheikh Faris Monday afternoon, the Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

Zebari “welcomed ambassador Faris and confirmed Iraq’s desire to develop and enhance bilateral relations, and to move to a new stage of cooperation,” the statement said.

Syria opened an embassy in Baghdad last year, but the arrival of its envoy marks a significant step for the two nations, which have had strained ties since rival factions of the Ba’ath party took power in both countries in the 1960s.

Syria has not had an embassy in Iraq since around the time Saddam Hussein became president in 1979.

Since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003, Iraq’s U.S.-backed government has accused Syria of not doing enough to stem the flow of foreign fighters entering Iraq across the two countries’ porous 600-km (380-mile) border.

Shi’ite-led Iraq has for years urged its Arab neighbours, mostly governed by Sunnis, to re-establish full diplomatic ties. Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad comes from the minority Alawite sect….

Several Arab leaders have visited Iraq since August. Last month, the United Arab Emirates ambassador took up his post in Baghdad, becoming the first Arab ambassador in Baghdad since Egypt’s envoy was kidnapped and killed in 2005.

Learning Syrian cooking, and culture, Bost Globe, 2008-10-15

“Mea Culpa,” By Amr Hamzawy of Carnegie Institute
Al Ahram Weekly, Issue No. 917, 9 – 15 October 2008

Although the questions of democracy, pluralism, political freedom, and human rights in Arab societies have taken the best part of my intellectual and academic effort, I found my analysis was too focussed on a single question; namely, how non-violent opposition movements can generate enough pressure on governing elites to bring about democracy, the rotation of power, competitive elections, citizen participation, and all the rest.

One thing I failed to examine adequately was the nature of the opposition. Be they Islamic, liberal or leftist, our opposition groups have a disturbing block when it comes to introducing democracy in their own organisations. However loud they may denounce the repression of the ruling elites in public, they have little or no respect for democracy in their own backyard.

Several weeks ago, I was asked to answer the following four questions about the impact of a Syrian-Israeli peace on terrorism in the region. Here are my answers. Let me make it clear that the following questions are not mine.

Syria & Israel:
Peace Prospects and Consequences for Terrorist Groups
By Joshua Landis
September 2008

1.What levers could Syria use during peace talks to retrieve the Golan Heights?

Syria has cultivated a number of “cards” to play in order to pressure Israel to return the Golan Heights and come to the negotiating table. These cards are ideological, military, and diplomatic.

Ideologically, Syria is the only Arab country that continues to advocate pan-Arab nationalism with any vigor. Pan-Arabism serves to deny the legitimacy of a Jewish state in the midst of the Arab homeland. Likewise, the Syrian government insists on the notion of “Arab Rights.” By promoting Arab identity, Damascus reminds Middle Easterners that Israel and its western supporters are in violation of the rights of the Arab people through the occupation of their land.

The Syrian government tries to forestall the emergence of local, territory-based, national sentiment for fear that Arabs will forget their struggle against Israel and cease caring about Syria’s fight for the Golan. By preserving a sense of pan-Arab duty in fighting Israel, Damascus undercuts the efforts of America’s “moderate” allies (Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia) in turning their citizens against Syria, Hizbullah and Hamas. The chief reason Nasrallah remains the most admired leader among Arabs is because he has fought and sacrificed in the struggle for “Arab” rights. Thus, by bolstering the notion of Arab rights and nationalism, Syria undermines efforts to cast Hizbullah and Hamas as “terrorists” rather than as “freedom fighters.”

Bringing peace between Syrian, Lebanon and Israel would help America’s Middle East allies attenuate the anger of their people, who are not happy with the pro-Israel policies of their governments. “Moderate” Arab leaders are concerned that the growing hostility to Israel undermines their domestic situation by exposing their support for President Abbas as tantamount to collaboration with Israel in oppressing Palestinians living in Gaza. As popular Arab hostility towards Israeli actions directed towards Gaza grows, so street anger towards these regimes rises – and the popularity of Iran, Syria, Hamas and Hezbollah increases: This makes “moderate” leaders feel vulnerable. (“Summary of Salafist web sites” Conflict Forum – September 16, 2008)

Militarily, Syria cultivates a number of allied militias, the most important of which are Hizbullah and Hamas. Because Syria cannot challenge Israel militarily, it must rely on non-state actors to hurt Israel in operations that avoid using a Syrian return address.

Hizbullah is one of the two main reasons that Israel has returned to the negotiating table with Syria. Israel’s failure to destroy Hizbullah in 2006 or to stop its subsequent rearming by Syria and Iran has persuaded Israel to try diplomacy. Likewise, US efforts to take on Hizbullah ended in failure. Washington’s attempt to strengthen the Lebanese government and army in the hope that they could disarm Hizbullah came to a sad end in May 2008, when Shiite militias overran West Beirut, the stronghold of Saad Hariri, America’s ally. The fact that mid-level officers in the Lebanese Army worked hand-in-glove with Hizbullah convinced Israel and European governments alike that Washington could not turn the Lebanese army into a terror fighting machine. It was no coincidence that Israel’s announcement of talks with Syria followed hard on Hizbullah’s success. When all military options to destroy Hizbullah failed, Israel turned to diplomacy. One of the main purposes of Israeli negotiators is to explore the possibility that Syria is capable of convincing Hizbullah to lay down its arms. Conversely, a principal Syrian card in the negotiations will be to keep the Hizbullah threat foremost in Israeli consciousness and to convince Israelis that Syria can and will act decisively to change Hizbullah’s purpose and capabilities.

It is easy to overstate Syria’s military capabilities. Hizbullah has not killed an Israeli for over two years. As a military threat, Hamas is little more than an irritant. This brings us to diplomacy and alliances.

Diplomacy is crucial to Syria. Having allies, such as Russia and Iran, that are seen to be growing stronger rather than weaker can only help Syria in its effort to get back the Golan. They compensate for Syria’s military weakness. (Syria’s negotiations in the 1990s failed in part because of the collapse of the USSR and inability of Syria to find alternate allies. Israel become convinced that time was on its side and the Golan could be absorbed with minimal risk.)

If Hizbullah is one reason Israel has come to the table, Iran’s growing nuclear capabilities and influence in the region is the other. As Israeli Ambassador to Washington Sallai Meridor explained recently: “By far, the first reason to engage with the Syrians is to explore whether there is a chance to [separate them from Iran] and stop their harboring, encouraging and supporting of terror.”

Iran’s growing nuclear capabilities and anti-Israeli rhetoric have rattled Israel. So have prospects that Russia may return to its Cold War policy of arming Syria and Middle Eastern proxies more generally in its revived contest with the US. These dangers provide Damascus with leverage just as they make the notion of “flipping” Syria ever more attractive to Tel Aviv.

2. What are the implications of a Syrian-Israeli peace agreement for regional counterterrorism efforts?

Syria has stated that a full return of the Golan and peace with Israel will “change the strategic environment of the region.” This will have a major impact on counterterrorism efforts.

First and foremost, it would allow the US to resume intelligence sharing with Syria and work closely with Damascus to stop jihadist infiltration into Iraq. Damascus is eager for this cooperation. So is the US military. A year ago, a West Point study based on captured documents estimated that forty or so foreign fighters cross into Iraq from Syria every month. Petraeus has been powerless to resume intelligence sharing with Syria for the purpose of stopping this traffic due to Washington’s ideological priority placed on isolating Syria. A peace agreement that would include the end of isolation and a return of the US ambassador to Damascus would eliminate this obstacle. Fewer American soldiers would be killed in Iraq.

Also, if Anbar province becomes destabilized as a result of the decommissioning of the pro-American, Awakening militias, it will be important for Washington to seal the Syrian border in order to assist the Iraqi government forces in their effort to subdue the region and draw the noose around recalcitrant Sons of Iraq. A friendly Syria can assist US plans for consolidating central control of Iraq and eradicating al-Qaida’s presence there. Syria’s mukhabarat have been good providers of intelligence on al-Qaida suspects in the past. There is no reason to have them as enemies if peace is signed between Israel and Syria.

3. How would any loss of Syrian sponsorship affect Hizballah and the Palestinian rejectionist groups?

Syria has considerable leverage over Hizbullah for a number of reasons, not least of which is that all of Hizbullah’s larger arm supplies must be transported through Syria. Delivery by sea or air leaves them vulnerable to monitoring and interception by Israel and the US.

Syria could persuade Hizbullah to give up its fight against Israel. If Syria made peace with Israel and ended its grievance over the Golan, any ally that sought to undermine the peace and rekindle war between Syria and Israel would become a problem. The community of interest shared between Hizbullah and Syria is too important to be sacrificed over peace with Israel. 

Some Hizbullah leaders might hold out and resist such a shift and insist on continuing the struggle against Israel and to turn against Syria, but they would be in the distinct minority. The notion that if Syria began to shift its strategic interest, Hizbullah would also trim its sails has considerable merit. Hizbullah has coordinated strategy closely with both Syria and Iran.

There can be little doubt that Hizbullah would be sorely divided were Syria and Iran to move in opposite directions. Because of the reluctance of the three allies – Syria, Hizbullah, and Iran – to move, one without the others for fear of being tricked by the US and Israel, Washington would be well advised to engage all three in dialogue. By attempting to bring all three along at once, Washington stands a much greater chance of successfully reducing terrorism in the region than if it attempts to “flip” one in order to destroy the others or to divide and conquer.

This is not to say that Syria would not be tempted to turn without its allies were it given proper guarantees of diplomatic support, security guarantees, and economic assistance, but the likelihood of success would be greatly increased if the West engages in a good faith effort at compromise with all three. If this approach fails, it will have provided Syrians with political cover. Syrian officials take the claim of “Arab rights” seriously and will be reluctant to be seen to sacrifice them without compromises from the US – Israel camp.

As for militant Palestinian groups, such as Hamas, Syria is not wedded to them and can move on its own peace agreement with Israel without waiting on the Palestinian track. Syrian officials have reiterated that Syria’s official Palestinian policy is much like Iran’s and Hezbollah’s. They want a solution that the Palestinians accept, or at least the vast majority of them. When asked if that must include all occupied territory, they that if the Palestinian accept it, we accept it. We do not want to be more Palestinian than the Palestinians. When the Palestinians abandoned their war footing in 1992 in order to pursue the Oslo peace process, they, in essence, gave Syria the right to pursue peace on its own as well.

Unofficially, many, if not most Syrians, have come to the conclusion that the Palestiniansare too weak to stop the loss of their land and rights to Israelis. They also believe that the international community will do little to prevent this. Most Arab governments have abandoned the fight and there is little that Syria can do to reverse this process. Many Syrians are of the opinion that if Syria can get back the Golan, it will be fortunate. Syria has suffered enough in wars against Israel. The government is prepared to exploit this sentiment. It is fully aware of its own weaknesses – both military and economic. In short, Syria wants a deal, and it does not want to allow Palestinian groups veto power over a deal. It does not believe the situation for the Palestinians or the Golan will improve over the long run.

4. How would a peace agreement impact Syria’s domestic security situation?

Peace with Israel would improve regime stability by improving the economy. Presumably Syria would be taken off the terrorist list, US economic sanctions would be dropped, and foreign investment in Syria would rise markedly.

It is common for regime detractors to claim that it would collapse forthwith because war with Israel is its main, if not only, justification. Sunni Syrians, they suggest, would turn against the Alawite dominated regime once peace was signed. This analysis has little if any merit. The same was said about Egypt’s authoritarian regime. It has survived just fine – indeed, it avoided bankruptcy by signing peace with Israel and winning US economic backing.

What is more, the notion that the Syrian leadership derives its legitimacy from fighting Israel is hard to square with reality. Syria has never won a battle against Israel; Syrians are not fools. The legitimacy that the Syrian regime enjoys does not come from fighting Israel. On the contrary, It comes from the stability and security that the leadership provides Syrians. In a region where little stability exists and where regime collapse usually means catastrophic civil war and social break down, security is prized over fighting Israel. No Syrian wants to end up like an Iraqi, Palestinian or Lebanese during that country’s long civil war. More than one out of eight inhabitants of Syria are refugees or have parents who were refugees during the past century. The conservatism of Syrians and value placed on security should not be underestimated.

Consequently, Syrians put up with the government they have. They complain a lot, but protest little. There is no viable or dangerous opposition in Syria. The regime has shown its willingness to act swiftly and brutally to smash opponents before they can organize against it. As in other Arab countries, security forces are able to convince the people not to question government legitimacy.

Syrian leaders and the economic elite in Syria are all expecting a sizeable economic peace dividend. They may be disappointed in this. Although fewer barriers to foreign and local investment will exist in a climate of peace, corruption and the absence of the rule of law will remain primary obstacles to economic growth in Syria.

In the long run, peace may well force the Syrian regime to take more decisive measures to reform and promote economic growth, but this is unlikely to jeopardize the regime’s survival. So long as sectarian mistrust remains high in Syria and in the region more generally, the present leadership will be able to avoid unified popular action against it. Having peace with its strongest neighbor can only add to this stability. Syria’s leadership and people stand to benefit from both the process and the peace. Arguments that Syria only wants the process and not the peace are silly.