Posted by Alex 

Yesterday, President al-Assad again warned that the region will witness in the near future political events that might have dangerous repercussions on the future of its countries and peoples unless they were tackled in a rational way to serve the interests of all sides without favoring one side over another.

This was a recommitment to the warning Assad issued during his inaugural speech last July: "This year … perhaps not more than few months of this year, will determine the destiny and future of our area, and conceivably, the whole world."

These warnings might sound unrestrained… but this is how Dennis Ross evaluated the Syrian president’s comments, in 2003, on the future ramifications of the expected Iraq war:

“When Bashar spoke about the situation in Iraq just prior to the war, his comments bordered on the hysterical. At one point, he noted that a disaster on par with the creation of the state of Israel and the British betrayal of the Arabs after World War I would befall the Arab world” 

Jordan's King Abdullah who avoided Syria for the past few years visited President Assad in Damascus this week. A joint communiqué following the talks yesterday included a number of Jordanian concessions to Damascus' demands:

According to a Royal Court statement, the two sides also agreed to expedite the implementation of existing bilateral agreements, especially with regard to both countries' shares in the water of the Yarmouk River basin.

On the issue of border delineation, the King, who returned home later Sunday, and Assad agreed that the technical committees should commence their work immediately to settle the issue.

Regarding joint Arab action, both leaders stressed their determination to activate Arab solidarity to face the challenges in the Middle East.

They expressed commitment to working and coordinating with Arab leaders to establish a unified Arab position on regional issues in isolation from external interference, and on bases that safeguard higher Arab interests and the interests of both countries in confronting political and security challenges as well as radicalism and terrorism.

The two leaders expressed keenness to intensify cooperation and coordination with Arab leaders to ensure the success of an Arab League summit that will be held in Damascus in 2008.

On the Palestinian issue, the two leaders stressed the importance of reaching a just and comprehensive solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict on the basis of the Arab Peace Initiative and international resolutions that provide for the return of all occupied Palestinian, Syrian and Lebanese lands.

The two leaders also discussed the situation in Lebanon, underlining their full respect to the sovereignty of Lebanon and denouncing the assassinations targeting Lebanese people. Both leaders also rejected all foreign interference in Lebanon's internal affairs.

They underscored the need for Lebanon to reach consensus on the presidential election.

The King and Assad also stressed the importance of Arab support for Iraq's unity, sovereignty and stability. Both leaders emphasised that solutions concerning the situation in Iraq should primarily come from within the war-torn country.

They said they support comprehensive national reconciliation in Iraq and the ongoing political process there.

Posted by Zenobia

The fourth and latest discussion topic for Creative Syria’s Forum deals with these questions:

Which international and regional powers (Turkey, Iran, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the Untied States, Russia, France) should Syria have good relations with, economically or politically? How flexible do you hope Syria will be on Lebanon, Iraq, the Golan, and Palestinian right? Should Syria be more involved or more hands off in the surrounding region's many conflicts?

I invite all the Syria Comment readers and posters to log on to the Creative Syria Forum site and check out the latest articles written by your fellow talented bloggers. Come see what we have to say, partake in the discussion, and give us your feedback.

The following are some selected excerpts from the different articles.

Wassim | graduate student | United Kingdom
 
The twentieth century can be considered the Middle East's lost century or, to paraphrase from Gabriel Marquez, its "100 years of solitude". The overwhelming tide of secular politics and nationalism, which engulfed the region following the end of the "Western mandates" marginalized and drowned out the region’s own rich political, socio-economic and religious realities with those that had a context in Western Europe. Almost two generations of Arabs have thus been educated to look West instead of East – they are lost. The tragedy is that most of these "lost Arabs" now either rule us (the moderate countries) or dominate what is taken as a political opposition in most countries, including Syria. As Shariati once said, there are three strands of political thought: Humanist, Nationalist and Religious. These three factors, when applied in the correct context and reality, can in fact be productive and useful. It is when they are applied in the wrong context and reality that they can cause much damage. For example, they can make people who should be enemies friends and vice versa. Rather than be partial to one or the other flavor, Syria has proven adept at manipulating each of those three images where it saw fit. This should be commended and notcondemned at a time when nationalism is used to divide the Arab countries, religion is used to divide Sunni against Shia and the secular against the religious whilst in one breath humanism is being used to justify the continued occupation of Palestine and Iraq.

Syria's non Arab allies (Turkey and Iran) are helping Assad counterbalance Syria's traditional Arab allies who joined the US administration in boycotting him. Uniformly improving relations with Sunni Turkey made it difficult for Syria's Arab critics to continue suggesting that Assad turned Syria into an Iranian client state.

Qunfuz | Educator/Author | Oman
 
Despite its Arabism, Syria has always been prepared to go against the grain of Arab alliances in what it perceives as the true interests of Arab causes. Syria had the honor of being the only Arab state to support revolutionary Iran against Saddam Hussain's barbarous Western-backed attack. Despite some conflicts of interest in Iraq, and despite the very different nature of the two regimes, Syria and Iran have preserved and developed their alliance. This is certainly a good thing. Whatever the future of the current clerical regime, Iran will continue to be a regional heavyweight, with a large population of well-educated people, with a crucial geo-strategic position and a wealth of resources. I know from my visit to the country that the alliance with Syria is popular even with opponents of the mullahs.

Syria's regional allies are well-organized forces, which will remain key players in the region indefinitely. Iran is one example of this, and Turkey, with its huge and growing economic power and connections to Europe and central Asia, is another. Hizbullah is by far the best organized, deeply rooted, and efficient political force in Lebanon, and perhaps the second most effective military force in the area after Israel. Indeed, despite Israel's continuing technological superiority (which translates into a superior
ability to kill civilians and destroy infrastructure), and despite the political-sectarian traps limiting its capacities domestically, the fact that Hizbullah frustrated all of Israel's war aims in the summer of 2006 remains a matter of pivotal importance in the region and the world. 

Mazen Salhi | Engineer | Canada

Syrian society can in fact make credible claims to being a tolerant and successfully diverse culture. Modern Syria has acted strongly against radical fundamentalist movements. It protected the Christians of Lebanon
from potential uprooting by extremist forces in Lebanon (some of whom are preaching about peace, freedom and independence today), and it opposed the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. Nevertheless, the gravity of religion, political history and oil companies is always looming overhead when making decisions about the country's regional and international political relations.

From all of the above, we can pretty much be certain that no matter how hostile the Saudis grow towards Syria, the Syrian government cannot break it with Saudi Arabia, which houses Mecca and Medina and influences the lives of a great many Syrians through religion and sheer economics. Also, no matter how costly the influx of Iraqi refugees may be on the Syrian infrastructure, Syria cannot afford to turn its back on them, with so much in common with the Iraqi people. And no matter what lows the likes of Jumblatt – who suggested in Washington recently to send car bombs to Damascus – sink to in Lebanon, Syria cannot and should not break it with Lebanon either. Decision trees are as complex as the realities in the land that gave the world agriculture.

So much for not reaching the point of no return with these countries, but what about active diplomacy and the right allocation of priorities? Well, to start with, there is no doubt that the times are dangerous and literally anything can happen. The first priority should be to avoid a large-scale war that could be devastating to the country. I think the regime is right about emphasizing relations with countries that make their own decisions. In that sense, it is vital for Syria to maintain and promote excellent relations
with Russia, Iran, Turkey, China, India, the European Union and Canada.

Bashar Elsbihi | Alenfetah Party of Syria | United States

In a world that has become a global village no one country can pursue its sole national interests without working through the web of international diplomacy to seek those mutual benefits and enhance cooperation among the regional parties to bring about peace and prosperity to all.

Based on these premises, there is an urgent need for an overall political change to those policies which have endangered our beloved country and placed it in the uncompromising position against the international community which have led to the isolation of Syria from the West where the political, economic, social, and security interests of the country are now in great jeopardy.

On the regional level, if there is one thing the regime can do immediately to save it from further escalation with the West is to act on the Lebanese and the Iraqi fronts.
 
Leadership begins with a vision. When the entire world surrounding you seems to be ablaze you simply cannot ignore the signs of the imminent danger to yourself and your country. Today, Syria is surrounded by chaos and danger and without a vision in the leadership the danger and chaos will soon be
knocking at its doors.

Fadi | Academic | the Gulf

Syria's challenge in the near future is to try to shift the countries from the "Hostile" and "Neutral" categories into the "Friendly" one. Israel and the current US administration on the other hand will persistently try to do the opposite by forcing these countries -through using carrots, sticks or both- to follow the most extreme anti-Syria policies possible (even if it is against those countries' own interests). The extent of their success in persuading such countries to follow anti-Syria policies would depend on complex sets of factors. For example, despite their best diplomatic, military and economic attempts, Israel and the current US administration were only able to win Saudi to the "Hostile" group from the "Neutral" one. Shifting Egypt to the "Neutral" category from the "Friendly" one was a limited success. On the other hand, Syria's major win was shifting Turkey from the "Hostile" to "Neutral" and then quickly to the "Friendly" category in a relatively short period of time. For the objective reader trying to understand how the power struggle in the region functions, this somewhat simplified framework makes it easier to understand the dynamics that govern the complex relationships between these countries.

Zenobia | Doctoral Candidate | United States (visiting Syria)

The notion that Syria can disengage itself from the conflicts involving the Palestinians, Israel, Iraqis, Iran, the Lebanese, and even Turkey is simply an impossibility, a denial of reality. The only conflict arena in which Syria can reasonably stay at a distance is in Afghanistan and Pakistan. And this last sentence should suggest the number one reason for my assertion that the region's conflicts inherently involve Syria. Geography. Just look at a map. Syria is geographically in the center of the middle-east stage. Not only this, but like Turkey and Lebanon, it sits on the Mediterranean Sea at the bridge between Asia and Europe. Dare I say that Syria is in the center of the world.

Anybody who takes the view that things like the political borders and 'sovereignty' of each of the middle east nations determine the boundaries of their rightful concerns and interests is engaging in some kind of fantasy. Where the boundary of Syria ends and Lebanon, Iraq, and Turkey begin on the map reveals nothing about what Syria actually is. The same confusions would apply to many colonially carved 'states' of the world. The reality is that the Palestinians are in Syria. The Iraqis are in Syria. Kurds are in Syria. And Lebanese are in what was Syria. So is some of Turkey. And some Syrians up in the northeast might as well be Turkish. And the Syrians are in Lebanon, and they are sometimes also Lebanese. The Israelis are in Syria! The Iranians are now everywhere in real and in spirit, and might as well be in Syria.

In the mean time, Syria goes on her way… progressing slowly through the deep swamp, the same swamp that Cheney and company would like to drain to their liking. It is tragic that the 'think-tank' zealots in D.C. (who don't actually think) continue not to see how Americans will drown in the swamp first before it can ever be cleared.

Thankfully Syria is experienced with swamps, having cities that although they have turned to desert, nonetheless, have survived with their people through the rise and fall of empires.

Tarek Barakat | Fashion Industry | Dubai

Iran and to even a lesser extent Turkey can offer Syria so much before the latter will need to move back to a multi-polar realm. Syria needs Saudi Arabia and the Americans way more than they need her because both can provide Damascus influence Iran cannot. And if the Syrians can't win the American support due to conflicting strategic interest then at least they should avoid antagonizing them. The Saudis are also here to stay for the foreseeable future and therefore must be accommodated (especially in Lebanon). Compromise might sound like an overly simplistic solution to a very complicated situation. But time, especially in the Middle East, crops up new opportunities and tribulations. The trick is to sit out the current tribulations and exploit any upcoming opportunities. And while I am merely stating the obvious, this is a better solution than "surrendering" or committing fatal errors due to blind stubbornness.

Simo Hurtta | Information technology | Finland

For Syria, good and functioning relations with the Arab and Muslim countries are in the end much more important than the level of relations with USA and EU. Naturally, good relations with EU and USA can open possibilities in trade, technology and investments. But especially with the United States, the past decades' history has shown that good relations can exist only if Syria obeys and follows the will of America. And that has been proven difficult because the countries’ interests do not match with so many issues.

Peace with Israel is important for Syria but only if the two main challenges can be solved in a way that might not be in Israel's interests, meaning creating Palestine and giving back Golan. The decades long dispute has enabled Israel to play a much bigger role in world politics (and hugely benefited it economically) than it could keep up with peace with neighbors. Is Israel ready to become the Denmark of the Middle East – a prosperous small country, but politically rather insignificant?

Syria's chances, with all those geopolitical tensions and problems in the Middle East, to create and keep up good relations with all involved parties is challenging if not impossible. Syria should concentrate on finding the elements that unite the areas/nations and actively work for a tighter Middle East's political and economical union. Only co-operation can save the area from decades long civil wars and the faith of Afghanistan and Iraq. In the end it is not the question about Shias against Sunnis, as little as it had been in Europe Protestants against Catholics. As Iraq and Afghanistan have clearly showed, the outsiders cannot provide solutions, better living standards or stability. They only create more problems if they are allowed to lead the future Middle East.

Ehsani | Finance | United States

Syria's geopolitical importance in the region stems from the following
facts:

• It shares a border with Israel.
• It lies on the Eastern Mediterranean
• It is to the south of Turkey, an aspiring EU applicant and a Muslim present member of NATO.
• Following the US invasion of Iraq in early 2003, Syria's eastern borderhas suddenly capitulated the country into what is arguably the eye of the storm engulfing the Middle East region.

The departing Chairman of the US Federal reserve Board Alan Greenspan has recently argued that the Iraq invasion was "largely about oil". The vast majority of Arabs seem to believe that it is more about Israel and the Neo-conservatives of the Bush White House. The US administration in turn tried to argue that the invasion was all about fighting "global terrorism" and that it was a matter of "national security" in a post September 11th world.

No matter what the real motivation behind the invasion was, the indisputable fact is that the U.S. has invested too many resources in this endeavor to call it quits anytime soon. As early as 2004, the decision was made to build in Baghdad the largest American embassy ever. Some continue to believe that once this American Administration leaves office, the American soldiers will soon leave Iraq as well. My suspicion is that the Damascus leadership shares this mistaken view.

“Lebanese security forces arrest group planning to assassinate Nasrallhah" [mideastwire.com]

As-Safir, an independent leftist newspaper, wrote on November 15: “As-Safir learned that the investigations carried out by the Lebanese internal security forces with an extremist group that was arrested in the Lebanese south and the Al-Kharroub areas last summer resulted in confessions submitted by a member of the group carrying the Libyan nationality that they prepared plans to assassinate the secretary general of Hezbollah Sayyid Hassan Nasrallah. The investigations with the members of the group, which turned out to belong to the Al-Qa’idah organization, showed that there are also big plans to attack the UNIFIL forces in the Lebanese south in order to achieve two gaols.

“The first goal was aimed at carrying out the orders issued by the number two man in Al-Qa’idah Aiman Al-Zawahiri about attacking the UNIFIL forces and the second goal is to incite strife and cause tensions between Hezbollah and the UNIFIL forces as has happened following the various security incidents that took place south of the Litani River. The members of the group also confessed that they were responsible for launching Katyusha missiles in several periods between 2004 and 2007 at the northern parts of occupied Palestine. The investigations proved that the Al-Qa’idah network was divided into three groups. The first group was positioned in the Al-Kharroub area, the second in the city of Saida, and the third in the area near the Al-Qassimiyah region near the city of Tyre.

“As Safir learned that during the search of the house of the Libyan detainee who was hiding in the Al-Kharroub area, a large quantity of the toxic material cyanide was uncovered. This substance is used along with Ammonium and other materials to manufacture explosives. According to knowledgeable sources, the quantity of cyanide discovered in the house of the Libyan detainee totalled 70 kilograms.

Security forces dismiss reports of plot to assassinate Nasrallah: Daily Star

Tough homecoming for Lebanon's refugees Nick Blanford | 11/14/07 After three months of fighting, Palestinians return to flattened refugee camp in Nahr al-Bared

Bilal Y. Saab and Magnus Ranstorp, "Fatah al Islam: How an Ambitious Jihadist Project Went Awry."
To what extent was Fatah al Islam a spillover effect from the neighboring Iraq conflict?

Seven conclusions and observations can be drawn from the battle of Nahr al Bared that could shed light on al Qaeda and the global war on terror:

1- Despite Fatah al Islam’s Islamist appeal and repeated calls for support throughout its battle with the Lebanese army, not one major salafist jihadist group in Lebanon headed its call. Osbat al Ansar, Jund al Sham (who have now re-merged with Osbat al Ansar), the Qarun group, the Arqoub group, and the Majdal Anjar group remained fairly silent and distanced themselves from the battle. For these groups and others, the battle that Fatah al Islam was waging was the wrong one. The jihadist compass, according to these groups’ leaders, was to be set South (against Israel) not North. This experience solidifies the authors’ earlier conclusion put forth in a study entitled "Securing Lebanon from the Threat of Salafist Jihadism" in which they argued that salafist jihadist entities in Lebanon are not united under a single umbrella or organization, instead they have dissimilar agendas and are relatively small and clandestine semi-autonomous entities with informal organizational structures. Each is more concerned about its own survival than about waging an offensive jihad against "infidels."

2- The battle against Fatah al Islam underscores the argument (also made in the above-mentioned study) that the salafist jihadist phenomenon in Lebanon is not purely a Palestinian phenomenon. Lebanese make a sizable part of the salafist jihadist movement in Lebanon, as evidenced by the high number of Lebanese cells operating in Tripoli, Akkar and al Koura.

3- Fatah al Islam was not a mechanical creation of Syrian intelligence. While Syria did not prevent large transfers of Arab fighters from Iraq to Lebanon, via Syrian territories, it did not play a major role in arming or financing Fatah al Islam.

4- Fatah al Islam could not have survived or accomplished any of its initial or later goals if it had not benefited from the large influx of Arab fighters from Iraq and from the financial support of al Qaeda in Saudi Arabia. In that sense, Fatah al Islam, as Kenneth Pollack and Daniel Byman – authors of "Things Fall Apart" – would most probably argue today, is a result of the Iraq conflict.

5- It is very interesting to note that throughout the battle, neither Osama bin Laden nor Ayman al Zawahiri issued a statement supporting Fatah al Islam or endorsing its insurgency. This raises a number of important questions: does al Qaeda only support winners? Why did al Zawahiri praise the attack against UNIFIL on June 24, 2007 but remain silent on Fatah al Islam? Is it because al Qaeda’s senior leadership is more inclined to support terrorist acts as opposed to reckless jihadist enterprises?

6- UNIFIL, as argued in an earlier study by the authors entitled "Al Qaeda’s Terrorist Threat to UNIFIL", remains highly vulnerable to terrorist attacks. The international force is still working with a major handicap: lack of good intelligence and force protection measures.

7- The failure of the jihadist project of Fatah al Islam raises a critical point on terrorist organizational structures. Fatah al Islam morphed from a hierarchical group to a network of semi-autonomous cells. To what extent did that transformation contribute to its ultimate downfall? What does organizational structure say about the effectiveness and survivability of a terrorist enterprise?

Lebanon’s Presidential Front-Runners
New York Times
The 110 members of Lebanon’s Parliament have until Nov. 23 to choose a president. Under a power-sharing pact made by religious leaders in 1943, …

Sfeir's Presidential Election List under Attack before Onset: Naharnet

U.S. Engages Muslim Brotherhood Despite Rice By: NIcholas Kralev | The Washington Times

The United States has resumed contacts with Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood despite Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's 2005 commitment not to "engage" with the banned group — a move that could strain relations with President Hosni Mubarak's government.

It seems there has been a major breakthrough in processing Iraqi refugees in Syria. The important news is that Damascus recently agreed to allow American interviewers into the country to screen the Iraqis for admission to the United States.

For the better part of the year, Damascus and Washington have been at logger-heads over how to process Iraqi refugees headed for the US. Damascus insisted that the US accept UNHCR processed refugees and take from the top of the internationally certified list.

Washington insisted that its special agents be allowed into Damascus to interview and choose which Iraqis would get US refugee status. The primary reason for this, I was told, is that the US wants to give priority to those Iraqis who worked for the US, such as translators, etc. Syria did not want to give the US special status because of bad US-Sy relations and did not want to reward Iraqi "collaborators."

This dispute now seems to be resolved in Washington's favor. Hopefully, we will see Iraqis begin to be processed at a speedier rate. It seems clear, however, that this dispute was not the main reason for so few Iraqis based in Syria getting into America. Iraqi refugees based in Jordan and elsewhere are not getting processed and into the States any faster. The bottleneck is in Washington.

Homeland security is establishing its own set of criteria for clearing Iraqis, which is different than that established by the UNHCR. Homeland Security does not have processing systems in place and is only beginning to establish permanent offices in Jordan or Syria. A whole new redundant bureaucracy is being established. The US is becoming the land of red-tape and silly procedures. Is Yankee ingenuity and can-doism dead? It would seem so.

There is great pressure in Washington not to open the taps to Iraqi refugees. Daniel Pipes and other anti-Arab aggitators have long saught to stem the immigration of Muslims and Arabs into the US for fear that "Islamofascists," as they call them, will establish greater electoral and lobbying might in US politics. They have long believed that Europe is "occupied territory" and do not want the US to be taken hostage by the forces of evil and Jihadism.

2007 Iraqi Refugee Admissions: An Overview (This info is from Human Rights First)

• Total number of Iraqi refugees admitted in the 2007 fiscal year: 1,608
• Of these, number referred by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees: 1,510
• Number referred by a U.S. embassy program for Iraqi employees: 98
• Special immigrant visas issued to translators and their family members: 820

The administration's Iraqi admissions goal for next year: 12,000

Country of origin of the 1,608 Iraqis resettled in 2007

Number of DHS circuit rides in FY07 by country

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) interviews each refugee referred to the US program. DHS does not have permanent staff in the region. Teams of four to six DHS officers visit the region for several weeks at a time on "circuit rides" to interview refugees.

Too Many Without Protection

The United States initially committed to accepting 7,000 refugee referrals from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). By June of 2007, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) had referred more than 8,000 Iraqis to the US refugee admissions program.

By the end of the fiscal year, Sept 30 2007, the US admitted only 1,608 of these Iraqis. The individuals referred by the UN include, among other categories, victims of torture and detention, individuals at risk of deportation from Jordan or Syria, and orphaned children. Put simply, these 8,000 Iraqis were all considered in urgent need of resettlement and protection. Delays can have devastating consequences for their lives.

The U.S. has failed to yet bring to safety more than 6,000 refugees whose cases have been fully its responsibility since June.

Emergency Visas Unused

In 2007 the United States had an unallocated reserve of 20,000 refugee admissions slots, to be used in response to unforeseen refugee crises. On April 17^th, at a UN conference in Geneva, the State Department Official in charge of refugees suggested these visas could be used for Iraqis.

… 20,000 was an unallocated number to be used wherever needed. So I think it is fair to say that if we get the referrals we could resettle up to 25,000 Iraqi refugees within the President's determination this year.
— Assistant Secretary Ellen Sauerbrey

These 20,000 admissions slots went unused this year.

Iraqi refugees: A lot of talk, little action
ReliefWeb (press release), Switzerland

The US must engage at all levels with the countries of the region, including Syria, and must also lead donor efforts to provide bilateral and multilateral …

Four Thousand Iraqi refugees in Syria have applied for resettlement in the United States

Damascus recently agreed to allow American interviewers into the country to screen the Iraqis for admission to the United States. The move followed a visit here last month by senior U.S. envoys James Foley and Lori Scialabba, a top immigration official with Homeland Security.

The U.S. plans to admit 12,000 refugees from different Middle Eastern countries in a year's time. But only 450 were let in last month — less than half the monthly average needed to reach the target.

Jolles said the U.S. interviewers will see 7,000 Iraqi refugees registered by his office. But it's up to the interviewers how many they would accept for resettlement. Already, several hundred have been given permission to resettle in Finland, the Netherlands, Canada and Australia.

Syria, U.S. Agree on Processing Iraqi Refugees
The New York Times – 11/8/2007

Iraqi Refugees in Arizona
The Washington Post – 11/8/2007

U.S. Falls Short of Iraqi Refugees Goal
AP – 11/1/2007

An Iraqi Blogger in Syria
One of the most moving, astute, and unique chroniclers of the Iraq war has been an anonymous Iraqi woman who blogs under the name "Baghdad Burning." She has quite a following, and a collection of her posts has been published in the U.S. On April 26th, she announced she was leaving Iraq. I've been following her blog for quite some time so it was almost a physical shock hearing this. She … continued

Asad is sticking to his negotiating position on the Golan. He does not want his pockets picked going into Maryland. The Arab league is of similar mind. This suggests that Saudi Arabia and Syria have been putting their heads together to some extent – a least by means of Egyptian mediation. This is a good thing. Arab unity has been absent since the invasion of Iraq, leaving the region prostrate at the feet of the West and Iran.

Syria, Saudi Arabia and Egypt must put their heads together going into talks with the Israelis or it will be all process and no peace – that is what the Israelis and some in the Bush administration want. It is the duty of the Arab governments to get a higher price for their participation. Their stock is already low enough as it is. The last thing they need is another round of fruitless negotiations that lead nowhere but to the loss of more land in the West Bank and a lower standard of living for the Palestinians.

Al-Assad: No peace initiative without Golan can be serious
Nov 15, 2007, DPA

Damascus – Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said Thursday any peace initiative not including the Golan Heights could not be serious and would not achieve fair and comprehensive peace in the Middle East.

Al-Assad made the statement during a meeting with the Arab League (AL) Secretary General Amr Moussa who arrived in Damascus overnight for talks on the upcoming Middle East peace conference in the United States and Lebanon's upcoming presidential elections.

Moussa and al-Assad also discussed an extraordinary meeting for the foreign ministers of the member countries in the AL committee to follow up on Arab peace initiatives with Israel.

Syria has repeatedly said it will not participate in the conference in Annapolis, Maryland that was called by US President George W Bush unless the issue of the occupied Golan Heights was placed on the agenda.

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice hinted earlier this week that Syria would be invited to the Annapolis conference, in a move that would contradict the US policy of isolating the Baathist Syrian government, press reports said.

Rice also said it would be likely that to follow up on the 2002 Saudi peace proposal, members of the AL committee – Syria is among them – would be invited to Annapolis.

Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has reportedly sent a message to the Syrian president informing him he was interested in resuming peace talks with Syria.

Moussa had earlier told Deutsche Presse-Agentur dpa that Arab countries would need guarantees and a timetable for talks over a final solution to their conflict with Israel as a condition to their participation in the Annapolis meeting.

According to Moussa, the Arab countries are against open-ended talks with Israel. 'This was our mistake in the 1990s that we will not repeat,' he said.

Israeli military bulldozers are digging trenches on the Golan Heights
By Gwen Ackerman
Nov. 15 (Bloomberg)

Israeli military bulldozers are digging trenches on the Golan Heights intended to stop a possible Syrian tank invasion, the daily Ma'ariv said, citing unidentified army officials.

The digging started two weeks ago and officials told the newspaper the trenches were a defensive measure in case of a Syrian thrust deep into the strategic plateau, Ma'ariv said.

Tuzmen: Turkey to open another border gate with Syria
The New Anatolian / Ankara
14 November 2007

Turkish State Minister Kursad Tuzmen said Tuesday that the sector that deserves priority in Turkish-Syrian relations is transportation and explained that Turkey aims to boost annual trade volume with Syria to 5 billion U.S. dollars during the next five years.

Tuzmen and Syrian Economy & Trade Minister Amir Husni Lutfi attended the first term meeting of Turkey-Syria Partnership Council in southern province of Mersin.

Speaking at the "Turkish-Syrian Business Forum" Tuzmen indicated that "a new border pass will be opened at Nusaybin/Kamisli at the Turkish-Syrian border."

Meanwhile, Syrian Economy and Trade Minister Amir Husni Lutfi said: "We are working to create a region full of peace and stability. Turkish-Syrian relations are important for the regional peace. We appreciate minister Tuzmen's efforts to develop Turkish-Syrian relations."

Turkey, Syria Said Rediscovered Bilateral Tie
BBC Monitor Euro:
2007-11-14 08:47 (New York)
Text of report in English by Turkish news agency Anatolia

["IF INCOME PER CAPITA RISES, WE CAN CONTRIBUTE TO GLOBAL PEACE, TUZMEN" – AA headline]

MERSIN (A.A) -13.11.2007 -Turkish State Minister Kursad Tuzmen said Tuesday that "if income per capita rises, we can contribute to global peace."

Tuzmen and Syrian Economy and Trade Minister Amir Husni Lutfi held a joint press conference following the "Turkish-Syrian Business Forum" in southern province of Mersin on Tuesday.

"Syrian-Turkish relations are viewed by Turkey as a regional development model. We have language, religious, cultural, geographic and historical ties with Syria. No matter what some circles do to block our relations, we have ties of brotherhood with the Syrians. We are two countries that have rediscovered ties in the 21st century. If income per capita rises (in the region), this would contribute to global peace," Tuzmen noted.

Meanwhile, Lutfi made a call to all Turkish entrepreneurs to come and invest in Syria.

The following story in Arabic from Syria-News says the Muhammad Hamshou, a very big-deal Sunni businessman, who was close to Bashar has had his money impounded. All I know about Hamshou is that he imported Apple Computers and Seadoo jet skis. He was frequently included in restaurant outings with Bashar in the 1990s. He is shy. His wife wears the hijab, but is liberal and shakes hands with men. Mudar Asad, the son of Rifaat, imported Yamaha jet skis so there was a friendly rivalry between him and Hamshou, the Seadoo importer. One day Hafiz Makhlouf, Rami's brother, who has recently been slapped with a US financial freeze for being a diplomatic channel between Nasrallah and Bashar, hurt his shoulder in a crash on his Yamaha. Rami and the others all laid into Mudar for selling crappy Yamaha jet skis. (We will try to find out more scuttlebutt on Hamshou and why he has fallen out with the government.

Addendum: Hamshou Industries has a 20% interest in a new Syrian-Iranian car-parts factory being build near Homs in Hessya, the official daily Tishreen reported on July 9.

The factory, the second of its kind in Syria, will have an annual production capacity of 15,000 cars and a preliminary cost of USD 50m. The project, which will be governed by investment Law No. 10 and its amendments, will be carried out by the Iranian Sigico Car Company and the Syrian Hamshou Trade Company. The latter contributes 20 percent to the project. The factory will initially assemble spare parts. It is expected to move to full local manufacture of all car parts by 2008.

“The project is a turning point in Syria’s industry,” Industry Minister Fouad Issa al-Jouni said. “The ministry supports all joint enterprises which contribute to the enhancement of Syrian-Iranian ties in different domains. The strong Syrian-Iranian ties must be embodied in projects that serve the policies and economies of both countries.”

In March, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad inaugurated the first Syrian-Iranian joint car manufacturing plant Siamco in Adra near Damascus.

About two years ago, it was rumored that Hamshou was buying land in Tadmour. Rami Makhlouf was also said to be buying land in large quantities there in order to build a large resort and hotel complex.

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

???? ??????? ???? ?????? ???? ??????? ?????? 19 ????? ?????? ????????? ??? ??????? ???????? ???? ???????? ???? ?? ???? ??????? ?? ????? ??? ??????? ???? ???????? ?????? ???? ????.

??????? ?? ???? ???? ???? ??????? ?????? ???? ??? ?????? ?????? ??????? ?????? ??? ?? ???? ??????? ?????? ???? ??????? ?????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ????????? ???????? ??? ??????? ??? ????? ??? ?????? ??????? ??? ????? ??? ?????? ???? ??? ? ??????? ???? ?? ???? ??????? ??? ????? ??????? ??? ??????? ??????? ?????? ???? ??????? ???? ???? . ????? ????? ????? ????? ????? ????? ???? ????? ?????? ?? ?????? ????? ??? ???? ????? ?????? ??????? ???????? ???? ???????? ??? ???? ?? ???? .

????? ????? "?????" ??????? ??????? ?? ???? ??????? ???? 19 ???? ?????? ????????? ???? ??????? 946/947/948/972/973/ ????? 31 /10 ?/1/11/2007, ???? ??? ??????? ???????? ???? ???????? ??????? ????????? ???????? ???:

1- ???? OTTOEK-TECH
2- ??? ????? ???? ???? ?? ???? ?????? ?? ?????? ????????
3- ???? ???? ?? ????
4- ? . ?
5- ? .?

Canadian Named to Head UN's Hariri Probe
By ALEXANDRA OLSON – 10 hours ago

UNITED NATIONS (AP) — The U.N. chief has appointed a former Canadian prosecutor to head a commission investigating the 2005 assassination of former Lebanese premier Rafik Hariri, according to a letter to the Security Council released Tuesday.

Daniel Bellemare replaced Belgian lawyer Serge Brammertz, who was nominated to head the Yugoslav war crimes tribunal in the Hague. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon made both announcements in two letters to the Security Council, which must approve the Brammertz appointment.

Columnist: 'When did we become like Syria?'

Arar's counsel argued that although the torture may have happened in Syria, the conspiracy by U.S. officials that allowed it to happen occurred here. Their actions, counsel argued, violated U.S. laws and the Constitution." 

So as I sat in the New York courtroom on Friday, a room with a rich mahogany interior, I was perplexed and saddened. Being Syrian-American, I had always borne the stigma and burden of the strained relationship between the U.S. and Syria, of having grandparents and roots (very proud roots) from an "evil" country. Now, Syria and the U.S. were in cahoots, finally getting along — at least when it came to torture.

Syrian language school draws the devout and the secular

The two drastically different pools of students intersect at the secular Arabic Teaching Institute for Non-Arabic Speakers, tucked away on a back street behind a row of embassies in Mezze, a modern neighborhood.

Syria will go to Annapolis if it gets a personalized invitation says Miqdad, Syria's deputy foreign minister [titled corrected]. 

Zubaida wrote on November 14th, 2007

US, Israel refuse to cooperate with inquest into Syria strike: diplomat, Larisa Alexandrovna/Raw Story (Thanks T-desco)

The International Atomic Energy Agency – the United Nations nuclear watchdog – has not been able to conduct an investigation into the events surrounding the Sept. 6 Israeli bombing of a Syrian military installation because neither the Bush administration nor Israel are cooperating.

A diplomatic source close to the Vienna based IAEA told Raw Story that both the United States and Israel have been approached by the organization requesting supporting evidence of a nuclear reactor which media sources have cited, based on anonymous sources in both governments, as the reason for the Israeli strike.

The source also explained that the satellite footage, which the IAEA obtained through commercial channels for lack of any “credible evidence,” does not show a nuclear reactor in the early construction phase.

Another source, close to the IAEA, who wished to remain anonymous due to the sensitive nature of the topic, told RAW STORY last week that based on satellite imagery, evidence that “it was nuclear related is shaky” and pointed out that even basic security for such a facility – such as “security fences” – is missing.…

The diplomat close to the IAEA also confirmed the lack of radiation signatures, but explained that a reactor still under construction would not yet be fully loaded with the necessary materials and would not therefore give off any radiation. The diplomat, however, again pointed to the satellite images, which do not show a nuclear reactor under construction in any case, explaining certain geometric configurations are necessary for such a facility, including certain height indicators as well as the lack of security such as armed guards.…

After mystery raid, the prospect of Syrian-Israeli talks, AP

Israel’s reported new secret peace feelers to Syria have deepened the mystery over the countries’ relations and the reason why Israeli warplanes bombed a target inside Syria two months ago.

The United States has unofficially said that Israel’s target was a nascent Syrian nuclear program. But outside analysts and the U.N. maintain there isn’t proof of that, and say the Syrian site could well have been something else, including possibly a radar station.
…

Meanwhile, many in the region and in Europe remain skeptical about what proof the United States or Israel have that the bombed Syrian site was nuclear-linked.

“There hasn’t been anything that constitutes a definitive smoking gun proof that this facility the Israelis attacked was indeed a nuclear facility,” said David Hartwell, Middle East and North Africa editor for Jane’s Country Risk in London.

Syria has denied any nuclear ambitions and the U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, has asked the United States and Israel to show proof.

A diplomat familiar with IAEA affairs, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the issue’s sensitivity, said one theory being considered within the agency is that the bombed site may have been a forward radar system, and not a nuclear site. …

"Lots of blood was left on the floor" following debates in Washington over whether Syria should be invited to the Maryland Peace Negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians. That was how a Washington insider described the heated Washington battle over Syrian participation in the peace process to me while I was in NYC.

This battle between neocons (Cheney's people) and realists (the State Dept.), which has been raging ever since Washington placed Syria in diplomatic quarantine, was won by the realists. Syria is being invited to Maryland.

The big question is under what terms. Will Syria find the invitation interesting enough to say, "Yes?"

So far Syria is keeping its cards very close to its chest as it explores exactly what the invitation means. At first Syrian officials said that they would not accept an invitation to participate in the negotiations if Syria was merely going to be used for a photo opportunity to legitimize the humiliation of the Palestinians and sidelining of Hamas. Syria fears that it will be giving away its Hamas card for nothing in return.

Also, Syria is very mistrustful of the Bush administration. It has learned this mistrust the hard way. In May 2007, Walid Muallem was invited to Sharm al-Shaykh to talk with Secretary Rice. She assured Syria that relations could get back on track if Syria helped with Palestine and other things. Syria played a positive role in Palestine, helping to broker the Hamas-PLO government with Saudi. A week after the Sharm al-Shaykh meeting, President Bush renewed sanctions on Syria and added more. Rice was made to look like a donkey by the neocons who undermined State's entire policy. Bashar learned not to trust the realists. 

The French and British have been sending high level envoys to get Bashar to make concessions in Lebanon and promising all sorts of goodies if he does. The problem is that Washington must deliver these goodies and few people believe that Washington policy is functional or that there is one boss in Washington. Factionalism has run wild. I have described the factionalism in cartoon style as being Cheney versus Rice, but it is more complicated and Byzantine. This is because everyone is getting into the foreign policy business right now as the Senate and House Foreign Policy hearings demonstrate.

"We want to keep the door open to Syria," is how the effort to get Syria invited was described to me. But why keep the door to Syria open? In order to fool Syria into playing nice while Washington and Israel reward the PLO in the West Bank for good behavior and punish Hamas? Is this a bate-and-switch exercise that Washington strategists are so good at? Or, is it the beginning of real negotiations between Israel and Syria? Is the US prepared to begin dropping sanctions on Syria and normalizing relations? Is it prepared to help Syria get back the Golan Heights? After all, the only basis for a permanent end to fighting along Israel's northern border is a return of the Golan. Anything short of the Golan will be a bandaid. It will only be a temporary fix to the Hizbullah problem and Syrian support for Palestinian proxies in its efforts to hurt Israel.

Most Syrians have long since come to terms with Israel's existence. They want peace and normalcy in the region. They are tired of war, emergency rule, and bad relations with the West. But they do want the Golan back. Any effort by the US or Israel to squeeze concessions from Syria without returning the Golan in full will only fail in the long term.

Syria must decide whether it wants to play Washington factional politics with no guarantees that President Bush is prepared to make the concessions that his policy makers promise. Syria is delving into murky waters at a time when Washington may not be a reliable partner in peace and the government may be too weak to deliver. This is ironic. "Lack of reliability" is usually the reason given by Washington not to engage with Middle Eastern partners.

[Here are a few news clips that have bearing on the analysis offered above.]

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has renewed his secret peace overtures to Syrian President Bashar Assad, telling him Israel is willing to return the captured Golan Heights if Damascus severs its ties with Iran and militant groups, the Yediot Ahronot newspaper reported on Tuesday.

Olmert hinted in a briefing to an influential parliamentary committee Monday that he was holding secret contacts with Syria. In response to a lawmaker's question on the subject, Olmert responded, "I don't have to tell you about everything that I do."

Yediot also said Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak has asked reserves Maj. Gen. Uri Saguy, a former chief of military intelligence, to review Israel's most sensitive intelligence reports and formulate recommendations for Barak about the prospect of renewing peace talks with Syria.

On Monday, Olmert told parliament's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee that he was "ready for peace with Syria and prepared to conduct negotiations with no preconditions — on condition they (the Syrians) abandon the 'axis of evil' and don't support terror," according to participants in the meeting.

Olmert was replying to a question by lawmaker Ran Cohen on whether Olmert was talking to Syria. On Tuesday, Cohen said Olmert gave the clear impression contacts with Syria were already under way.

"This is his first hint that he is holding some sort of negotiations with Syria," Cohen said. "It was fairly clear to everyone sitting there that he is doing something and not saying anything about it."

Olmert added that the United States did not oppose the possibility of Israel's fully resuming talks with Damascus, Cohen said.

Barak reportedly does not believe Israel has a chance of reaching a peace deal with the Palestinians because he considers Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas too weak. (AP)

Barak for Syrian participation in Peace Talks

HERZLIYA, Israel, Nov. 13 (Xinhua) — Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said on Tuesday that Syria's participation in the upcoming U.S.-sponsored Mideast peace conference later this month could be a positive progress and lead to the renewal of peace talks.

Barak made the comments during an International Institute for Counter-Terrorism forum at the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya on Tuesday.

He, however, urged that Syria's attendance at the peace summit "needs to be based on the premise that the Syrians recognize the main topic for discussion is the Palestinian issue."

Syria has said it wouldn't attend the gathering in Annapolis, Maryland, unless the meeting would also discuss the issue of the Golan Heights, which was captured by Israel from Syria in 1967.

Syrian Assistant Secretary General of the Syrian Baath Party Abdullah al-Ahmar said on Monday that Damascus was still waiting to see if the conference's agendas include the issues of Palestinian territories as well as the Golan Heights and Shebaa Farms.

Senator Hagel on the Peace Process: (Nov. 8 at Center for Strategic and International Studies) 

To succeed, President Bush must become actively invested in the negotiations. In the Middle East, Hamas cannot be simply ignored like before. We must not pursue again a policy premised on an illusory hope that Hamas will collapse through isolation. Nor can Syria be excluded. Serious focus must be given to the "Israel-Syria" track, as part of any peace process.

David Lesch's testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s Subcommittee on the Near East on November 8, 2007 is a must read. I have copied it below. David is a Professor at Trinity University in San Antonio and has been visiting Bashar al-Asad regularly since he wrote a biography of the president in 2004.

Rob Maley's testimony is also important reading. It is posted on the Senate site.

Mr. Robert Malley
   Middle East and North Africa Program Director
   International Crisis Group
   Washington, DC

Here is Lesch's oral testimony, which is not posted, alas.

     Mr. Lesch?
 
     LESCH:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for inviting me here.
 
     I think my value added here today is not to reiterate a lot of
what Rob said, but to provide some insight into President Bashar al-
Assad, with whom I've met on a regular basis since early 2004, and met
with this past Sunday — in fact, I arrived quite late last night from
the Middle East, and so, if I appear incoherent, then I hope you'll
understand — also to provide some insight to the Syrian regime, as
well as the perspective from Syria.
 
     I think a positive Syrian role can be transformational in terms
of U.S. interests and regional stability in the Middle East — one
that could lead to a comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace, the diminution
of Iranian influence, the rapid dissipation of rampant anti-
Americanism in the region, which as we all know, is fertile ground for
terrorist organizations — and the exertion of positive Syrian
influence in Iraq, where, as Rob stated, the threat perception has
changed, and where their interests coincide much more with U.S.
interests now, and where there are markedly different interests with
Iran, as well.
 
     So, there's fertile ground for cooperation, I think, in Iraq.
Also, the exertion of positive influence in Lebanon, and the war
against global terrorism, in general.
 
     Now, Syria, in my opinion, is a key to this, because of its
unique ability in the Arab world to play both sides of the fence, so
to speak.  It has been the traditional beacon of Arab nationalism and
the vanguard of the anti-Israeli front.  Yet it has also a member, as
we all know, of the 1991 Gulf War Coalition, and participated
seriously in bilateral negotiations with Israel throughout the 1990s.
 
     As a result of the post-9/11 U.S. foreign policy shift and
circumstances surrounding the war in Iraq, the Bush administration
essentially said to Syria, you have to choose which side of the fence
you want to be on.  And if you want to be on our side, you have to
give up everything on the other side.
 
     President Bashar essentially said no to this.  Syria is a
relatively weak country, with few strategic arrows in its quiver, and
Bashar was not about to give up these arrows before any negotiations.
 
     And it is all about strategic assets to Bashar, as it was with
his father.
 
     As he told me on one occasion regarding Iraq, about a year ago,
he said, quote, it is not — excuse me, Iran.  He said, quote, it is
not about ideology, our close relationship with Iran.  "It is about
interests.  Whoever is better for Syria's interests will be its
friend."
 
     Now Bashar is securely in power.  And I'm 100 percent sure of
that, and will continue to be so for the foreseeable future, in my
estimation.
 
     It is a shame that our image of him was so skewed and unrealistic
at the beginning of his tenure in power, simply because he was a
computer nerd, ophthalmologist, who liked to Phil Collins music.
 
     There was no way he could meet the expectations, given the
dilapidated, broken-down country he inherited, and the regional and
international baptism by fire he immediately encountered.  Therefore,
he, and some of his successes, were dismissed much too quickly by
many.  And certainly, he feels this way.
 
     Much of the congressional testimony regarding Bashar surrounding
the Syria Accountability Act in 2002-2003, was grossly ill-informed
and unfortunate.  He's been fighting that image ever since.
     Unfortunately, Bashar doesn't help matters at times, with his own
less-than-prudent comments, which were made for domestic and regional
consumption, but fed into the construction and confirmation of the
negative image of Bashar and policy against Syria that was going on at
the same time in Washington.
 
     Bashar didn't adequately adjust to the shifts in U.S. foreign
policy.  And also, Syria is just pretty bad at public diplomacy.
Although Bashar has done a better job at this than his father, the
Syrians still have a long way to go.
 
     Now, although Bashar has a progressive and modernizing outlook,
we must remember that he is Hafez al-Assad's son.  He spent all of 18
months in London with advanced study in ophthalmology.  And he is a
child of the Arab-Israeli conflict, and a child of the superpower Cold
War.  Therefore, he felt compelled to defend traditional Syrian
interests.
 
     Now, he's no longer the untested, inexperienced leader.  He has
been in power seven years, and one doesn't do that in Syria without
having some level of capability.
 
     And I have seen him grown into the position with more confidence
and more of a comfort level since I've been meeting with him.
 
     He has been on the upswing politically, domestically and even
regionally, since surviving the intense pressure of the (inaudible)
report in the fall 2005 — the investigation into the Hariri
assassination, in part by default, because of mounting U.S. problems
in the region and also partly due to his own maneuvering.  I think the
makeup of the February 2006 cabinet reshuffling in Damascus was a
clear reflection of this upswing.
 
     Now, Bashar has built up a reservoir of popularity, domestically
and even in the region, for keeping the country together, despite the
external pressures, and also the instability in neighboring countries,
and for being perceived as not having caved into the United States —
or, as they say in the region, for having refused to give into the
American project.
 
     He has effectively funneled the expected nationalist response and
need for resistance into support for the regime that has also given
the regime something of a pass, unfortunately, in terms of quelling
signs of internal dissent.
 
     Now, having said this, Bashar does not have absolute authority.
 
     It would be wrong to see the Syrian regime, or Syrian security,
as a tightly-knit, well-oiled, hierarchical machine — particularly
Syrian security.
 
     In fact, here I was seeing president Bashar, and when I landed at
the airport in Damascus last Friday, I was detained and told I was
blacklisted from the country, because of some other projects in which
I am involved — rather innocuous cultural tourist projects.  Security
in Syria, obsessed with control, they had some concerns about this
project.
 
     One hand — the right hand of security doesn't know what the left
hand is doing.  They don't know that I meet regularly with President
Bashar.  And they were very upset and apologetic when they found out.
 
     Now, Bashar has to reach consensus, negotiate, bargain and
manipulate the system.  Implementation regarding domestic issues is a
serious problem in Syria.  He is fighting against systemic,
institutional, bureaucratic and cultural inertia that seriously
retards any reform progress.
 
     There's also an array of Faustian bargains erected under his
father, i.e., unswerving loyalty in return for casting a blind eye
toward personal enrichment and corruption, that sometimes has the
regime sincerely saying and wanting to do one thing, while actions by
important groups connected to the regime, or actually in the regime,
do something quite contrary to this.
 
     There's really not much Bashar can do about it without
undercutting his support base, especially in a threatening regional
environment.
 
     Bashar has, however, acquired control over foreign policy
decisions, although the decision-making process still relies on too
much ad hocism — what I call "ad hocism."  There's no national
security council coordinating policy.  Instead, there seem to be
informal committees that focus on various foreign policy issues.
 
     But Bashar, in my opinion, is the prime decision-maker now.  This
hasn't all been the case.
 
     Now, despite this ad hocism, Syrian officials have a way of
getting in line with regime policy, mimicking declarations and
pronouncements, often word-by-word.  As such, and I am confident an
agreement with Syria — Syria and Israeli peace treaty, whatever —
would be acidulously maintained, as they have been in the past.
 
     Finally, in my opinion, and echoing a little bit of what Rob was
saying, while many see Syria's ties with Iran, Hezbollah and various
Palestinian factions, such as Hamas, as a liability, I actually see
them as a potential asset, in the current environment and state of
things for the United States.
 
     If Syria is given a real seat at the diplomatic table, certainly
with the Golan on the agenda, which it very much wants, whether it be
at this proposed conference in Annapolis or some other setting, it
could certainly be utilized as a conduit in a positive influence
process.  This is definitely how Bashar is trying to position Syria.
 
     He has touted, and rightly so, the crucial Syrian role in
orchestrating the Mencken (ph) agreement earlier this year between
Fatah and Hamas, in the role in mediating with Iran for the release of
the British sailors captured in the Persian Gulf, and in steering
Hezbollah toward political compromise in Lebanon, particularly with
the Berri initiative recently — although Berri is not with Hezbollah,
but the Shiite response.
     Now, Bashar has repeatedly stated that the Palestinian track —
he reiterated this on Sunday — can go out in front of the steering
one, which I thought was quite clever.  And Bashar and Syrian
officials have repeatedly held out an olive branch, as Rob mentioned,
to Israel, unconditionally calling for the resumption of negotiations,
albeit with U.S. involvement — in fact, as many have pointed out,
including many Israelis.  It is unprecedented that Israel is refusing
to take up the unconditional offer of an Arab state with which it is
not at peace.
 
     Indeed, the Israelis are the ones making the conditions, in line
with U.S. policy.
 
     Now, again, the ineptitude sometimes of Syrian public diplomacy
makes this an awkward process at times, in terms of communicating
their positions to the West, and certainly to the Israeli public.
 
     Finally, in closing, the United States has a history of
negotiating with countries with whom it has a clear disagreement.  It
is unfathomable to me, knowing what the Syrians want and the role that
they can play, why we continue to refuse to engage in a sincere
dialogue with Damascus.  The missed opportunities of the 1990s led
directly and indirectly — the Madrid peace process, to, among other
things, the election in (inaudible) the war in Iraq, the 2006
Hezbollah-Israel war.  In fact, Hezbollah probably would have been
totally emasculate by now if there was an Israeli-Syrian peace treaty.
And there should have been — a historic missed opportunity in the
late 1990s — and some might even argue, 9/11.
 
     I fear what happens if this opportunity is missed.  Now, if the
U.S. says jump, Syria will not say how high.  It either will be
cautious, primarily because of the tremendous level of distrust that
has built up between Washington and Damascus in recent years.  But
with hard work and Syria's intent, the relationship can move forward.
 
     And I want to mention two things in reaction to what Assistant
Secretary of State Welch said.
 
     One of the members of the committee asked a question about the
meeting between Secretary of State Rice and Syrian foreign minister,
Walid Muallem, that occurred — was it in May of this past year — or
this year, in Sharm el-Sheikh, regarding the situation in Iraq.
 
     The Syrians tend to discount Secretary of State Rice, rightly or
wrongly.  They consistently tell me — both Bashar, as well as the
Syrian foreign ministry, that after that particular meeting, Arab
officials — probably foreign ministers — informed the Syrians that
Vice President Dick Cheney's office or himself had called these
foreign ministers, saying to dismiss everything that Rice had said,
because she does not speak for the administration.
 
     I have no idea whether this is true or not.  The Syrians seem to
believe it is true, and they're acting accordingly, in terms of
discounting the initiatives of Secretary Rice.
 
     Also, on one last thing, on the Lebanese assassinations, Syria
certainly is a suspect.  And I agree with — was (inaudible) suspect.
 
     But inter and intra-sectional rivalries are so antagonistic in
Lebanon, that it is difficult to pinpoint who is doing what.
 
     In the Middle East there is a tendency to have conspiracy
theories about the CIA.  There are CIA conspiracy theories galore,
which, of course, is ludicrous.  And we need to make sure that we
don't do the same thing and ascribe similar capabilities to Syrian
security.  They do some things well, but overall, it's a pretty inept
group.
 
     Thank you for your time.
 
     ACTING KERRY:  Thank you, Mr. Lesch.