Thanks to Sharmine Narwani a Senior Associate at St. Antony’s College, Oxford University for alerting me to this interview with Assad copied below. Other wiki headlines are

Erdogan ‘Hates’ Israel in WikiLeaks Posting of U.S.-Turkey Talk
Gates tells Italians no weapons are coming from Iran to the Taliban…
Israel tried to coordinate Operation Cast Lead with Fatah and Egypt.

Sen Cardin and Assad Feb 2009

PRESIDENT ASAD AND Congressional Delegation [including U.S. Sen. Benjamin L. Cardin – democrat, Maryland] DISCUSS IRAN, PEACE PROCESS, TERRORISM, AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Wikileaks CONFIDENTIAL Embassy Damascus – Febraury 18 2009 meeting, filed on 2009-03-10
Classified By: Charge d’Affaires Maura Connelly for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d)

¶1. (C) SUMMARY: CODEL [Congressional Delegation] Cardin, in a February 18 meeting with President Bashar al-Asad, FM Muallim, Presidential Advisor for Political and Media Affairs Shaaban, and Ambassador to the U.S. Mustafa conveyed U.S. concerns regarding Iran’s pursuit of a nuclear weapon, Syrian human rights abuses, the Israel-Syria peace process, upcoming Lebanese elections, and Syrian support for terrorism. Senator Cardin encouraged the SARG to address these issues in order to lay the groundwork for a more productive future dialogue. Asad argued Syria essentially shared the same position as the U.S. on the majority of these issues, but Syria’s approach toward solving these problems was clearly different. Asad said the U.S. needed to look at the larger regional political picture, as Syria did, if it truly wanted to find satisfactory resolutions. On Iran, Asad maintained IAEA monitoring would ensure Iran’s pursuit of nuclear power for civilian purposes only. Regarding human rights, Asad stated Syria was making progress, but the CODEL needed to understand this issue in the larger context of Israel’s aggression in Gaza, the suffering of Palestinian refugees, and terrorist attacks on Syria. Asad rejected the notion that Syria facilitated the transit of foreign fighters into Iraq, pointedly asking the CODEL what interest would he have in doing so? The upcoming elections in Lebanon, Asad surmised, would not change the composition of the government dramatically nor Syria’s determination to continue the process of establishing a full diplomatic presence in Beirut. On future Israel-Syria peace negotiations, Asad was more vague. He offered no specifics on re-opening talks, but expressed Syria’s desire for the process to continue with U.S. involvement. Finally, in response to the CODEL’s repeated concerns about Syrian support for Hamas and Hizballah, Asad remarked that these were democratically elected organizations in the Palestinian Authority and Lebanon; dealing with them was simply part of the reality of politics in the Middle East. END SUMMARY.

——————————–
The Opening Gambit: Human Rights
——————————–

¶2. (C) Following a warm exchange of pleasantries in which Senator Cardin thanked Asad for sending Imad Mustafa to the U.S. as Syria’s Ambassador (“He’s in our offices so much we’ve thought of charging him rent!”), Senator Cardin noted the CODEL had come to Syria for two major reasons: (1) As a fact-finding mission with an eye toward reinvigorating the Syria-Israel peace process; and (2) to learn more about the Iraqi refugee situation. Senator Cardin added “there are new opportunities . . . The U.S. has a new president who wants to work” with countries in the region. Regarding Syria, he said, “there are areas of major concern,” one of them being Syria’s human rights record. Senator Cardin told Asad he could give specific examples of citizens jailed for their political views. Asad responded, “we are a country in process of reform. We aren’t perfect. You are talking about 12 people out of 20 million. It’s a process. We are moving forward, not fast, but methodically.” (NOTE: Asad’s mention of “12 people” refers to the 12 members of the Damascus Declaration National Council convicted in October 2008 and sentenced to two and a half years in prison. END NOTE).

¶3. (C) Asad admitted Syria had very strong security laws, but argued they were necessary to protect the nation. The members of the Damascus Declaration had been convicted for their “contact with an individual in Lebanon who had invited the U.S. to attack Syria. This is against our law.” Senator Cardin replied he realized this was a domestic issue; he was not asking Syria to be exactly like the U.S., but Syria should nonetheless adhere to widely accepted international standards. Senator Cardin argued that “when the U.S. is challenged, you see it on the front page of the newspaper” and that such challenges were an important part of a national dialogue. “You do not see this (freedom of expression) anywhere in the region,” Asad chuckled in reply, “let’s talk about Saudi Arabia.”

¶4. (C) Widening the human rights conversation beyond the scope of Syrian prisoners of conscience, Asad admonished the CODEL for focusing on 12 individuals without taking into account half a million Palestinian refugees in Syria alone, and the continued suffering of people in Gaza. “Human rights,” Asad philosophized, “is related to the whole upgrading of society. This will produce new laws.” In a final bid to put the subject of human rights to rest, Asad stated he was a popular president and that if he were working against his people, he would not enjoy such popularity. “Don’t worry about human rights, we’re moving forward,” he said.

¶5. (C) Turning to conflict and reform in the region, Asad observed many societies in the region (including Syria) were experiencing a shift in political alignment to the right. As a result, the process of political reform had become increasingly difficult. Asad warned that countries, like Lebanon and Algeria, which had strived for rapid reform in the past, had only set the stage for more conflict. In the case of Algeria during the 1980s, Islamists had tried to use a sudden political opening to gain power and this had sparked a conflict lasting twenty years. Similarly, Asad continued, Lebanon’s reform process and the May 29 elections had been the cause of the subsequent sectarian violence. Asad contended the real issues were “peace and fighting terrorism.”

——————————-
The Middle Game: A Nuclear Iran
——————————-

¶6. (C) Senator Whitehouse raised Iran, agreeing with Senator Cardin’s assessment of the new political terrain and asserting: “We have a moment of opportunity for new policies.” Whitehouse cautioned Asad that it was also “a time for choices.” The manner in which the U.S. would proceed depended on “honest, sustained cooperation in the region,” he said. The senator emphasized the time-frame for this cooperation was quite short. The one thing that could bring it to a premature close would be Iran’s development of nuclear weapons. “If Iran insists,” Senator Whitehorse stated, “it will create an atmosphere challenging for negotiations.”

¶7. (C) Asad swiftly responded, “we’re not convinced Iran is developing nuclear weapons.” He argued Iran could not use a nuclear weapon as a deterrent because nobody believed Iran would actually use it against Israel. Asad noted an Iranian nuclear strike against Israel would result in massive Palestinian casualties, which Iran would never risk.

¶8. (C) Second, he continued, the IAEA had reported no evidence of a nuclear weapons program in Iran existed. Arguing Syria and the U.S. were actually closer than they realized on these issues, Asad said Syria adamantly opposed any “weapons of mass destruction” in the Middle East. But as signatories to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) both Iran and Syria had the right to pursue nuclear power for civilian purposes. Asad asserted demands for Iran to “stop” its nuclear program were unproductive and a violation of its rights under the NPT. Instead, he said, “the argument should be about how to monitor their program,” as outlined in the NPT. “Without this monitoring,” Asad warned, “there will be confrontation, and it will be difficult for the whole region.” Asad leaned slightly forward and said: “Let’s work together on this point.”

¶9. (C) Senator Whitehorse replied, “I hope monitoring is enough,” noting the difficulty of such a project in a closed society such as Iran. Asad responded an international system for monitoring was in place and should be followed. Senator Cardin interjected, “we believe Iran’s goals are the opposite of what you describe. We think they want to change the equation” (of power in the region). Asad asked the CODEL to put aside this point of view and focus on monitoring. Senator Cardin said, “we agree on monitoring, but we think Iran should give up its nuclear ambitions.” Asad reiterated monitoring was the best institutional way to control Iran’s nuclear program. Senator Wicker challenged Asad’s assertion Iran was not seeking to develop nuclear weapons and that monitoring alone would work. Asad replied his impression was that Iran’s program was for peacful purposes with the caveat “we have no evidence as we are not in Iran.” Senator Wicker advised Asad the international community assessed otherwise; the question now was what the appropriate response to Iran should be. “Everyone wants to avoid a military reaction,” he noted, “but it was the clear view of the former administration and is the clear view of the current administration that something will have to be done.” Asad observed “you have my impression. Everything you mention is guessing. Monitoring will make everything clear.”

¶10. (C) Representative Moore argued that while monitoring was a mechanism appropriate to “nation states,” it would not be effective in controlling Iran’s military proxies, Hamas and Hizballah. She stated both Syria and Iran provided financial support to the two groups and there was no way to rule out categorically the possibility that Iran might provide nuclear material to Hizballah. “The ability of the international community to monitor Iran on NPT is understood. It’s the role of the proxies that is the problem,” she said. Asad replied, “if you don’t trust the mechanisms of the NPT, let’s cancel it.” He maintained these proxies “would go away” if there was a comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace agreement. He asked who had created these proxies? “We didn’t and Iran didn’t. How were they created? By conflict because Lebanon was occupied by Israel. It’s normal to have resistance. This is the reality we have to deal with.”

————————–
Testing The Flank: Lebanon
————————–

¶11. (C) Senator Wicker asked Asad to give his prognosis for the upcoming Lebanese elections, the prospect of Syria sending an ambassador, and whether Hizballah would disarm. In a tone of resigned pessimism, Asad replied that the Lebanese elections would not make much of a difference. In Lebanon, he explained, any party can get a “veto third.” Asad maintained the key issue was whether the Lebanese would vote along political lines or sectarian lines. If the latter occurred, then Shi’as would elect Shi’as, Christians would elect Christians, and so on, which would result in conflict. “If you don’t have consensus, you will have civil war. This is how it has always been in Lebanon,” he said. Conflict in Lebanon would preclude normal relations between the two countries.

¶12. (C) On the subject of a Syrian ambassador to Lebanon, Asad characterized the delayed appointment as being part of a deliberate political process. Asad pointed out Syria had opened an embassy and staffed it, actions they would not have taken if they did not fully intend to send an ambassador. Asad argued an appointment like this was a political step requiring the proper timing. He added “we know who and when, but we’re not going to announce it today.” Senator Wicker deftly rejoined “we could make news!” eliciting laughter from everyone, including Asad.

¶13. (C) Regarding the disarmament of Hizballah, Asad argued “Hizballah has no specific interest in Israel besides securing Lebanon’s borders and preventing threats to Lebanon’s integrity, like Israel’s daily violations of Lebanese airspace.” Asad noted Hizballah was the most powerful political party in Lebanon, was democratically elected, and if peace in the region were to be achieved, “the small things” with Hizballah and Hamas would disappear. “Let’s talk about the peace. This is the big picture that will solve everything.” Asad likened the U.S.’s approach to Hizballah to trying to patch an old suit when a new suit was needed. Senator Cardin countered that peace would very likely go forward if Syria would stop the arms flow to Hizballah. The senator noted many countries thought Syria was concerned about possible repercussions with Iran if it were to take the initiative on stopping arms to Hizballah. Asad responded Syria had been in negotiations with Israel with no concern for Iran’s opinion. He told the story of how Iranian President Ahmedinejad called him just before the Annapolis conference and implored him not to send anyone, that it was a “bad meeting,” but that they sent a representative anyway. “I told him I know it (Annapolis) is just a photo op. But I am sending someone anyway. We do what we think is good for our interests; it’s not dependent on Iran,” he contended.

——————————
A New Tempo: The Peace Process
——————————

¶14. (S) Senator Tom Udall asked what message Asad wanted the CODEL to deliver to the new administration. Asad replied he saw two key common interests between Syria and the U.S.: peace in the region and combating terrorism. Asad argued Syria had been at the forefront of fighting terrorism ever since it put down the Muslim Brotherhood in 1982. He claimed that in the mid-1980s, Syria had sent a delegation to Europe to articulate the need for a coalition to fight terrorism, but nobody had listened. Asad said Syria wanted to know when the U.S. would adopt a new approach toward terrorism, adding that “it’s not a question of how much you can destroy, but how much dialogue you can make.” The Europeans, Asad continued, knew more about the region than the U.S. and he urged the CODEL to turn to them for guidance. Asad stated the U.S. and Syria shared a common interest on “70 percent” of the issues at hand, the difference was all in “point of view, principles, culture, and approach.” Keen to press the topic of engagement, Asad attempted to refute the idea that a new dialogue would only make Syria stronger: “No, you make yourselves stronger because you have interests in the region.”

¶15. (C) Agreeing that dialogue was crucial and an essential component of the Helsinki Commission, Senator Cardin advised Asad that if he were serious about engagement, he would expel Hamas leaders from Syria. Asad replied, “What if Hamas supported peace?” Senator Cardin explained Hamas was a symbol–it launched rockets into non-military areas and this was the definition of terrorism. Asad replied Hamas was an uninvited guest; it was really the very Muslim Brotherhood organization Syria had combatted through the 1980s. “If you want me to be effective and active, I have to have a relationship with all parties. Hamas is Muslim Brotherhood, but we have to deal with the reality of their presence.” Senator Cardin pointed out not expelling Hamas sent a signal to the international community that Iran, given its support for Hamas, might be making the decisions in Damascus.

——————————–
En Passant: The DCS, ACC and ALC
——————————–

¶16. (C) When confronted with Senator Cardin’s observation that the SARG’s closure of the Damascus Community School (DCS), the American Culture Center (ACC), and the American Language Center (ALC) had hurt Syrians more than Americans, Asad assured the CODEL that this was merely a public relations gesture on his part. “We were attacked by the U.S. army,” Asad replied, “Seven civilians were killed. I had two choices: fight the U.S. army or do something symbolic. It’s something temporary. You’ll open it next year.” Senator Cardin told Asad he understood “symbolic gestures, but not when they hurt your own people.”

——————————
The End Game: Foreign Fighters
——————————

¶17. (C) “What interest does Syria have in letting foreign fighters go to Iraq?” Asad pointedly asked in response to Representative McIntyre’s question about why Syria had not done more to monitor and staunch the flow of transiting fighters across the Syria-Iraq border. Asad continued: “Can you stop the immigration of Mexicans into the U.S.? No. All borders are porous. There is no army on the border; you don’t have soldiers on the border. Do your homework. My job is to protect my people, not your soldiers. We have terrorists. Two months ago there was a car bomb in Syria and that car came from Iraq.” (NOTE: We assume Asad is referring to the September 27, 2008 car bomb attack against a SARG military facility, though Syrian Military Intelligence has reportedly stopped several cars rigged with explosives since then. END NOTE). Asad noted that the lack of cooperation with military forces in Iraq contributed to the problem. With Turkey, he said, the border was more complicated and the terrain worse, but because Syria enjoyed better cooperation it was less porous.

¶18. (C) Asad recounted how when (then NEA A/S) William Burns and representatives from the Army and CIA came to Damascus, “we said we were ready to cooperate. We took the delegation to the border, then after they left we waited for a proposal, but nothing came of it. They didn’t want to cooperate.” Asad added Syria lacked the financial and technical means, such as night-vision goggles, to tighten its control of the area. Asad then said, somewhat contradicting himself, that 80 percent of controlling the border was about controlling the country. Representative McIntyre asked, “but are you willing to monitor (the border)?” The president demurred, “this is a different problem,” at which point Ambassador Mustafa interjected with “I will brief you on the details.”

¶19. (C) The three main objectives Asad felt the U.S. and Syria should work on were (1) Eliminating WMD in the region; (2) pursuing a shared interest in a stable Iraq; and (3) working for peace and combating terrorism. Asad re-affirmed that Syria was not an enemy of the U.S., “I have saved American lives.” In 2002, Asad explained, he passed information to the King of Bahrain about an imminent attack on American citizens. Ambassador Mustafa added that then Secretary of State Colin Powell had sent the Syrian government a letter expressing his gratitude for its assistance. If the U.S. wished for similar coordination in the future, Syria could not begin security cooperation without concomitant political cooperation, Asad stated.

¶20. (C) COMMENT: Beginning with the visit of President Carter last December, President Asad’s exposure to U.S. politicians has steadily increased. This encounter was a good example of how Asad has been able to hone his responses to U.S. accusations that Syria is a bad actor in the region. At no point in the conversation did Asad ask about the appointment of a U.S. ambassador to Syria or economic sanctions, which suggests to us that he is doing everything possible to avoid the appearance of being the supplicant, despite the Syrian press’s heavy focus on Syria’s desire to see an end to sanctions and the appointment of a U.S. ambassador.

¶21. (C) COMMENT CONTINUED: We have heard anecdotally that Asad was not pleased with the tenor or substance of his meeting with the CODEL. The SARG is reportedly interpreting the group’s position on Iran, Iraq, Hizballah, and human rights to be a continuation of, rather than a departure from, the previous Administration’s policy toward Syria. We note that the CODEL’s discussion with Asad was frank but cordial. Senator Cardin and the CODEL members aired U.S. policy concerns publicly from their perspective as elected legislators in press remarks, framed in the context of their desire to explore whether cooperation with Syria is viable. The Syrian press and many of our interlocutors have come to view re-engagement with the U.S. as a fait accompli, as something long-overdue and very much owed to Syria. Asad’s displeasure with the CODEL may be his first recognition that U.S.-Syria bilateral relations will require more on his end than originally anticipated. END COMMENT.

————-
Participants
————-

¶22. (SBU) U.S.A.: Senator Benjamin Cardin (D-MD)

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI)
Senator Roger Wicker (R-MS)
Senator Tom Udall (D-NM)
Representative Mike McIntyre (D-NC)
Representative Gwen Moore (D-WI)
Charge d’Affaires Maura Connelly
Mr. Fred Turner, Chief of Staff, CSCE
Mr. Alex Johnson, PSM, CSCE
Ms. Shelly Han, PSM, CSCE
Mr. Eric Pelofsky, PSM, SIC
Notetaker Anthony Deaton

Syrian Arab Republic:
President Bashar al-Asad
Foreign Minister Walid al-Muallim
Presidential Advisor for Political and Media Affairs Dr.
Bouthaina Shaaban
Ambassador to the U.S. Imad Mustafa
Unidentified female notetaker
Unidentified male palace staffer

Cables Obtained by WikiLeaks Shine Light Into Secret Diplomatic Channels

President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, left, with William J. Burns, a State Department official, in Damascus.
New York Times, November 28, 2010
By SCOTT SHANE and ANDREW W. LEHREN

….Cables describe the United States’ failing struggle to prevent Syria from supplying arms to Hezbollah in Lebanon, which has amassed a huge stockpile since its 2006 war with Israel. One week after President Bashar al-Assad promised a top State Department official that he would not send “new” arms to Hezbollah, the United States complained that it had information that Syria was providing increasingly sophisticated weapons to the group.

MOSSAD DIRECTOR DAGAN, Thursday, 26 July 2007, Quoted in Guardian – thanks to our friend at Friday Lunch Club

…. Dagan expressed deep skepticism regarding any near-term solutions. Dagan believes that the Syrians were emboldened by the Second Lebanon War, and argued for a concerted international effort to enforce UNSC resolutions in Lebanon as a means of removing Syria from Iranian influence.

…. Dagan characterized Qatar as “a real problem,” and accused Sheikh Hamad of “annoying everyone.” In his view, Qatar is trying to play all sides — Syria, Iran, Hamas — in an effort to achieve security and some degree of independence. “I think you should remove your bases from there…seriously,” said Dagan. “They have confidence only because of the U.S. presence.” Dagan predicted, with some humor, that al-Jazeera would be the next cause of war in the Middle East as some Arab leaders (specifically Saudi Arabia) are willing to take drastic steps to shut down the channel, and hold Sheikh Hamid personally responsible for its provocations.

Syria Taking Dangerous Risks: Dagan echoed other reports that Syria expects an Israeli attack this summer, and has raised its level of readiness. Despite the fact that Israel has no intention of attacking, said Dagan, the Syrians are likely to retaliate over even the smallest incident, which could lead to quick escalation. Dagan believes that Syria’s strategic alliance with Iran and Hizballah has not changed, and that Assad views these policies as both “successful and just.” There is a tendency to assume that Syria can be separated from Iran, said Dagan, and that this offers the key to weakening Hizballah. Dagan argued that the opposite is true: by enforcing UN resolutions on Lebanon and increasing efforts to disarm Hizballah, the international community can remove the glue that binds Iran and Syria. Enforcing the resolutions would put additional pressure on Assad, who fears being tried for the assassination of Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri above all else. The advantage of such an approach, continued Dagan, is that the legal ground is already in place for action by the UNSC. This credible threat could sufficiently frighten Syria away from Iran and towards more natural allies in the Arab League…..

Around the World, Distress Over Iran
By DAVID E. SANGER, JAMES GLANZ and JO BECKER

Cables show how two presidents have dealt with Iran and how President Obama built support for harsher sanctions….

…..Six months later it was an Arab leader, the king of Bahrain, who provides the base for the American Fifth Fleet, telling the Americans that the Iranian nuclear program “must be stopped,” according to another cable. “The danger of letting it go on is greater than the danger of stopping it,” he said.

His plea was shared by many of America’s Arab allies, including the powerful King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, who according to another cable repeatedly implored Washington to “cut off the head of the snake” while there was still time.

These warnings are part of a trove of diplomatic cables reaching back to the genesis of the Iranian nuclear standoff in which leaders from around the world offer their unvarnished opinions about how to negotiate with, threaten and perhaps force Iran’s leaders to renounce their atomic ambitions.

The cables also contain a fresh American intelligence assessment of Iran’s missile program. They reveal for the first time that the United States believes that Iran has obtained advanced missiles from North Korea that could let it strike at Western European capitals and Moscow and help it develop more formidable long-range ballistic missiles. ……

U.S. Expands Role of Diplomats in Spying
By MARK MAZZETTI

State Department personnel were told to gather the credit card and frequent-flier numbers, schedules and other personal data of foreign officials.

According to the London-based daily al-Hayat, the WikiLeaks release includes documents that show Turkey has helped al-Qaeda in Iraq — and that the United States has supported the PKK, a Kurdish rebel organization that has been waging a separatist war against Turkey since 1984, the Washington Post reported.
The U.S. embassy in Tel Aviv warned the Israeli foreign ministry that some of the cables could concern U.S.-Israel relations, the Israeli daily newspaper Haaretz reported, citing a senior Israeli official.

“..Israeli daily Maariv reported Friday

that “there are US-Israeli understandings” on way to counter the repercussions of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) indictment against Hezbollah in the assassination case of former Premier Rafiq Hariri. The newspaper’s correspondent in Washington Shmuel Rosner said that the US administration was working on this track more than it was on the Israeli Palestinian track. He added it was surprising to see how busy the US official’s schedule on the Middle East, be it with Saudi or Israeli officials who have been to Washington lately.

Rosner also quoted a “well informed Israeli official on US-Israeli talks on Lebanon” as saying that “between Washington and Tel Aviv are understandings concerning what we will or will not do, in case of escalation in Lebanon…Washington had hinted that Israel could attack Lebanon” and that “this was the most efficient threat available, based on the hypothesis that the Americans will not send aircraft carriers to tackle the problem of Hezbollah in Lebanon.

The Maariv correspondent said that “the United States finds it difficult to solve the anticipated crisis in Lebanon; because the ball now is in Hezbollah’s court as the party has pointed out that it will not accept accusations against it and while Washington does not really know where Hezbollah’s counter action would lead; will it settle for a show of power, or will it try to topple the government? Will it content itself with pointing the finger towards….

Hummus sales top $350 million a year in the US and Israeli companies — Sabra and Tribe – dominate. Not an Arab company in sight.

Iraq’s Troubles Drive Out Refugees Who Came Back
New York Times
By JOHN LELAND, November 26, 2010

BAGHDAD — A second exodus has begun here, of Iraqis who returned after fleeing the carnage of the height of the war, but now find that violence and the nation’s severe lack of jobs are pulling them away from home once again.

Since the American invasion in 2003, refugees have been a measure of the country’s precarious condition, flooding outward during periods of violence and trickling back as Iraq seemed to stabilize. This new migration shows how far the nation remains from being stable and secure.

Abu Maream left Iraq after a mortar round killed his brother-in-law in 2005. Amar al-Obeidi left when insurgents threatened to kill him and raided his shops. Hazim Hadi Mohammed al-Tameemi left because the doctors who treated his wife’s ovarian cancer had fled the country.

All three joined the flow of refugees who returned as violence here ebbed. But now they want to leave again.

“The only thing that’s stopping me is I don’t have the money,” said Mr. Maream, who gave only a partial name — literally, father of Maream — because he feared reprisal from extremists in his neighborhood. “We are Iraqis in name only.”

Nearly 100,000 refugees have returned since 2008, out of more than two million who left since the invasion, according to the Iraqi government and the United Nations high commissioner for refugees.

But as they return, pulled by improved security in Iraq or pushed by a lack of work abroad, many are finding that their homeland is still not ready — their houses are gone or occupied, their neighborhoods unsafe, their opportunities minimal.

In a recent survey by the United Nations refugee office, 61 percent of those who returned to Baghdad said they regretted coming back, most saying they did not feel safe. The majority, 87 percent, said they could not make enough money here to support their families. Applications for asylum in Syria have risen more than 50 percent since May.

Justice, or a Death Blow For Lebanon?
Sharmine Narwani. Senior Associate, St. Antony’s College, Oxford University
November 23, 2010

Lebanon … has split into predictable camps – those who believe the STL is an “Israeli Project” bent on destroying its biggest regional foe the Lebanese resistance group Hezbollah, and those who back the Tribunal, possibly also in hopes that it will neuter the ever-growing strength of Hezbollah and its regional allies….

Lebanon’s Telecoms Minister Charbel Nahhas said just a few weeks ago that Israel has been capable of altering telecommunications-related data in the country “for a very long time.” In a press conference earlier today, Nahhas and others expounded further:

“Israel has set up electronic warfare towers along Lebanon’s border and can crack encrypted data, jam communications, view phone subscribers’ information, and tap their lines.

Israel “controls information and data packets, and can enter a network, shut down parts and transfer information or delete it.”

“They can fabricate calls that originally did not exist.”

Israel can obtain information about mobile phone owners, their location, their numbers, and their other phones.

“The network is penetrated at any control point, via a person inside the [phone] company, an agent, or another means.”

In light of these facts, it seems unlikely that Hezbollah – a very early adherent to the battle strategy of foiling the enemy’s penetration of communications – used a bunch of mobile phones to plan a very high-profile assassination…..

……But if you look at the line-up of who really supports the STL – the US, a handful of Western nations, Israel, Egypt and Saudi Arabia (though the latter may change its position shortly) – you see a line-up of nations that have never done a single positive thing for sovereignty, independence and real progress in the region. Ever.

….. I am not certain that any nation outside the region has done MORE to undermine Lebanon’s stability and sovereignty than the United States. More and more, this Feltman/Clinton crusade resembles the Bush-era legacy in the Middle East. …. This Tribunal is no longer about justice. To weigh one man’s death against the lives of four million Lebanese and countless other millions who could be caught up in a regional conflagration is sheer madness.

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/israel-u-s-tense-as-wikileaks-sets-to-release-classified-bilateral-communiques-1.326905

“The United States Embassy in Tel Aviv has informed the Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem that the whistle-blowing website WikiLeaks was planning on releasing hundreds of thousands of American diplomatic cables, some of which might deal with Israel-America relations. ..”

An American Jolt for the Middle East
By CHESTER A. CROCKER, SCOTT B. LASENSKY, and SAMUEL W. LEWIS
Published: November 23, 2010

Faltering Middle East peace talks need a jolt. And Washington does have a powerful potential prod: taking a firm stand on how to end the conflict.

An American declaration of principles — carefully crafted and properly marketed — could spark a debate and thereby change the political calculus for leaders. As a mediator and a world power, one of America’s strongest assets is the ability to legitimize ideas and then rally others in support. A central role for the U.S. in this conflict must be to define the zone of negotiability.

This does not mean imposing peace. Rather, it would be a statement of the basic principles the U.S. believes can guide the parties toward a negotiated solution.

America has long declared its support for “two states” but must now say more about what that means in practice.

Even if the current talks resume, without American ideas the parties are unlikely to agree on the broad trade-offs necessary to reach a peace deal. A quick deal on “borders and security,” as many have proposed, is itself unlikely without Washington addressing the endgame. Otherwise, both sides would be too exposed on issues set for later discussion, like Jerusalem and refugees. Opinion polling has consistently showed that support for peace is strongest when all the core issues are addressed.

An American statement of principles would mobilize regional support. It would provide, for the first time, a public framework for engaging sponsors of the Arab Peace Initiative. It would also strengthen America’s ability to reassert the importance of a regional support structure for the bilateral negotiations, especially by reviving multilateral contacts and meetings involving Israelis and their neighbors throughout the region. Moreover, greater regional engagement on the peace process can carry powerful benefits for regional challenges like the Iranian nuclear program.

A clearer U.S. declaration is also the surest way to protect prospects for a two-state solution from an unrelenting onslaught on the ground. An American set of ideas would anchor present-day demands on issues like Jerusalem, security and settlements in a clear vision of the future.

Perhaps most urgently, it would broaden the debate from the narrow confines of the settlements question.

At a minimum, the American declaration should be based on the 1967 lines, with agreed territorial swaps; support a compromise on Jerusalem that allows for two capitals for two states; include provisions about security limitations and guarantees; reiterate America’s support for an agreed solution to the refugee problem; and reaffirm our long-standing commitment to the state of Israel. But American principles should also include some caveats, given that our ultimate interest is in an agreed, viable solution — not in any particular formula.

What would it take for American ideas to succeed? Unlike some past efforts, Washington should not try to “pre-cook” this declaration with one or more parties or to choreograph their reactions. In fact, the U.S. statement of principles would be explicitly described as what our own country believes in and can support; and by implication what it cannot support.

Thus the U.S. statement would not be designed to achieve immediate approval or adoption by the parties.

U.N. nuclear agency makes little progress in Syria
2010-11-25 LA Times [Reg]:

Reporting from Istanbul, Turkey — The United States is about to push for so-called “special inspections” in Syria by the U.N. nuclear watchdog, a rarely used tool to seek access in a country that otherwise denies entry to sensitive sites, …

Haaretz: MESS Report / Intel sources implicate Syria in Hariri assassination
2010-11-26

Syria played a major role in the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in February 2005, and the UN probe into the murder is wrongly absolving it of guilt, Western intelligence sources familiar with the probe told Haaretz. The …

The first Arabic language printing press in the Arab world was founded in 1702 in Aleppo by the Patriarch Anathios Dabbass.
Meanwhile in Istanbul, it was not until 1727 that an Imperial edict (Ferman) was issued, giving permission for the establishment of a Turkish press. However, in 1742 the press was closed, not to be reopened until 1784.

Defining a Constructive Role in the Middle East
By Ahmed Salkini, Spokesman for the Syrian Embassy, Washington
Washington Post Global

WASHINGTON, D.C. — One of the most commonly used phrases when describing a certain party’s role in the Middle East is whether or not it is “constructive.” American officials have a special affinity for this phrase, particularly when referring to players whom they disagree with.

Syria is a case in point. Those who are pro-engagement with Syria defend engagement as a tool to make it play a more “constructive role.” Meanwhile, the anti-engagement crowd argues that such efforts are futile, and unwarranted, because Syria’s role is “not constructive.”

Yet, no one has defined what this all-too-ubiquitous “constructive role” entails.

We do know what it does not entail. Invading a country in the Middle East, causing the deaths of hundreds of thousands, the displacement of millions, and engendering an all-too contagious sectarianism is not constructive. Turning a blind eye to the daily deaths of Palestinians, the building of illegal settlements, the world’s largest nuclear arms arsenal per capita, and the establishment of the only current apartheid state is not constructive. Brokering peace between two sides while arming one with billions of dollars worth of weapons and preventing the other from having a mere functioning state is not constructive. Continually fomenting sectarianism in Lebanon and historically favoring one side over another, all the while criticizing others for not playing a constructive role, well, is not constructive.

As people of the Middle East we cannot logically expect the United States to view its interests through our lens. Similarly, the United States cannot define what is ‘constructive’ in our region while completely neglecting our interests.

Every year, the University of Maryland, in conjunction with Zogby International, conducts an opinion survey in six Arab countries: Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and Morocco. Incidentally, these countries all have pro-American governments.

The results of the poll are very telling and can serve as a barometer for those trying to truly understand what the people view as ‘constructive’ or not.

Eighty-five percent of those surveyed have either a somewhat unfavorable or very unfavorable attitude towards the United States; 63 percent are disappointed with U.S. President Barack Obama’s Middle East policy; 78 percent believe Iran has a right to a nuclear program; 88 percent and 77 percent respectively say that Israel and the United States pose the greatest threat; and when asked to rank their world’s favorite leader, the top five were: Erdogan, Chavez, Ahmadinejad, Nasrallah, and Assad — not really a pro-American list.

Most importantly, when asked which country plays the most constructive role in the region, the United States came in dead last.

Of course, the reader does not require this essay or these poll results to discover that there is a deep anti-American sentiment in the region and around the world. The aim here is to highlight the irony, audacity, and indeed absurdity of having the foreign power viewed by the indigenous people as playing the least constructive role, define for those same people what is “constructive.”

On the other hand, the results of this survey indicate that Syria’s policies most reflect the aspirations and demands of the Arab street — clearly evident in President Assad ranking the highest among Arab heads-of-state, year in, year out. In light of these inexorable facts, American officials should, indeed, reconsider questioning Syria’s “constructive role” in the region.

What constitutes a constructive role in the Middle East is diligence towards ending all forms of occupation, allowing for the creation of a Palestinian state and helping bring about peace, stability, and opportunity for our people. If the United States truly believes in these goals, it should drop the hubris of dictating to us what is constructive for our own region, and instead engage in a serious dialogue on how to achieve them — flowery, sonorous speeches do not count. This would be the first step towards curbing anti-American sentiment, while creating a new, peaceful, Middle East.

Three important stories for Syria:

"The nation WITH the Golan," a very popular bumper sticker in Israel

The Golan: The new Israeli referendum law dashes the hopes of a renewed Syrian-Israeli peace process. The law dictates that any “retreat” from land that Israel currently claims as its own (meaning the territories it has annexed – the Golan Heights and East Jerusalem) must be approved by a public referendum. The law passed by a majority of 65 to 33. It can only be overturned by a 2/3 majority of Knesset. See a recent protest in the Golan by Syrians worried about Golan lake drying up due to pumping by Israel’s national water company.

Addendum:

The Syrian Foreign Ministry announced the following:

“The decision taken by the Israeli Knesset to organize a referendum before withdrawing from the Occupied Syrian Golan and East Jerusalem constitutes a complete disregard for international law and the demands of the international community that considers East Jerusalem and the Syrian Golan occupied Arab territories, and has decried the annexation of the Golan and East Jerusalem as null and void.

The decision taken by Israel on Monday confirms that it rejects the requirements of a just and comprehensive peace based on Security Council resolutions 242 and 338, and the principle of land-for-peace.

This procedure taken by Israel is unequivocally rejected, and does not change the fact that the Golan is occupied Syrian territory, not up for negotiations, and that the full return of the Golan to the line of June 4, 1967 constitutes the basis for establishing peace.

The Syrian Arab Republic considers this Israeli procedure as directed to those who are still under the delusion that the current Israeli government seeks peace and, on this basis, continue to shower Israel with rewards.”

Mitchell Plitnick writes:

The bill makes peace with Syria, which is conditioned on withdrawal from the Golan Heights, impossible. There might be even less public support for the Golan withdrawal than there is for a West Bank one; it’s just discussed less in the media.

What this law does is essentially present a choice to the international community: either force a resolution on the Israeli people or give up on the two-state solution.

U.S. State Department refused to take a stand on the new Israeli law. Spokesman Philip J. Crowley said the law was “an internal Israeli issue.”

Addendum: See Shai’s corrections and criticism of Plitnick in the comment section. He argues that the referendum law is fairly meaningless and will not inhibit a peace deal.

Iran: The Iranian Assembly Pushes to Oust Iran President reports the WSJ.  Iran’s parliament revealed it planned to impeach President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad but refrained under orders from Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, exposing a deepening division within the regime.

Lebanon, Hizbullah, and the Hariri Murder: The Canadian Broadcast Company has published a long report by Neil Macdonald, “Who killed Lebanon’s Rafik Hariri?” It claims to lay out the evidence amassed by the STL against Hizbullah. Qifa Nabki has an excellent write up on it. T_Desco is skeptical that Macdonald gets the story right. He points out a number of inconsistencies with actual reports.

Qifa Nabki writes:

The material about Wissam al-Hassan [He oversaw security for Hariri at the time of the murder and is now considered potential suspect] is clearly the most disturbing and complicating element in this whole report. It’s an accusation that makes everybody’s life more difficult. Given al-Hassan’s close ties to Saad Hariri, no one in March 14 is going to be happy with these claims, and the Americans were apparently very uncomfortable with them. It also causes problems for Hizbullah and its allies: how can the opposition embrace the revelation about al-Hassan’s alleged culpability while disavowing the rest of the report? Finally, the Syrians, too, will not be happy with this leak, as Wissam al-Hassan was Hariri Sr.’s main channel to Rustom Ghazzali (former Syrian head of intelligence and de facto viceroy in Lebanon), which puts Damascus back under the spotlight.

If QN argues that Macdonald’s revelations put Damascus back under the spotlight, Angry Arab claims the opposite. He writes:

This CBC report rendered a great service to Hizbullah’s campaign against the Hariri court… to accuse the key intelligence guy in the Hariri camp, Al-Hasan, of complicity is to turn the investigation into a farce.

Addendum: Qifa Nabki has added a new post, laying out serious criticisms of the Macdonald article. One is by T-Desco who first pointed out that Macdonald is wrong to claim that the first two investigators ignored cell phone calls. Both were well aware of the “red team” and reported extensively on this group of people who seemed to be tailing Hariri. The second is a fuller explanation of these contradictions by Ben Ryan. Read it. Early reports presumed that the red team were Sunnis from Tripoli with possible Sunni extremist connections. The Ghamloush and girlfriend breakthrough, first reported on in 2006, linked the group to Hizbullah. We have no explanation for the Tripoli connection; this leaves a number of question marks. Ryan concludes:

I’ve seen no attempt at an explanation of how these magical phone records could point to the Syrians in October 2005 and then Hezbollah in 2006, 2009, and 2010. Basically, I smell a rat. Maybe these are real and maybe they say exactly what MacDonald says they do. But this story is being peddled, not investigated.

President Barack Obama said Monday he was committed to keeping Lebanon free of “terrorism” as tensions and fears of violence rose sharply in Beirut.  “We continue to support the Special Tribunal for Lebanon, which will end the era of political assassinations with impunity in Lebanon,” he said. “Lebanon and its children need a future where they can fulfill their dreams free of fear and intimidation.”

Lebanon: justice at what cost? By James Denselow in the Guardian

The predicted indictment of Hezbollah members would suggest that they are suspected of killing Hariri at the behest of their Syrian allies. In response, the Syrians have regularly looked to discredit the investigation as biased, with a senior Syrian diplomat telling me that its enemies were using the tribunal as “a game” against it.

If it is a game then Syria still has cards to play and none more powerful than its alliance with Hezbollah. A senior Hezbollah official warned that “such an indictment is a warning bell equivalent to lighting the fuse, to igniting the wick for an explosion, and is dangerous for Lebanon”.

Peace is the Problem, Not Engagement. Ahmed Salkini the spokesman for the Syrian Embassy makes a good point in letter to the editor of the WSJ.

In regard to your Nov. 8 editorial “The Damascus Mirage”: President Bashar Assad was never “visited by” Assistant Secretary of State Jeffrey Feltman or National Security Council Senior Director Daniel Shapiro; in fact, he has yet to meet with them. As for other American politicians who have visited Syria, we did indeed reciprocate. They came with nice words about engagement; they heard kind words about engagement. They want to send an ambassador to Syria, we exceeded that by not withdrawing our ambassador to the U.S. to begin with.

The crux of the problem is not engagement. It is peace. The truth is that only when Israel—the illegal occupier of our lands—decides to return our land will there be peace in the Middle East. Until then, political and military resistance will inevitably, and rightfully, persist. Instead of implying the need for more U.S. military enterprises and chaos in our region, you should think about what is best for “beloved” Israel: peace.

Bribing Israel: Former U.S. ambassador to Israel Daniel Kurtzer criticized the recent U.S. offer to provide Israel with a 3 billion dollar package of incentives in exchange for an additional 90-day freeze on West Bank settlement construction. He wrote:

Marriage between relatives, which accounts for thirty-eight percent of marriages in Syria, threatens Syrians with disability, which affects ten percent of the population. (SSRC’s latest update)

The level of remittances to Syria is estimated by the World Bank at USD 1.4 billion for 2010, a figure significantly higher than in previous estimates. (Syria Report)

The General Company for Mills, a state-owned company, is expecting its losses to reach some SYP 53 billion, or USD 1.15 billion, next year, according to its director-general, Abu Zeid Katbeh. (Syria Report)

Syria’s threats and counter threats – Haaretz, 2010-11-20

Speaking in New York last week, International Atomic Energy Agency director general Yukiya Amano said the organization had the authority to send inspectors to sites in Syria where there is a suspicion that prohibited nuclear activities have taken …

Syria important for India’s energy security needs: President Patil By Praful Kumar Singh,

On Board Air India One, Nov 21 : President Pratibha Devisingh Patil, who left on nine day state visit to West Asia on Sunday, described Syria as an important country for India’s energy security needs.

Democracy Debate – Shadi Hamid and Greg Gause discussed whether democracy in the Middle East is in Washington’s interests, what Islamists would do if they came to power, and the durability of authoritarian rule across the Arab world. Blogginghead TV.

Great TV, ?? ???? ??????? from this past Ramadan season? writes Tyler:

The best I’ve ever seen from the Arab world. Not the same production values of ???????? or some of the other historical epics, but the writing is great and the topics they take on are legitimately ground-breaking. A BBC Arabic article about it: but WARNING: don’t watch the film clip through to the end if you don’t want a big plot point spoiled!

Stratfor Claims that Russia has provided Iran with a new and enhanced radar system that extends its ability to detect hostile aircraft and missiles from around 250 miles to more than 1,850 miles.

The US can do very little about the difficulties of the Special Lebanese Tribunal and Saad Hariri’s need to back away from its results. The Lebanese pendulum is returning to its equilibrium. Syria’s and Hizbullah’s authority in Lebanon is being restored after the effort by George Bush, Jacques Chirac, and Ehud Olmert to yank it out of Syria’s orbit in 2004 – 2006. The Special Tribunal was a device conceived of by George Bush to use international law and Western institutional clout to hog tie Syria and Hizbullah. It was of a piece with UN resolution 1559 and the other Security Council resolutions. They were designed to mobilize international law against Syria and Hizbullah and to help bring Lebanon into America’s orbit. The effort failed.

Rafiq Hariri, Lebanon’s strong man, was assassinated because he switched sides. We do not know how Bush and Chirac enticed him to abandon Syria, the country that had helped him to power in Lebanon. Presumably Bush turned to the Saudis and the French to convince him. What assurances of protection were promised Hariri by Ameirca’s president, we do not know. They did not stop Hariri’s murder. We do know that Rafiq Hariri was scared that he would not survive the Bush gambit. Only 22 years earlier Bashir Gemayyel, the Lebanese strongman that the Israeli’s made president in order to sign a peace agreement with Israel, was blown up in similar circumstances. Israel’s effort to wrench Lebanon out of Syria’s orbit collapsed in the same way that America’s effort to do the same thing has failed.

When Hizbullah soldiers marched into West Beirut in May 2008 to surround Saad Hariri’s offices and demonstrate that they were in control and that the Lebanese army would lift not a finger to oppose Hizbullah, no one could question that Syria and Hizbullah were back in control. George Bush and the US military stood by and watched. They were not going to repeat Ronald Reagan’s mistake of sending marines into Beirut. Saad Hariri discovered that he had no power and that Washington would not and could not back him up.

U.S. State Department officials are clamoring for Syria and Hizbullah to recognize the SLT. They insist that Prime Minister Hariri stand firm in supporting the SLT and act on any indictments of HIzbullah members. This places an impossible burden on Hariri. It is unlikely that he will try to use the Lebanese state to move against Hizbullah or give orders for the arrest of Hizbullah members. If he does, his government is likely to fall, and Lebanon will return to the government paralysis that characterized the years between 2005 and 2008, when the Doha Accord provided a compromise between Hizbullah and the March 14 coalition. The US cannot protect Hariri from Hizbullah, who will most likely feel compelled to find a face saving way to finesse the SLT.

If the US is serious about the peace process in Palestine, it will need Syrian help.
Despite US Effort, Syrian Mideast Role On The Rise – CBS News

Syria Rebuilds Mideast Clout, Shrugs Off US Incentives And Pressure To Shun Iran, Hezbollah
Syria has bounced back from years of international isolation and is wielding its influence in crises around the Middle East, shrugging off U.S. attempts to pull it away from its alliances with Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah.

Damascus played a role in helping Iraq’s fractious politicians agree this month to form a new government after eight months of deadlock. Now with Lebanon’s factions heading for a possible new violent collision, Arabs have had to turn to Syria in hopes of ensuring peace, even as Damascus backs Lebanon’s heaviest armed player, the Shiite militant group Hezbollah.

Washington has increasingly expressed its frustration with Syria, which it says is stirring up tension through its support of Hezbollah. Last week, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Syria’s behavior “has not met our hopes and expectations” over the past 20 months and that it has “not met its international obligations.”

Since 2005, Washington – along with its Arab allies – hoped to squeeze Syrian influence out of its smaller neighbor Lebanon. But Arab powers that once shunned Damascus, particularly Saudi Arabia, have had to acknowledge its regional weight.

This month, Syrian and Saudi officials have been holding talks trying to avert an explosion in Lebanon. It’s a remarkable turnaround from several years ago, when the two countries were locked in a bitter rivalry and an outright personal feud between their leaders, Syrian President Bashar Assad and Saudi King Abdullah.

Fears of violence in Lebanon are high because an international tribunal investigating the 2005 assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri is expected soon to indict members of Hezbollah.

Many Lebanese fear that could break the country’s fragile unity government grouping Hezbollah and pro-Western parties loyal to Hariri’s son, Saad, who is the current prime minister, and even lead to clashes between the two sides. With Syria’s backing, Hezbollah demands Saad Hariri break off Lebanon’s ties with the tribunal.

Little is known about the Syrian-Saudi talks, but Lebanon’s daily As-Safir reported Monday that the contacts have produced a five-point compromise plan in which Hariri, a close Saudi ally, is likely to declare Hezbollah innocent of the assassination once the tribunal issues indictments.

Such a deal would be a setback for Washington, which has pressed for support of the tribunal, and for pro-U.S. factions in Lebanon who fear the country is coming under Hezbollah’s thumb. But it would mark a new success for Syria and illustrate how it has come to restore its regional clout largely on its own terms.

It has done so while ignoring incentives from Washington. President Barack Obama has made repeated overtures to Damascus this year, nominating the first U.S. ambassador to Syria since 2005 and sending top diplomats to meet with Assad, in hopes of swaying it away from its alliance with Iran and regional militant groups.

Still, “Syria did not abandon Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah or its principles regarding the (Mideast) peace process,” said Sami Moubayed, a Syrian political analyst who is the editor-in-chief of Forward Magazine.

Relations with Washington have now chilled before they even had a chance to fully warm up. Last month, Assad accused the United States of sowing chaos around the world.

“Is Afghanistan stable? Is Somalia stable? Did they bring stability to Lebanon in 1983?” Bashar Assad told Al-Hayat newspaper, referring to U.S. intervention in Lebanon’s 15-year civil war, which ended in 1990.

U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice in turn accused Syria of displaying “flagrant disregard” for Lebanon’s sovereignty, citing its provision of increasingly sophisticated weapons to Hezbollah and other militias in violation of a U.N. resolution.

“Hezbollah remains the most significant and most heavily armed Lebanese militia,” Rice said on Oct. 28. “It could not have done so if not for Syria’s aid, and facilitation of Syrian and Iranian arms.” Iran funds the militant group to the tune of millions of dollars a year and is believed to supply much of its arsenal.

As it spurns moves by the U.S., Damascus is making friends elsewhere – and not just with staunch anti-American governments such as Iran and Venezuela, whose President Hugo Chavez swung through Damascus in October.

Iraqi leaders looked to Syria for help in solving the political stalemate stemming from March parliamentary elections, which failed to produce a clear winner. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who along with other prominent Iraqi officials made a trip to Damascus, is expected to form a new government after last week’s deal broke the political impasse.

Syria’s emergence as a regional heavyweight is a reversal from just a few years ago. Rafik Hariri’s assassination prompted a wave of anti-Syrian protests that forced Damascus to withdraw its military from Lebanon and end its long control there. In 2006, relations with some Arab states took a dive when Assad called Saudi King Abdullah and other Arab leaders “half men” over their disapproval of Hezbollah’s capture of two Israeli soldiers in a cross-border raid, which sparked a 34-day war between Hezbollah and Israel.

Syria could benefit from improved ties with Washington, which would boost its economy and end sanctions first imposed by President George W. Bush. Assad also wants U.S. mediation in indirect peace talks with Israel – a recognition that he needs Washington’s help to win the return of the Golan Heights, seized by Israel in the 1967 Mideast war.

But after rebuilding its regional status, it may feel less of a need to pay the price for better ties. Syria has “turned the page on isolation” by building its partnership with Saudi Arabia and asserting a role in Iraq, Peter Harling, a Syria-based Mideast analyst with the International Crisis Group, says.

“Syria has been doing well in a region that has not.”

I am not sure what to make of the Bar’el article. It is smart but I we have no evidence that the Syrian government double crossed Iran as he claims it did. I wouldn’t believe it without proof. Lebanese sources have a long history of misinformation about infighting within the Asad family and between Iran and Syria and between Hizbullah and Syria. Almost all of them have turned out to be false. We were told that Syria killed Mughniya, when it was almost asuredly Israel – perhaps with US assistance. We were told that the Assad family was at daggers drawn, with Assaf Shawkat out of favor and Bushra in exile. Not true. These perennial stories of intrigue and treachery are the products of wishful thinking and mischievous minds seeking to assure opponents of Syria and Hizbullah that if they refuse to cooperated with Damascus and Nasrallah, they will be rewarded by a sudden collapse of the Iran-Syria-Hizb alliance. It is not likely to happen. They make for good copy but Iran and Syria are not double crossing each other in this way. No alliance could withstand it for 30 years as the Syrian-Iranian alliance has.

Are relations between Syria and Iran cooling off?
New article in Asharq Al Awsat reveals Syria apparently was responsible for confiscating a large shipment of explosives that Iran was planning to send to Hezbollah.
By Zvi Bar’el

Tehran and Damascus were able to trust each other so long as it was clear that the other was not planning to encroach on its sphere of influence. Just as Syria does not intervene publicly or ostentatiously in Iraqi affairs – an area considered to be under Iranian influence – so Damascus expects Tehran to refrain from intervening too crudely in Lebanese affairs, at least not in a manner that portrays Lebanon as an Iranian protectorate rather than a Syrian one. But Ahmadinejad’s visit to Lebanon, the presence of Revolutionary Guards there, and the transfer of explosive materials from Iran to Syria in a way that puts Damascus under scrutiny by the committee examining sanctions against Iran, raise questions about the quality of relations between the two countries. ….

Syria would like to leave Hezbollah as a bargaining chip in negotiations with Saudi Arabia over the international committee looking into the murder of Rafik Hariri, the former Lebanese president assassinated in 2005, or as a reward for Israel in case of a peace agreement. But Iran has other plans. It would like Lebanon to become an Iranian protectorate, through Hezbollah. …. Hezbollah and Syria will not cooperate with the international tribunal hearing the Hariri case, but neither will Assad permit Lebanon to be shattered.

Syria and America: The End of the Honeymoon Period
Saturday 06 November 2010
By Tariq Alhomayed

It seems that the American – Syrian honeymoon has come to an end, and to make matters worse, the Republican Party has gained control of the US Congress following this week’s mid-term elections. Damascus wasted two years of Obama’s presidency, failing to achieve anything; during this period the Syrians dealt with Washington in the same manner that they deal with certain Arab countries, and this is something that can be seen in their response to the statement made by US Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, Jeffrey Feltman, in which Damascus called on Feltman to “recognize historical and geographical facts.”
Two years after Washington extended its hand to Damascus, the US is outraged by the Syrian behavior in Lebanon, with the Americans believing that Damascus is contributing to undermining security and stability there. This is something expressed by US Ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, and Feltman himself reiterated this in his statement that provoked the Syrians. If we add a Republican-controlled Congress to this equation, then we can say that Obama cannot continue opening up to Syrian in this manner, especially as there have long been demands in Washington that the US reassess the manner in which it is dealing with Syria.

Syria has not met US hopes: Clinton (AFP)

WASHINGTON — Syria has failed to meet Washington’s hopes since the Obama administration started to engage with the former US foe, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in an interview published Friday. “Syria’s behavior has not met our hopes and expectations over the past 20 months — and Syria’s actions have not met its international obligations,” the chief US diplomat told the Lebanese newspaper An-Nahar.

Syrian bloggers brace for fresh blow to Middle East press freedom
The Christian Science Monitor -By Sarah Birke, November 16, 2010

A Syrian law awaiting parliamentary approval is one of a raft of measures across the region to clamp down on a surge in Internet activity over the past decade.

The Middle East’s modest window for dissent, created by a surge in blogging and online journalism over the past decade, looks poised to narrow with a raft of measures across the region.

A draft Internet law awaiting parliamentary approval in Syria is one such measure. The government says it would give a needed legal framework to online activity by forcing bloggers to register as union members, conferring rights such as a press card to online journalists for the first time, and potentially requiring content be withdrawn from websites.

Online journalists and bloggers in Syria, already subject to harassment and imprisonment, are concerned that the law is designed to crack down on their activities and restrict freedom of expression. Media analysts say parliamentary approval is likely to come soon.

Since Syria’s online sphere began to blossom in 2000, Syrian websites – which face less scrutiny than the country’s print media – have been able to publish stories on sensitive subjects such as the army and corruption. They have recently brought to light a controversial personal status law and the issue of corporal punishment.

“We have democratized information and flagged up sensitive and important topics for debate, both controversial and non-controversial,” says Abdel Ayman Nour, the editor of All4Syria, a news website run from outside the country which as well as writing about politics has actively campaigned about neglected topics such as the environment. “But a law that stipulates that police can enter the office of a website to take journalists for questioning, seize their computers, and impose penalties of jail or a fine of up to 1 million Syrian pounds [$200,000] is clearly designed to end that.”
New media push boundaries

The Middle East has long been known as one of the least liberal regions for media freedoms in the world, though the advent of new media forms has pushed the boundaries of media restrictions and made governments more accountable to their citizens.

“The satellite revolution and the launch of private television in the 1990s made it harder to censor content,” says Naila Hamdy, a former journalist who now teaches at the American University in Cairo. “Now the Internet, which was formerly used only by a handful of people, has exploded, challenging traditional government-controlled media.”

But Middle Eastern countries pushed back as Internet usage surged 13-fold from 2000 to 2008. A 2009 report by the Committee to Protect Journalists detailed the tailoring of press laws and the introduction of new laws across the region, including measures such as the United Arab Emirates’ Cyber Crime Law that stipulates $5,400 fines and prison sentences for vague online acts such as insulting family values.

Egypt, in the run-up to Nov. 28 parliamentary elections and the presidential election next year, has imposed restrictions on the press. Satellite television stations must now request a license before broadcasting a live event, as must companies engaging in mass text messaging.

But Syria is ranked even worse than Egypt on this year’s annual press freedom chart by Reporters without Borders. The international organization based in Paris put Syria at 173 out of 178 countries, just behind Sudan and China, and beating out only Iran and a handful of others.
Defamation is concern, say governments

Syrian websites espousing harsh political criticism, such as All4Syria, are blocked along with some human rights and social networking sites such as YouTube and Facebook – although most Syrians use proxy software to access them. Many publications are subject to censorship.

But this is not a complete picture, say analysts. Taleb Kadi Amin, director of the Arab Radio & TV training center in Damascus and former deputy information minister, says the Syrian law is part of a global trend to regulate the Internet and deal with negative effects such as violations of copyright law.

“This law is simply designed to tell online journalists that they are responsible for what they write,” he says. “Many websites copy and paste material and publish defamatory or untrue material, often anonymously, and there is currently no mechanism to deal with it.”

“It is not about limiting freedom of expression but giving support to legitimate online journalists and increasing people’s rights not to be defamed,” he added.

But such laws include a risk of abuse, say analysts. “The challenge is promulgating a law that cannot be used to silence dissent,” says Professor Hamdy.
More anxiety for journalists

Syrian bloggers claim the new regulations will lead them to self-censor, write anonymously, or leave the country, which will lower their credibility, but some say the law will have little consequence.

“The Internet is almost impossible to police and Syria and other countries already mete out penalties without a specific law,” says Joshua Landis, a Syria expert at Oklahoma University. “It will, however, add another layer of anxiety for journalists.”

Professor Landis, operator of the blog Syria Comment, adds that it was in the interest of all countries to have a free press, including Syria.

“It is necessary for the economic liberalization desired by Syria,” he says. “Many officials realize that debating difficult topics such as the removal of subsidies and salary disparities is more likely to get people onside with painful but needed reforms.”

Israel pullback alarms Lebanon border town
By Douglas Hamilton
GHAJAR, Israel | Wed Nov 17, 2010

A woman walks past concrete security blocks in the village of Ghajar on the Israeli-Lebanese border November 7, 2010. Reuters/Nir Elias

GHAJAR, Israel (Reuters) – Israel said on Wednesday it would withdraw troops from a village straddling the Lebanese border, in a gesture to the United Nations that drew residents onto the streets protesting the division of their community.

The people of Ghajar, a prosperous hillside town of 2,300 who are members of Syria’s Alawite sect, say they want no “Berlin Wall” dividing the north from the south of their village and forcing them to chose between Lebanon or Israel.

They say they were not consulted on U.N. plans to resolve a situation that has long inflamed tensions between Israel, the Lebanese Hezbollah guerrilla group and neighboring Syria.

“We don’t know what’s going to happen when the Israelis pull back. We’re afraid the village will be cut in two, and in Ghajar we’re all one big family,” said local council head Ahmed Fatali.

Morocco and Syria have the highest SMS rates in the Arab World
2010-11-18

New research from the Arab Advisors Group reveals that 87% of Arab cellular operators provide the MMS service. The SMS service, which is provided by all mobile operators in the region, is priced quite differently across the region. Yemen and Palestine have the lowest average SMS rates, while Morocco and Syria have the highest.

Lebanon PM: Army to get assistance from Russia
The Associated Press

Russia will provide the Lebanese army with free helicopters, tanks and munitions in a deal that will boost the country’s poorly equipped military, officials said Tuesday. The announcement comes at a time when military assistance to Lebanon is under scrutiny after U.S. lawmakers demanded assurances that American aid will not fall into the hands of Hezbollah.

Robert Fisk: How Lebanon can’t escape the shadow of Hariri’s murder

Madame Clinton has been on the phone to Hariri, nagging him to disarm Hezbollah and to stick to the tribunal. In Washington, this makes sense. In Lebanon, she sounds as if she is mad.

Why? Shiites are the largest community in Lebanon, yet their sons and brothers make up a majority of the Lebanese national army.

It’s not that the Hezbollah have infiltrated the ranks. It’s just that since the Christian and Sunni elites have maintained the Shiites in comparative poverty, the youngest sons need a job and are sent off to the army.
… If they were indeed ordered to march south…. are they going to shoot their Hezbollah brothers, fathers and cousins to a chorus of White House cheers?

No, they would refuse and the Christian-Sunni soldiers would be tasked to attack the armed Shiites. The army would split. That’s how the civil war started in 1975.

Does Madame Clinton – and France’s foppish foreign minister, the saintly Bernard Kouchner who has turned up in Beirut to support the tribunal – want another civil war in Lebanon?

There’s another problem. Given their numbers, the Shiites are grossly under-represented in the Lebanese parliament and government. And there’s been an unspoken – certainly unwritten – agreement in Beirut that to compensate for their lack of political power, the Shiites can have a militia.

If God was to tell Nasrallah to disarm the Hezbollah – he would surely obey, for no-one else in the region would dare to make such a request – then Nasrallah would immediately demand an increase in Shiite numbers in government, commensurate with his perhaps 42 per cent of the population. There would, therefore, in effect, be a Shiite government in Lebanon.

Is that what Clinton and poor old Obama want? Another Shiite Arab state to add to the creation of the Shiite Iraqi state which they have bestowed upon the Saudis and the rest of the Arab Sunnis as a neighbour?

In Schenker’s article about China (copied below), he omits one fact. Iran and Syria are forced to look to China because America has closed all doors to them and is sanctioning them. Turkey does not have to look East, but if it wants to trade with Iran and cultivate good relations with Russia, Syria and the neighborhood, it cannot afford to remain so dependent on the US and Israel for its defense and economic needs. What is more, Turkey was excluded from the EU; America’s closest ally just killed 9 of its citizens. These are all reasons that turkey is increasingly looking East to Russia and China. It does not want to alienate its new friends, who ahve the potential to help drive its economy forward. The US is insisting that Turkey sanction Iran, a 10 billion dollar a year trading partner. Asia is the future. In 2008, Asian nations as a group passed the United States with $387 billion in research and development spending, compared with $384 billion in the United States and $280 billion in Europe.

Every Middle Eastern country is beginning to make calculations similar to Turkey’s. They are discounting US power and counting on China and India to be able to soften US sanctions in the future. The US should not be following use more sanctions and more sticks to force regional states into capitulating to US and Israeli demands. Instead, the US should soften its diplomacy in the region. Most importantly, it should back away from confrontation with Iran. It should also avoid greater conflict with Turkey. Using sanctions as its main tool of diplomacy with Syria and Iran is isolating the US and producing deep resentments in the region that will inevitably find a way to express themselves as anti-Americanism.

The most compelling argument against using sanctions, is that they produce the wrong outcome. They are counter productive because they make Middle Easterners poorer. The only real solution for improved US – Middle East relations is growing a bigger middle class.  Only when Middle Easterners are better educated and better integrated into the global economy will we see serious movement toward democracy and liberalism in the region. The US should apply the same logic it applies to China to the Middle East: more prosperity will eventually lead to a more democratic regime and better relations.

It is worth reading Fareed Zakaria on this question in today’s Washington Post.  I had dinner with him on Monday, when he visited the University of Oklahoma and we discussed the wisdom America’s decision to make Iran its number one security threat and arm twist regional powers such as Turkey, India and Russia to sanction it. He writes about sanctions and containment, as follows.

By undertaking this trip to India, Japan, South Korea and Indonesia, Obama was making America’s opening move in a new great power game unfolding in Asia. Until now, China’s rise had been talked about more as an abstraction. But events over the past few months have made the rise of China tangible in the eyes of many Asians. They are watching how the United States will react. The right reaction is not containment….

China’s Rise in the Middle East
BY: DAVID SCHENKER AND CHRISTINA LIN | LOS ANGELES TIMES

It’s unrealistic to expect that Washington could have excluded Beijing from the Middle East. But the rate of Chinese progress occurs amid a perception that the U.S. is withdrawing from the region.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu was in China this month touting the “new cooperation paradigm” between Ankara and Beijing. Just a week earlier, a top political advisor to Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao spent five days in Syria signing deals and planting olive trees in the Golan Heights. The Middle Kingdom, it seems, is planting deep roots in the Middle East these days.

The reach of the People’s Republic is far and wide, extending from the Far East to Africa to Latin America, and its interest in the Middle East is neither new nor surprising: China gets more than a quarter of its oil imports from the Persian Gulf and has billions invested in Iran’s oil sector. Recently, though, Beijing appears to be making greater headway, a development fueled by Washington’s creeping withdrawal from the region.

Starting in the 1990s, China filled a void in Syria left by a decaying Soviet Union, providing the terrorist state with a variety of missiles. Today, Syrian President Bashar Assad is fulfilling his 2004 pledge to “look East” toward Asia to escape the Western hold on the Middle East. In addition to serving as an ongoing and reliable source of weapons, China has invested heavily in modernizing Syria’s antiquated energy sector.

More striking, however, has been Beijing’s rapid inroads with the Islamist government in Ankara headed by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan. In October, Wen was the first Chinese premier to visit Turkey in eight years. Erdogan and Wen inked eight deals, including an agreement to transform the ancient SilkRoad into a “Silk Railway” linking China and Turkey.

Of more concern than the budding economic relationship, however, is the nascent military relationship between NATO partner Turkey and China. The most recent manifestation of these ties was the unprecedented inclusion in October of Chinese warplanes in the Turkish military exercise Anatolian Eagle, maneuvers that previously had included the U.S. and Israel.

Although Turkey reportedly left its modern U.S.-built F-16s in their hangars during the exercises and instead flew its F-4s, which the U.S. Air Force retired from service in 1996, the damage was done. Chinese participation in the exercise exacerbated the already extant crisis of confidence between Washington and its NATO partner. The joint announcement in October that China and Turkey had formally upgraded their bilateral relationship to that of a “strategic partnership” only makes matters worse.

Beijing did not choose Iran, Syria and Turkey as the focal point of its regional “outreach” by accident. These northern-tier Middle Eastern states all have complicated if not problematic relations with the United States and increasingly close ties with one another. To complement this triumvirate, China appears to be looking to Iraq as the next target of its charm offensive.

China is the leading oil and gas investor in Iraq, and it is paying millions to protect its investment there. That’s not surprising since Iraq has the world’s largest known oil reserves. China has also purchased extensive goodwill with Baghdad by forgiving $6 billion to $8 billion in Iraqi debt accrued during the Saddam Hussein era. And Beijing has gotten in on the sale of weapons — worth in excess of $100 million — to the new government in Baghdad….

Turkey objects to Iran-centric Nato shield

“… As negotiations on a missile defence shield enter their final days before a Nato leaders’ meeting in Lisbon, Turkey is turning out to be more of a problem to the alliance than Russia, whose hostile attitude towards its former Cold War enemy is starting to fade.

One of the main sticking points in agreeing the final text of Nato’s new strategic concept is the language in which countries describe the potential missile threats to Europe, EUobserver has learned.
Despite being one of the early members of the military alliance which it joined in 1952, Turkey has grown increasingly at odds with its Western allies as it seeks closer ties to its eastern neighbours Iran and Syria, which the US and also some European allies, such as France, want to name as threats.

Not mentioning the Middle Eastern hotspots would create renewed difficulties with Russia, Nato diplomats say, just as Moscow has started to give signs that it no longer considers the shield to be directed against itself.
Other Nato sources say that “it is not Turkey alone” which is creating a problem for the shield, but a broader “nexus” of issues connected to missile defence, such as France’s reluctance to join the aim of a “nuclear-free world” and Germany’s insistance on nuclear disarmament….”

Tehran Sets Deadline For India

“…India, fresh off a visit by US President Barack Obama, is being put in a dilemma by the Iranian government which says it has until the end of December to put up or shut up about its proposed investments in Iran’s rich South Pars gas field.

A senior official at the petroleum ministry told Asia Sentinel that it is a “tough ask for New Delhi to balance India’s energy needs with America’s discomfort about any country doing business with Iran.”
Although contracts have been signed, the money that has flowed so far has not been enough to invite US sanctions. However, this will need to change if the South Pars project is to move forward.

Roger Cohen argues that Hillary Clinton will be successful in negotiating a just two state solution to the Arab-Palestinian conflict. Few others respond to the latest Washignton offer to Israel in such a positive light. Read Hitchen’s article which follows Cohen’s.

Madam Secretary’s Middle East
BY: ROGER COHEN | THE NEW YORK TIMES

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has taken charge…. The heavy lifting is now in Clinton’s hands. Officials in Washington, Jerusalem and Ramallah tell me that the secretary of state will lead what her husband recently called the attempt to “finish Rabin’s work.”

“She’s not insecure about Israel, she will call the shots as she sees them,” a senior U.S. official said. “And she would not be engaged if she did not feel there was a way to get there.”

Clinton’s new role was evident last week. During a video conference with Fayyad, she announced $150 million in direct U.S. aid to the Palestinian Authority (and said America was “deeply disappointed” by “counterproductive” Israeli housing plans in East Jerusalem). The next day she went into nearly eight hours of talk with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that opened the negotiations door a crack.

Before I get to that, some background. The Clinton of today is not the Clinton of a decade ago. Compare that sharp criticism of Israel’s East Jerusalem building with her 1999 position that Jerusalem is “the eternal and indivisible capital of Israel.” Somewhere in the past decade her conviction hardened that the state of Palestine is achievable, inevitable and compatible with Israeli security.

“A bit of an epiphany,” in the words of one aide, came in March 2009 on the road to Ramallah. “We drove in a motorcade and you could see the settlements high up, and the brutality of it was so stark,” this aide said. “Everyone got quite silent and as we approached Ramallah there were these troops in berets. They were so professional, we thought at first they were Israel Defense Forces. But, no, they were Palestinians, this completely professional outfit, and it was clear this was something new.”

That “something” is fundamental: the transition from a self-pitying, self-dramatizing Palestinian psyche, with all the cloying accoutrements of victimhood, to a self-affirming culture of pragmatism and institution-building. The shift is incomplete. But it has won Clinton over. And it’s powerful enough to pose a whole new set of challenges to Israel: Palestine is serious now.

Another moment came in September 2010 when Clinton held a meeting with Fayyad that threw her schedule off because it ran so long. Fayyad is Mr. Self-Empowerment, the Palestinian who, at last, has put facts before “narrative,” growth before grumbling, roads before ranting, and security before everything. Clinton, I was told, has “strong views” on Fayyad. She said last week she had “great confidence” in him….

FIGHTING WORDS
Israel’s Shabbos Goy
Why America will come to regret the craven deal Obama is offering Netanyahu.
By Christopher Hitchens
Posted Monday, Nov. 15, 2010

Those of us who keep an eye on the parties of God are avid students of the weekly Sabbath sermons of Rabbi Ovadia Yosef. In these and other venues, usually broadcast, this elderly Sephardic ayatollah provides an action-packed diet that seldom disappoints. A few months ago, he favored his devout audience with a classic rant in which he called down curses on the Palestinian Arabs and their leaders, wishing that a plague would come and sweep them all away. Last month, he announced that the sole reason for the existence of gentiles was to perform menial services for Jews: After that, he opined, their usefulness was at an end….

Read Clinton on Syria: US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton give a speech during her visit to Government House in Melbourne on November 7. Syria has failed to meet Washington’s hopes since the Obama administration started to engage with the former US foe, Clinton said in an interview published Friday.… George Mitchell has engaged with Syria on the Middle East peace progress, and my Assistant Secretary Jeff Feltman has had good consultations with Syrian officials about Iraq,” she said. “But we have also had some very difficult discussions with Damascus about its actions in Lebanon and elsewhere,” the secretary said.

Clinton’s remarks on Friday. After Hassan Nasrallah said his group will “cut the hand” of anyone who tries to arrest its members for the 2005 assassination of Rafik Hariri….Clinton said: “Hezbollah should know that resorting once again to violence in Lebanon runs completely counter to the interests of the Lebanese people, the interests of the region, and of the United States … They should also know that if the goal of violence is to stop the tribunal, it won’t work …

Rafik Hariri murder probe hinders progress on Lebanon-Syria ties
Blandford in CSM

The Hariri murder probe is getting closer to issuing indictments, straining ties between Lebanon and Syria and complicating US goals in the region.

Last week, a senior UN official warned that Lebanon was in a “hyper-dangerous” situation.

Despite the focus on Hezbollah, Syria remains within the circle of suspicion for the murder of Hariri, as well as other prominent anti-Syrian figures, and would like to see an end to the tribunal, analysts say……

But there are signs recently that the US may be toughening its attitude toward Damascus.

“Rather than playing a positive role, recent Syrian behavior and rhetoric has had a destabilizing effect on Lebanon and the region, and has contributed to these recent tensions,” says Jake Walles, deputy assistant secretary of state for Near East affairs, citing the transfer of weapons from Syria to Hezbollah and the indictments against 33 Lebanese figures. “These types of activities directly undermine Lebanon’s sovereignty and directly undermine Syria’s stated commitments to Lebanon’s sovereignty and independence.”

Andrew Tabler, a Syria expert at the Washington Institute of Near East Policy, says that the US may adopt more of a balanced “hybrid policy” with Syria than outright engagement in the coming months.

“By now most policy makers expected there would be daylight between Syria and Hezbollah, but the arrest warrants forced everyone to go back to the drawing board,” he says.

Jerusalem Post: MI Chief: Iran and Russia giving Syria advanced weapons
2010-11-02, JPost

Outgoing Head of Military Intelligence General Amos Yadlin made his final appearance in front of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee on Tuesday, saying that he has seen “three defense ministers, two chiefs of the general staff and two …

“… In addition to supplying long range weapons such as M-600 and scuds missiles to Hezbollah, Syria was recently reported to have entered into a military alliance with Hezbollah, consisting of joint headquarters which would take hold in the event of war with Israel…..

While it remains a distinct possibility that Israel would attack Lebanese targets during a future conflagration with Hezbollah, it is doubtful that Israel would willingly extend the war to Syria. This remains the case even if Israel were to set itself an ambitious (and unrealistic) aim of eliminating Hezbollah. Israel would inevitably face condemnation from all corners of the international community; from allies and even the US, and would be hard pressed to find approval from Washington, keen to engage Syria and concerned about Syria’s ability to make life difficult for troops in neighboring Iraq. An Israeli attack and the lack of US support would make the likelihood of an emergency UN Security Council meeting and subsequent binding resolution a near guarantee, limiting Israel’s time and ability to launch a credible and effective operation against Syria. Indeed, expanding a war against Hezbollah would effectively assure Israel of international isolation. Following the US lead, Europe, Canada and Australia would outwardly condemn Israel’s actions in the harshest tone possible and would add fuel to the fire of the ‘boycott Israel’ movement. Much closer to home, Israel would face unrest not only in the Palestinian territories, but also in Arab neighborhoods in the north of Israel. Egypt, Jordan and Turkey would recall their ambassadors (assuming that Turkey’s ambassador will soon be re-stationed in Tel Aviv) and face virulent public demands that future relations with Israel be reassessed….

But assuming that, as Leiberman predicted, Israel did go to war against Syria, attacking Syrian targets, and destroying its airforce and the Assad regime, the question of Assad’s successor would become urgent. It is highly doubtful that Israel would want to open such a pandora’s box. Despite the rhetoric, posturing and concern over Syria’s ties to Iran and Hezbollah, Israel has enjoyed over two decades of relative quiet on its Syrian front…..

A future war between Israel and Hezbollah is unlikely to involve Syria, and if there were any kind of engagement it would be on a small scale, with Israel most likely attacking the transfer of balance-altering weaponry. If Israel were to attack Syria without a significant casus belli, it could face unprecedented diplomatic isolation as well as thousands of rockets aimed at its population centers and military targets. Assad, on the other hand, stands to lose his hold on power if he becomes embroiled in a large-scale conflict with Israel. Both parties have compelling reasons to want to avoid such an eventuality. There is no cause for complacency, however. In a border wherehedging trees can lead to a fatal exchange of fire, and Iranian nuclear ambitions could provoke an Israeli attack, unpredictability remains the best presumption.”

Syria: U.S. Can Keep it’s Diplomatic Advice
2010-11-04 AP. CBS News’ George Baghdadi in Damascus.

Syria on Thursday slammed advice given by a senior U.S. diplomat as to how the Middle Eastern nation should manage relations with its neighbors and internal political groups, …

Syria Must Wield Influence in Lebanon to Help U.S. Relations,
Says Top Diplomat, By Glenn Kessler, Nov. 1 (Washington Post)

Feltman discounted Iranian influence on Syria, saying that unless Damascus mends relations with Washington, it has no chance of winning the return of the Golan Heights, which was seized by Israel in the 1967 Six-Day War. Syria has said that it wishes to have its territorial expectations met through a peace agreement with Israel and that Syria recognizes the essential role that we can play in achieving that,” Feltman said. “So this suggests to me that Syria is in fact interested in a better relationship with us. But our interests in a comprehensive peace doesn’t mean that we are going to start trading our other interests in Iraq or Lebanon in order to get Damascus to like us better.”

But Feltman refrained from naming any consequences for Syria and Iran if they undermine the Lebanese government, except to say that Syria risked losing an opportunity to improve ties with Washington. … Feltman said that the administration is “deeply concerned” about Lebanon.

Haaretz: Outgoing MI chief hints at Israel role in strike on Syria nuclear facility
2010-11-02

Outgoing Military Intelligence chief Amos Yadlin took part Tuesday in his final meeting of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee meeting, ahead of his imminent departure from the post which he has held for the last four years. In his …

A century of dispute peaks in south Beirut
by Rami Khoury, The Daily Star – Opinion Articles –

Zvi Bar’el writes Thanks to our friend at War in Context:

“Iran is not the enemy, Israel is the enemy,” the head of the Center for Strategic Studies in Saudi Arabia declared in an interview with Al Jazeera. This was his response to a question on whether the $60 billion arms deal between Riyadh and Washington was meant to deter Iran. The American efforts to portray the deal as aimed against Tehran doesn’t fit with the Saudi point of view, and it seems this isn’t the only subject over which these two countries fail to see eye to eye.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spoke with King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia twice last week, and Iran reported that a senior Iranian official would visit Riyadh soon. It’s not clear if it will be Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki or the head of the National Security Council, Saeed Jalili.

But the frequent contacts between Iran and Saudi Arabia are not over the big arms deal or Iran’s nuclear plans. The two countries have concluded that they need to reach an agreement on two other issues regarding their sphere of influence in the region: Iraq and Lebanon.

Regarding Lebanon, Iran is trying to persuade Saudi Arabia to help stop the work of the special international tribunal investigating the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. This would prevent the collapse of the Lebanese regime. While Iran is worried about Hezbollah’s status, it also doesn’t want Lebanon to collapse or fall into another civil war, whose results cannot be ensured.

In this respect, Tehran doesn’t have to make too great an effort to get Riyadh’s support. This became clear last week to Jeffrey Feltman, the U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs and a former U.S. ambassador to Beirut, when he visited Riyadh. During his meeting with King Abdullah, the monarch tried to figure out America’s position if the international court’s work were stopped. Arab sources say Feltman was “furious but restrained,” and made it clear to the king that Washington was determined to support the tribunal.

With all due respect to the American insistence, if the client that is supposed to pay Washington $60 billion decides it’s vital to halt the tribunal’s work, it won’t make do with consulting the Americans. It will throw its full weight behind the efforts. Meanwhile, the indictment the tribunal is due to publish is not expected before February.

Syria’s Challenge: A Modern Secular Family Law,

By Elie Elhadj, for Syria Comment

Equality between women and men before the law is an inalienable human right–a natural justice. Gender equality is crucial for economic growth and human development.

Syria’s 2008 Gender Gap Index was a poor 107 out of 130 countries, scoring 0.618. It ranked in economic participation and opportunity; 107, educational attainment; 101, health and survival; 65, and political empowerment; 112. In 2007 (the first time Syria participated in the index) Syria ranked 103 out of 128 countries, scoring 0.6229 (Euromed Gender Equality Program report on Syria, p. 12, please see below).

Syria’s discriminatory laws against women should be abrogated. A modern secular personal status law for all Syrians should replace religious laws, including Shari’a laws and courts.

That a man can marry four wives, divorce any one of them without giving reason (with limited child custody rights, housing, or alimony); that a Muslim woman is prohibited from marrying a Christian or a Jewish man while the Muslim man is allowed to marry Christian and Jewish women; that a woman cannot pass her nationality on to her husband and children while the man can; that a woman must have a male family relative as guardian overseeing her actions; that “honor killing” of a woman by a male relative can effectively go unpunished; that Syria’s First Lady and the Republic’s Vice President are equal to one illiterate man in a Shari’a court of law in testimony, witness, or inheritance reflect the unsuitability of seventh century laws of the Arabian Desert to Syria’s way of life today.

Such anomalies are all the more serious in light of Syria’s government’s keen interest to project itself as a modern “secular” society. Further, such anomalies violate Syria’s constitution, which guarantees equality among citizens before the law in their rights and duties (see below).

All provisions in Syrian laws that infringe on the equality of women with men should be brought before Syria’s High Constitutional Court to be declared unconstitutional.

Such anomalies are also all the more surprising in light of the contradictions between Shari’a laws and the Prophetic Sunna, which tells us of the Prophet’s monogamous and exemplary treatment of His first wife of 25 years, Khadija.

Equality between women and men before the law is crucially important not only to accord natural justice and human rights to Syria’s women but also for economic and human developmental reasons. Treating women like chattel leaves its scars on women’s personality, defining their view of themselves as lesser beings and inhibiting their contribution to the country’s economic, scientific, artistic, and political developments.

Treating women like chattel causes women to demand large dowries in order to protect themselves from the vagaries of a Shari’a divorce system that would otherwise leave them practically destitute. Large dowries are responsible for delaying marriages for years among young men and women. Such a situation precipitates unhealthy social conditions that transcends all walks of life. A modern secular family law would reduce the risk of destitution from divorce and with it the size of dowries. As dowries size come down, marriage costs become affordable; solving a serious social problem for young men and women in Syria today.

In what follows, the findings of a 2010 report on Syria by the Euromed Gender Equality Program will be presented. The report elaborates upon the discriminatory practices women in Syria endure. Financed by the European Union Commission, the Euromed Gender Equality Program aims at enhancing equality between men and women in the Euromed Region.

Finally, a letter sent by Human Rights Watch to President Bashar AL-Asad in July 2009 will be presented. The letter summarizes the plight of Syrian women and seeks the President’s help to achieve gender equality.

The Euromed Gender Equality Program

In a study published in 2010 titled “National Situation Analysis Report. Women’s Human Rights and Gender Equality – Syria”, the Euromed Gender Equality Program addressed Syria’s discriminatory laws and practices against women. For the full report.

Equal constitutional rights for women and men

It is significant that Syrian women enjoy full constitutional rights, like men (Euromed Gender Equality Program report on Syria, p. 13):

Article 25: “Citizens are equal before the law in their rights and duties, and the government guarantees the principle of equal opportunities among citizens”.

Article 26: “Every Citizen has the right to contribute to the political, economic, social and cultural life”.

Article 27: “Citizens practice their rights and enjoy their freedoms”.

Article 45: “The State guarantees women all opportunities enabling them to fully and effectively participate in the political, social, cultural and economic life. The state removes the restrictions that prevent women’s development and participation in building the society”.

Discrimination against women in the Personal Status Act, the Nationality Act, and the Penal Code

However, notwithstanding their constitutional rights, provisions that discriminate against women exist in various laws relating to the family and women’s personal lives, such as the Personal Status Act, the Nationality Act, and the Penal Code (Ibid., pp. 14-18).

Family issues in Syria fall under the Personal Status Law of 1953, and its amendments of 1975. The law is applied to Syrians, except certain rules on issues related to Christians and each sect has its own religious rules regarding engagement, marriage, alimony, divorce and custody. The main articles that discriminate against women in Syria’s Personal Status Law are:

• Article 16 stipulates that the legal age of marriage is 18 for boys and 16 for girls with scope of judicial discretion for males of 15 years and females of 13 years if either the father or grandfather serving as wali consents and the parties appear physically able, and if he fears for the young girl’s “morals and reputation”;
• Matrimonial guardianship is mandatory for women only (Art. 21). Muslim women are not allowed to marry non-Muslims, but Muslim men are allowed to marry non Muslims (Art. 48.2);
• Polygamy is permitted  up to 4 wives (Art. 17);
• Divorce: Art. 91 gives the right of repudiation to the husband (one-sided and unconditional); while according to Art. 105-115, the wife can petition for divorce under very restrictive conditions. The law makes no reference to providing habitation to the divorced mother and her children. Divorced women are often forced to return to their relatives houses with their children while their former husbands are allowed to stay in the marital house. Syrian women always feel threatened by divorce, as a husband can just dispense with her without giving compensation;
• Child custody is the prerogative of the father;
• Maintenance and obedience: according to Art. 74, the wife owes obedience to her husband in return for maintenance; and Art. 73 and 74 stipulate that the wife forfeits her maintenance rights if she works outside the home without her husband’s consent;
• Discrimination against women also relate to nationality. A woman cannot pass her nationality on to her husband. According to Article 3 of the Nationality Law, only Syrian fathers can pass their nationality on to their children and to their foreign wife.
• In terms of Penal Law, Article 548 states that men can be exempted from punishment if they kill or hurt their spouse, sister, or any of their female ascendants, whom they unexpectedly discover committing adultery or out-of-wed sexual relation with another person. Furthermore, the man is not deprived from inheriting from her. Article 548 was amended on 1st July 2009 by legislative decree No 37, 2009, raising the penalty for honor killing to least two years. According to Article 192, men who murder, beat or cause injury to their allegedly adulterous wives and sisters can claim extenuating circumstances before the law.

Further discrimination against women in the Syrian Penal Law relate to:

• Rape.  A rapist can be acquitted if he marries his victim. As such, the woman suffers three times. First, when she was raped, secondly when she is married to her rapist and thirdly when he inevitably divorces her after a few months.
• A murderer pays compensation (fedya) to the family of a female victim half what would be paid for a male victim.
• Adultery. According to Articles 473, 474 and 475, a woman who commits adultery is subject to punishment double that of the man’s, if she is not killed by her family. Men’s adultery is considered allowable when committed outside the martial house and is punished only when it occurs inside the home. Women, however, are punished for adultery no matter where it is committed. Under the law, male guardians are given the right to bring a suit of adultery against an unmarried woman, but they have no right to bring such a suit against an unmarried man.

International Agreements signed with Syrian reservations

The Syrian Commission for Family Affairs (SCFA) prepared three studies comparing the CEDAW articles and national legislation (personal status law, nationality code, and criminal code). In May 2006, it wrote a memorandum submitting it to the Cabinet with a request to remove all reservations on the CEDAW. In April 2007, the SCFA developed a draft for a presidential decree forwarding it to the Cabinet in order to be transferred officially to the parliament (Ibid.).

Syria ratified the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) by Legislative Degree 330 dated 25/9/2002, with reservations believed to contradict Shari’a principles related to bestowing the nationality of mothers to their children; freedom of movement and housing; equality of rights and responsibilities linked to custody, kinship, maintenance and adoption, during and after marriage; legal effect of the children’s engagement or marriage; arbitration between countries to solve disputes (Ibid., p. 21).

Syria signed the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) in 1990 and ratifying it in 1993, with a general reservation to any provisions that are not in conformity with Syrian legislation or the principles of Sharia, and particular reference to children’s freedom of religion, and adoption.

In 2007, a committee was set up to draft a new Personal Status Law. The draft proposal was presented in 2009. It received many critics.

Letter from Human Rights Watch to President Bashar Al-Asad

Human Rights Watch sent a letter on July 28, 2009 to President Bashar Al-Asad urging him to to enhance and protect the legal status of women consistent with Syria’s Constitution and international human rights standards.

July 28, 2009
President Bashar al-Assad
Presidential Palace, Damascus
Syrian Arab Republic

Your Excellency,

We are writing to express our support for your decision, as reported in the media, to set aside the draft personal status law, which would have continued the unequal treatment of Syrian women. The current draft would leave a number of problematic articles in the existing law intact, and would fail to enhance and protect the legal status of women.  We understand that the draft law has been returned to the Ministry of Justice, which we hope will create an inclusive process to revise the draft law so that it will be fair to all Syrians.

There is a growing trend in the Arab world to amend laws on the subject to ensure equal treatment for men and women. A few years ago Morocco amended its family code or mudawannah to grant equal rights to men and women in family matters.  Morocco, Egypt and Yemen have also recently granted women the right to pass on their nationality to their children. We hope that other countries in the region, including Syria, will soon follow suit.

We would like to share our concerns about some of the discriminatory provisions in the draft law and the supporting documentation in the hope that it will assist you in revising the law, consistent with Syria’s Constitution and international human rights standards. Article 25 of Syria’s Constitution states that “freedom is a sacred right and the state guarantees its citizens’ individual freedoms and protects their dignity and security. Article 25(3) further notes “the citizens are equal before the law in their rights and duties.”

Here are provisions that cause concern:

The draft law is discriminatory with regard to marriage age, allowing marriage for males at age 18 and females at 17 in one provision and boys at 15 and girls at 13 in another if they have reached puberty and have been granted permission by their guardians.
The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), ratified by Syria in 2003, states in article 16 (1) that state parties must take appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against women in all matters related to marriage and family relations.   The Committee on the Rights of the Child, which provides the guiding interpretation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, also ratified by Syria, has also addressed this issue. In its General Comment no. 4 (2003) the Committee expressed its concerns about early marriage and pregnancy, which it described as significant factors for problems related to sexual and reproductive health.  It states clearly that the Convention requires states to ensure the minimum age for marriage is the same for both girls and boys, and goes on to strongly recommend States Parties to increase the minimum age for marriage with and without parental consent to 18 years, for both girls and boys.

The draft law does not allow Syrian women married to non-citizens to pass on their nationality to their children, while it does not restrict men in this way.

Article 44 of Syria’s Constitution clearly states “The family is the basic unit of society and is protected by the state.”  By denying Syrian women the right to pass on their nationality to their children, the Syrian government denies equal protection to their families.

The draft law’s system of guardianship for women subjects female decision-making in family matters to male supervision. Specifically, article 20 requires adult women to receive consent from a male guardian to marry. In instances where a marriage has occurred without consent, article 27 stipulates that a woman’s male guardian may invalidate her marriage if her husband was found incompetent.

Article 15 of CEDAW specifically requires states to “accord to women, in civil matters, a legal capacity identical to that of men and the same opportunities to exercise that capacity.”  State parties are also required to ensure that all contracts with a legal effect directed at restricting the legal capacity of women will be voided.

Numerous articles in the draft law deny women autonomy and freedom of movement. These include provisions in article 37 (1) that state that women are not permitted to work outside the home without their husbands’ permission and that even a divorced woman can lose her alimony payment if she works without her former husband’s permission. Article 70 also denies women the right to travel outside Syria without permission.

Article 15(4) of CEDAW obliges states to grant women the same rights as men with regard to freedom of movement.  In addition, article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) states that “everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state” and that “everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.”  Article 12 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)acceded to by Syria in 1969, requires all state parties to implement the right to freedom of movement both within a state and the right to enter and leave one’s own country.

The draft law also creates a discriminatory system for divorce. Under article 86, men have the right to divorce by simple repudiation while women must prove that there is a “valid” reason. In instances where a consensual decision has been reached by both spouses, the woman must repay her dowry to her husband.

Article 16 (c) of CEDAW says that state parties are responsible for guaranteeing “the same rights and responsibilities during marriage and at its dissolution.”   The ICCPR obliges states to “take appropriate steps to ensure equality of rights and responsibilities of spouses as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution. In addition, as the body responsible for interpreting the ICCPR, the United Nations Human Rights Committee has noted that “any discriminatory treatment in regard to the grounds and procedures for separation or divorce, child custody, maintenance or alimony, visiting rights or the loss or recovery of parental authority must be prohibited.”

On another matter, we commend your efforts to reform article 548 of the penal code,  an important step to reform laws that effectively grant immunity to men who murder their female relatives.  However, we remain concerned about other provisions in the law that urgently need changing to address adequately the issue of so-called honour crimes and to protect women and girls from violence.

Article 548 of the penal code still provides a 2-year minimum sentence for killing a female relative on the basis of honour. Articles 548, 239, 240, 241 and 242 grant immunity or a reduced sentence to a man who murders his female relative.  In addition, Article 192 states that if the criminal act was based on an honourable intent, then the judge has a number of options to reduce the sentence, including short-term detention or imprisonment.

Violence, of any kind, against women has long been considered a human rights violation that all states have a responsibility to eradicate.  The United Nations General Assembly resolution 61/143 on the Intensification of efforts to eliminate all forms of violence against women notes that states need to condemn such violence and to “refrain from invoking any custom, tradition or religious consideration to avoid their obligations with respect to its elimination as set out in the Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women.”

We ask your government to abolish all articles that reduce sentences for “honourable intent” and that effectively grant reduced sentences for crimes provoked by passion.  We also ask your government to amend the unequal treatment of women under these provisions in the penal law and to consider all cases of murder as such.

We urge you to ensure the revision of the above – mentioned articles in Syria’s Personal Status Law. We also urge you to withdraw Syria’s reservations to articles 9(2) and 16 (1) (C) of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women concerning equal rights between men and women to pass on their nationality to their children and the equal rights and responsibilities of men and women during marriage and its dissolution.

Finally, we recommend the Ministry of Justice grant the Syrian Commission for Family Affairs (SCFA) the responsibility for redrafting this law, under its mandate, issued by presidential decree in 2003.  We ask that this process be open and transparent, with consideration given to the knowledge and perspectives of all parties who offer their views and the full participation of civil society organizations, including women’s rights organizations and legal experts.

Personal status laws affect the lives of ordinary men and women, and as such they should treat both equally, and in particular should enhance, not reduce, women’s rights.  Lessening the inequality that women face in their families will ultimately assist women to advance in Syrian society.  We welcome the opportunity to discuss these matters further and look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Liesl Gerntholtz

Executive Director of the Women’s Rights Division
Human Rights Watch
CC:      Ministry of Justice
Prime Minister of Syria

President Al-Asad has issued a decree granting a one-time 50 per cent bonus on government salaries. This is done in view of eid al-adha. The one time bonus equals syp 12.5 billion or $270 million, which equals about 0.49% of Syria’s GDP.

The 50-per cent bonus on monthly salaries and wages is to cover civilian and military public service workers inside and outside Syria. The bonus is exempt from income tax, and covers those working in joint sector companies in which the state has a 75-per cent share.

The program is thought to cost syp 12.5 billion. This is $270 million. Because this sum is 50% of the total government monthly salaries, we can assume that the total monthly salaries come to $540 million a month or $6.48 billion a year. This equals 11.6% of Syria’s $55 billion GDP.

Syria’s government employment roll is 1,072,000, according to Syria’s Statistical Abstract (2009). This figure excludes military and security forces, which are estimated at more than 300,000. Thus, the number of people employed by the government is close to 1.4 million, excluding pensioners.

[Addendum 11/15/]: Syria Steps reports some troubling news. The government admits to only having been able to create 39,000 jobs last year versus the 250,000-300,000 objective. The actual number of created jobs was only 16% of the target. If GDP or “real” growth of 8% was that target growth rate that was estimated to be able to create 250,000-300,00 jobs, one can conclude that growth was only 16% of the 8% target. This works out to be 1.25%, suggesting that real GDP growth was only slightly higher than 1%. This number supports the lower growth figures that Syria Steps reported on last week and which Syria Comment covered as well. Admittedly, these numbers are calculated in the crudest fashion possible. Unfortunately, we must resort to such inadequate techniques to verify the government figures, which are not always as transparent as we would like.

Ehsani calculates Syria’s average monthly government salary to be in the $270 range:

When the government raised heating-oil (Mazoot) prices back in 2008, it said in this Reuters article:

The increase, which will take effect this month, covers 2 million public workers and retirees, the state news agency said.

If there were 2 million public workers and retirees, then we get an average monthly salary of $270. (syp 12.5 billion is $270 million.) Since the bonus is 50% of the monthly salary cost, this means the monthly cost is double the bonus ($540 million). Dividing 540 million by 2 million workers and retirees, yields an average monthly salary of $270, or syp 12,500, which is exactly what I have argued it is all along.

To take it one step further, if you include the armed forces, which are estimated at 400,000, the 540 million would have to be divided by 2.4 million people. The average salary is $225 or SYP 10,400. We can conclude that the average Syrian government salary is i the range of $225 – $ 270 a month.

Pensions are at 70% of salaries, so if one tweaks the calculations appropriately, the monthly government salary is $270, or syp 12,487, which I am fairly confident is correct. $270 a month is $9 a day for a family. If the family is more than four members, it will fall below the UN poverty line of $2 a day.

[Thanks to Ehsani and Elie for these calculations.]
______

Read Marc Lynch’s excellent article on Lebanon’s Special Tribunal: The Zombie Tribunal for Lebanon

… anyone who has followed the investigation of Hariri’s murder over the last five years will remember being flooded with leaks, analysis and evidence which supposedly established the culpability of the Syrian regime with absolute certainty. We all read books, articles, op-eds, blog posts and official reports placing Syria’s responsibility beyond a reasonable doubt. And then suddenly “new information” — which most people in the region understood to be conveniently discovered in a new political climate — led the STL to stop pursuing the Syrians and shift to Hezbollah. The Arab media has not failed to notice.

What are we to make of its really quite shocking reversal? Why should we consider the evidence now pointing to Hezbollah credible given the seeming collapse of the supposedly iron-clad case against Syria? Most discussion of this fairly obvious point that I’ve seen in the Western media has been framed around Hezbollah’s “efforts to discredit the STL.” But the STL’s credibility problems seem a bit more real than that. If Hezbollah were really responsible than a strong case could be made for pursuing justice regardless of the consequences. But from the outside, it really does look an awful lot like the STL is being used as a political weapon against Hezbollah at a time of mounting fears of its power and of allegedly rising Iranian influence in Lebanon. …

U.N. Nuclear Chief Sets Sights on Syria
BY: JAY SOLOMON | THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

The head of the United Nations atomic watchdog said he is open to demanding intrusive new inspections of alleged Syrian nuclear sites, signaling a potential hardening of the international community’s position….

IAEA chief indicates the body is ‘reluctant’ to push for inspections in Syria over a possible nascent nuclear program (Haaretz)

The United States has suggested the IAEA could invoke its “special inspection” mechanism to give it the authority to look anywhere in Syria on short notice.

Asked in New York why the Vienna-based U.N. agency was reluctant to request a special inspection in Syria, IAEA Director-General Yukiya Amano said there was no longer a site to investigate.

“If the facility is there, it’s easy to go and look and confirm if it is a reactor or not,” he told reporters at the Council on Foreign Relations. “But the facility is gone.”

While Amano said he would be open to seeking a special inspection in the future, he said he had not strengthened his position on Syria and that, for now, the IAEA was focused on seeking cooperation with the Middle Eastern country.

“There is talk, there is cooperation. On Dair Alzour, not yet, but why don’t we hope?” Amano said. …. Diplomats and analysts believe the IAEA will refrain from escalating the dispute as tensions rise with Iran, which the West suspects of seeking nuclear weapons

llo Joshua:

Shana Marshall, a graduate student at Princeton who has written some excellent articles on the Syrian economy, writes:

The Syrian International Academy (SIA) was a cooperative endeavor between Al Jazeera’s training center (for journalists) and the Syrian PR Association. Apparently the folks at IWPR were using some of the students from the academy to write for them – which fell afoul of someone with at least some measure of authority – who closed down the SIA despite the presence of numerous big-wigs on the academy’s board of directors and within its general administration….

http://www.shril-sy.info/enshril/modules/news/article.php?storyid=557

Syrian industry minister Fouad Al Jouni has said investors have been invited to help revamp the country’s under-performing industrial sector but privatisation is not on the table, Reuters has reported. “We have adopted this principle towards every public sector industrial company that needs to be modernised. We are ready to begin negotiations with any investor,” Jouni said. “But there is no sale of public industrial assets. Privatization is prohibited and workers rights cannot be compromised,” he added.

Bush: Olmert asked to me to strike Syria, but I refused
By JPOST.COM, 11/05/2010

Former US President George W. Bush has revealed that he considered ordering the US military to strike a suspected Syrian nuclear facility at Israel’s request in 2007, however in the end he opted against it.

In his memoir, “Decision Points,” which is due to be released on Tuesday, Bush says he received an intelligence report about a “suspicious, well-hidden facility in the eastern desert of Syria,” and then telephoned then Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to discuss what action to take.

Reports at the time suggested that Israel was behind the bombing that eventually destroyed the facility, which Syria denied was aimed at developing a nuclear weapons capability.

Bush writes that Olmert’s “execution of the strike” against the Syrian compound made up for the confidence he had lost in the Israelis during their 2006 war against Hezbollah in Lebanon, which Bush feels was bungled.

http://www.syriasteps.com/?d=131&id=59252&in_main_page=1                          

The government admits that ot was only able to create 39,000 versus the 

250,000-300,000 objective. The actual number was therefore only 16% of the 

target. If GDP "real" growth of 8% was thought to be enough to create the 

250,000-300,00 target, one can conclude that growth was only 16% of 8% which is 

1.25% 

What is Behind the Uproar in Syria’s Labor Relations? The Reform Process and Jobs?
By Elie Elhadj
For Syria Comment
November 5, 2010

Syria’s Real Economic Growth Not 5%

Syriasteps quotes a study by the Planning Commission which finds that “economic growth in Syria dropped during 2008 and 2009 to 3% from 5.5% in 2007.” Growth was negative in what is termed “real economy.”

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

This is a far cry from the 5% to 6% growth that we have been quoted and which the World Bank and Economist have been repeating.

According to Syria-News.com on October 29, 2010, Mr. Dardari revealed that Syria needs to create 1.25 million jobs during the forthcoming Five-year Development Plan. 65,000 are to be created during the first year of the Plan. “Dardari on poverty and unemployment… in numbers.” However, the author of the Syria-News.com report estimates that the plan needs to produce not 1.25 million jobs but 2.1 million if Syria is merely to maintain its present unemployment rate of 11.8%.

The challenge of future economic growth in Syria

1. Provide young men and women with work opportunities upon graduation from schools and universities
2. Absorb the 600,000 already unemployed – out of Syria’s 5.44 million work force
3. Absorb those who would become unemployed as a result of being laid off from privatized enterprises in the future
4. Raise the country’s real per capita GDP

High unemployment rates have serious negative consequences in terms of lost economic contribution, prolonging poverty, and fomenting discontent; even possibly social unrest.

Evaluating Syria’s development plans is difficult because Syrian statistics are a mess. The assumptions behind the Eleventh Five-Year Plan are unknown and the accuracy of the available public data is in doubt. The IMF Country Report on Syria, No. 10/86, dated March 2010 states on page 30: “Government finance statistics suffer from major deficiencies with respect to definitions, coverage, classification, methodology, accuracy, reliability, and timeliness”.

Headlines

The following headlines appeared in the Syrian Press during the second half of October 2010: (I am translating from the Arabic)

Shamlife: “Dardari: No industrial policy-maker knows What the Answers are to Industry’s needs. The Solution is not Easy.” October 17, 2010

ALL4SYRIA: “Labor unions will attack the government… by throwing tomatoes”. October 24, 2010

ALL4SYRIA: “’Asi: The high price of tomatoes is caused by Dardari”. October 28, 2010

Shamlife: “Dardari: We could not reduce poverty…” October 26, 2010, 26, 2010,

ALL4SYRIA: “Dardari inundates unionists with ‘misleading’ data”. October 26, 2010

Syriasteps: “A minister in Mr. Outri’s cabinet… I disagree… I disagree”, referring to the Minister of Industry’s reaction to a demand by union leaders that more workers be employed in a Jableh textile factory. October 26, 2010

Shamlife: “Sharp exchanges between the Minister of Labor and Damascus’ labor union leaders”. October 27, 2010

These headlines describe the tension between leaders of Syria’s labor unions and officials responsible for Syria’ economic affairs. In particular the acrimony stems from Deputy Prime Minister Abdullah Al-Dardari’s efforts to dismantle Syria’s “socialist” economy. In order to build a viable and lively private sector, the Syrian government will have to overcome serious opposition from labor, which is clinging to the thousands of public sector jobs that provided the backbone of the socialist economy and kept many Syrian families from sinking into poverty. Unfortunately, these industries are not viable and Syria can no longer afford to subsidize them. The government must redirect its limited resources toward building the infrastructure the will attract and sustain a competitive private sector. Unemployment in Syria is already through the roof.

In a “market” system, government investment will ideally be decided by rates of return, not rates of employment. Efficient allocation of scarce resources should produce optimal growth and benefit everyone. A rate of return approach will direct taxpayers’ money toward investments that create the most profit – not just for one segment of the population at the expense of others – but for the entire nation. Other approaches are inefficient because of the ideological, ethical, or emotional bias that typically influences decision makers.

As for those business enterprises that the government already owns and manages, a “market” economy should open Syria’s doors to competition. More competition from Turkish, Chinese, and Korean goods will will further undermine the market for the goods produced by Syria’s state sector. Eventually, the government will have little choice but to sell off the 250 or so firms it owns – almost all of which are bleeding red ink. EHSANI2 wrote convincingly about the need to privatize these companies on October 17, 2010 in his “The Sin in Syria is Low Wages.”

Whenever this happens, a proportion of the workers currently employed by these establishments will be laid off, exposing them to the vagaries and humiliation of unemployment.

Possible solutions
In addition to the government’s effort to attract foreign investors, factors that can accelerate Syria’s future rate of economic growth will be outlined next. Five factors are structural, which means that a long time is required to bring about the necessary changes. Three other factors are operational and can produce quick results. Hopefully, the government will muster the political will and wherewithal to implement both types of reforms.

The first structural factor is to reduce the rate of population growth significantly. With an annual rate of 2.7% growth, Syria needs to feed, keep healthy, and educate around a million new citizens every year. Such increases are too heavy a burden for a relatively poor country. Unless Syria’s population growth rate is reduced measurably, Syria will be caught in a poverty and high unemployment trap.

Syria should institute effective programs to encourage family planning and birth control. For those who are guided by God’s views on this matter, religious scholars have it in their power to tailor their interpretations of the Holy Scripture to suit their political benefactors. Syrians would do well to ignore the dictums of orthodox ulama and the Pope. The Lord wants the faithful to be healthy, educated, and prosperous, not poor and too numerous.

The second structural factor is to enact laws that would encourage Syrian women to participate fully in economic development. Women’s equality with men is a prerequisite for economic growth. Syria would never be able to attain its full economic potential while half of its population is mistreated like second-class citizens.

Equality for women with men before the law is an absolute right, not a favor. Equality would restore natural justice to fifty percent of the society, helping to enhance women’s contribution to Syria’s economic growth.

A modern secular family law that applies to all citizens regardless of religion, sect, and denomination should replace existing family laws, including Shari’a laws and courts. That a man can marry four wives, divorce any one of them without giving reason, that Syria’s two best known ladies for sophistication, intellect, and modernity; the First Lady and the Republic’s Vice President are equal to one man, who can be illiterate, in a Shari’a court of law in giving testimony, being a witness, or in inheritance brings into question the suitability of Shari’a law to Syria’s way of life in the twenty first century. Such an anomaly is all the more surprising in light of Syria’s keen interest to project itself as a modern “secular” society. Treating women like chattel leaves its scars on women’s personality, defining their view of themselves as lesser beings and inhibiting their contribution to the country’s development.

The third structural factor is to reform the educational curriculum in order to produce graduates with the skills needed in today’s competitive business world. The educational curriculum should aim at enhancing students’ analytical competence, inquisitiveness, creativity, and entrepreneurial drive. To this end, independent studies, term paper research, use of the school’s library and laboratory should become the order of the school day instead of attending lectures passively and memorizing textbooks. Teaching should emphasize student participation in the classroom and encourage debating taboo issues, especially religious dogma. Classroom size should be reduced from 40-50 students to 20-25 students. Large and sustained capital investment in school buildings, libraries, laboratories as well as expanding the size of the teaching staff need to become a priority.

The fourth structural factor is to fight corruption seriously. EHSANI2 addressed this issue at some length, here. Suffice it to say, that corruption is expensive; be it in the inflated prices the government pays for goods and services, the unqualified employees in city hall, or the petty bribes citizens need to pay to minor officials in order to facilitate dealing with government offices. All forms of corruption are robbery and deny taxpayers fair value for their taxes.

The World Bank Institute’s Worldwide Governance Indicators shows Syria’s poor score in corruption control. Of the 213 countries in the study, Syria ranked among the worst, scoring a negative (0.96) while Denmark, for example, achieved the high score of positive 2.42. Disturbingly, Syria’s score has been on a downward slide in recent years; in 2003, it was a negative (0.5) and in 2005, it slid to a negative (0.63) (http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/index.asp).

The structures that have been nourishing corruption in a “socialist” Syria may well exacerbate the level of corruption in Syria’s new “social market economy”. A “market” economy could enlarge Syria’s business elites, adding ferocity to the culture of greed and exploitation that pervades the elite’s conduct. Today’s lawbreakers must be brought to justice so that would-be business offenders in the future are warned. Before the “market” economy gets underway in earnest, social welfare programs should be in place to protect the weaker members of society. Otherwise, “market” economy’s shortcomings, its focus on profit and efficiency, could scuttle the new experiment altogether, triggering even societal unrest.

The fifth structural factor is in the nature of an administrative house keeping. Given that high quality statistics can help improve the quality of planning and investment decisions and instill a culture of transparency and accountability, implementation of the recommendations contained in the March 2010 IMF Country Report on Syria to provide comprehensive, accurate, and timely statistics in accordance with international standards should become a priority.

The challenge of Syria’s data may be summarized in: A) Annual national accounts “reported for publication in the International Financial Statistics (IFS) with about 2-years lag” (IMF report, p. 30). B) Government finance statistics that “suffer from major deficiencies”, with “the largest, most persistent and volatile discrepancies, are between the financing requirements of the budget, as reported by the MOF, and government financing as reported by the Central Bank of Syria” (IMF report, p. 31). C) Monetary and financial statistics “reported for publication in the IFS with about 10-month lags, falling short of recommended dissemination practices of 3-month lags” (IMF report, p. 31). D) External sector statistics presentation and compilation methodology being inconsistent with IMF standards.

On the other hand, the operational factors can provide rapid access to money to help fund the next development plan. Three sources can be worth billions:

First: Enforce tax collection vigorously. It is reprehensible that large family businesses pay an effective tax rate of something around 4% (EHSANI2: https://joshualandis.com/blog/?p=7598).

Second: Stop politically convenient allocation of national resources. “Market” investment decisions are based on rate of return criterion. Return on investment should decide the priorities of future government investments, including irrigation projects.

The financial return on Syria’s investment in irrigation over the past few decades has been poor, as have the non-financial returns. Migration from rural communities to urban centers continues unabated. Reliance on capricious rainfall has not been reduced. Over-extraction of groundwater has led to negative balances in five out of the seven water basins in Syria. In all, Syria’s precious water resources are being reduced in quantity and degraded in quality.

Food self-sufficiency in an arid/semi arid Syria is a mirage, notwithstanding the national appeal such a slogan evokes. Syria does not have sufficient groundwater and rain to feed more than 15 million people. New spending on irrigation schemes will be a waste of money and would exacerbate aquifers’ condition. Syria should divert investment in irrigation schemes to other fields, including rain-fed lands.

Third: Divert resources from the military to productive investment in infrastructure, education, health, and welfare. The military is not among Syria’s regional strategic strengths. In the regional balance of power, Syria’s armed forces are not a major factor. A well-educated healthy population makes for better soldiers and officers.

Elie

Nicholas Kristof writes:

“Mounting evidence suggests that losing a job or a home can rock our identity and savage our self-esteem. Forced moves wrench families from their schools and support networks.  In short, inequality leaves people on the lower rungs feeling like hamsters on a wheel spinning ever faster, without hope or escape. Economic polarization also shatters our sense of national union and common purpose, fostering political polarization as well.”

Top Chinese political advisor hails Chinese-Syrian economic ties
2010-10-30

DAMASCUS, Oct 30, 2010 (Xinhua via COMTEX) — China’s top political advisor Jia Qinglin on Saturday hailed China’s economic and trade cooperation with Syria, urging Chinese companies there to further contribute to local economic development. Jia, chairman of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) National Committee, made the remarks during his visit to a cement factory which is under construction by a Chinese company.

He described Syria as an “important trade and economic partner” of China in West Asia, saying the two countries have carried out friendly cooperation in an equal and mutually beneficial manner.
Jia applauded the soaring bilateral trade, the two-way investment and the contract of construction between China and Syria, saying it contributed to the economic progress of Syria and the friendship between the two peoples.

Chinese-Syrian trade surged from 220 million U.S. dollars in 2001 to 2.2 billion dollars last year, according to China’s Ministry of Commerce.

China also supports the just cause of Syria for safeguarding its national sovereignty and territorial integrity, and backs Syria in resuming the exercise of full sovereignty on the Golan Heights at an early date, Jia said.

Syrian Oil Output Rises in First Nine Months of 2010, SANA Says
2010-10-31

By Nayla Razzouk
Oct. 31 (Bloomberg) — Syria, the largest oil producer in the Levant, produced slightly more crude in the first nine months of 2010 than in the same period a year earlier, state news agency SANA said. Production climbed to 105.749 million barrels in the period, averaging 387,000 barrels a day and marking an increase of 11,825 barrels a day from the same period of 2009, it said. The Syrian Petroleum Co. pumped 49.6 percent of the total and the rest came from producers affiliated with foreign companies, the agency said.

BP’s statistics suggest that Syria will exhaust its oil reserves in 18 years.
Syria: Economic Overviews, 2010-11-01

Nov. 1 (Economist Intelligence Unit) — POLITICAL STABILITY: The president, Bashar al-Assad, and his ruling Baath party are expected to retain their grip on the country, supported by key elements in the security services. …..

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS: After a period of diplomatic isolation in 2005-07, Syria has developed steadily better relations with Western and regional states–notably Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon and Iraq. Consequently, the EU is now ready to sign a long-delayed Association Agreement and final negotiations are ongoing. Better relations are primarily due to perceptions that Syria is playing a more constructive role in Lebanon–there have been suggestions that Syrian officials may not be implicated in the UN inquiry into the killing of Rafiq Hariri, a former Lebanese prime minister. There is also a desire among Western and other Arab countries, particularly Saudi Arabia, to weaken Syria’s alliance with Iran. However, tensions could still emerge from issues relating to the UN inquiry, undermining the apparent improvement of relations with Saudi Arabia. Relations with the US have also improved, and although US sanctions on Syria were renewed in May, the US has withdrawn its objections to Syria’s accession to the World Trade Organisation.

POLICY TRENDS: The gradual liberalisation of Syria’s centrally planned economy is expected to continue under the leadership of the deputy prime minister for economic affairs, Abdullahal-Dardari. However, the economic debate remains highly charged. There are influential officials who oppose this process, and these conflicting interests will inhibit policy formulation and implementation. Recent press reports have highlighted concerns within the Baath party about the negative impact of reform on poverty. There are also powerful members of the business elite who benefit from the status quo and might resist changes that would threaten their incumbent advantages.

ECONOMIC GROWTH: We estimate real GDP growth at 4% in 2010 as strong government spending and private consumption have both supported growth. We forecast growth of 4.6% in 2011 dropping to 4.5% in 2012 owing to lower oil production. Growth will be driven by rising foreign investment into Syria as the economy is opened up and international relations improve. This, combined with a government focus on capital spending, will drive growth in fixed investment, although the rate of expansion in government consumption and capital expenditure will slow during 2011-12. Private consumption growth will pick up as the private sector expands and as an expected recovery in agriculture in 2011 boosts incomes. However, if there is a significant improvement in security in Iraq–not our core scenario–once the new government is formed, a sizeable number of the Iraqi refugees in Syria (estimated at between 500,000 and 1m) may return home, thereby depressing consumption. Growth in trade will also pick up in 2011-12 as Syria becomes more integrated into the global economy.

INFLATION: Consumer price inflation is expected to accelerate to 4.4% in 2011, as global commodity prices rise slightly and value-added tax (VAT) is finally introduced—although food, a major component of the consumer price index, may be exempted. Inflation will then drop to 4.2% in 2012, as inflationary pressures, particularly on rents, decline owing to a stabilisation or small decline in the number of Iraqi nationals in Syria and declining global commodity prices.

EXCHANGE RATES: The Syrian pound has been loosely pegged to the IMF’s special drawing rights since October 2007 and is tightly managed by the Central Bank of Syria. The authorities are unlikely to let the pound float freely, because they place a high importance on exchange-rate stability. Weakness in the euro zone (the euro is a component of the Central Bank’s currency basket) caused the pound to depreciate against the US dollar in the first half of 2010, although it has recovered since, resulting in an estimated average exchange rate of SP46.4:US$1 for 2010. Persistent worries about the euro in 2011 will lead to a slight depreciation of the pound against the dollar, and we forecast that it will average SP46.7:US$1 in 2011-12. The Central Bank had healthy foreign-exchange reserves–US$17.4bn (about 13 months of import cover) at end-2009–leaving it well placed to maintain control of the local currency.

EXTERNAL SECTOR: In 2011-12 we expect export earnings to build on a 2010 recovery to reach an average of US$14bn, although this is still below the oil-price-related peak in 2008 of US$15.3bn. In recent years, drought has seriously constrained production and therefore exports of cotton and textiles. The drought has now eased, but the 2010 wheat crop is expected to be disappointing and a boll weevil infestation may affect the cotton crop. Overall, the trade deficit will narrow slightly to an average of US$682m in 2011-12, and as a proportion of GDP it will fall to an average of 1%.

Now We Know. America Really Doesn’t Care about Injustice in the Middle East.
by Robert Fisk
November 30, 2010 by The Independent/UK

Vast amounts of diplomatic literature prove that the mainstay of Washington’s Middle East policy is alignment with Israel, that its principal aim is to encourage the Arabs to join the American-Israeli alliance against Iran, that the compass point of US policy over years and years is the need to tame/bully/crush/oppress/ ultimately destroy the power of Iran. ….

One of the most interesting reflections – dutifully ignored by most of the pro-Wikileaks papers yesterday – came in a cable on a meeting between a US Senate delegation and President Bashar Assad of Syria earlier this year. America, Assad told his guests, possessed “a huge information apparatus” but lacked the ability to analyse this information successfully. “While we lack your intelligence abilities,” he says in rather sinister fashion, “we succeed in fighting extremists because we have better analysts … in the US you like to shoot [terrorists]. Suffocating their networks is far more effective.” Iran, he concluded, was the most important country in the region, followed by Turkey and – number three – Syria itself. Poor old Israel didn’t get a look in. ….

Wikileaks: Kerry said Israel should return Golan to Syria
By JPOST.COM STAFF
11/30/2010

US Senator John Kerry said he believed Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu needs to compromise and work the return of the Golan Heights to Syria into a formula for peace. Kerry made the statement to the Amir of Qatar in a February meeting between the two, according to a US State Department cable leaked on the Wikileaks website on Sunday.

Kerry’s assertion came in response to the Amir’s belief that peace between Israel and the Palestinians should be attempted only after Syria-Israel peace was achieved, and that the Golan Heights was of the utmost importance in attaining that peace.

Kerry added that he believes Syrian President Bashar Assad wants change, but that he must compromise and act like more of a statesman in order to attain it.

The senator added that he believed Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas was not strong enough to make necessary compromises with Israel that can lead to peace.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman John Kerry (D-MA) told Qatari leaders that a Palestinian capital should be established in East Jerusalem as part of the Arab-Israeli peace process, and that he was “shocked” by what he saw on a visit to Gaza.

The emir told Kerry to focus on Syria as the path toward resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Kerry agreed with the emir that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is a man who wants change but pointed out that his arming of Hezbollah and interference in Lebanese politics were unhelpful. Kerry said that Assad “needs to make a bolder move and take risks” for peace, and that he should be “more statesman-like.” Kerry also agreed with the emir that the Golan Heights should be given back to Syria at some point.

“The Chairman added that Netanyahu also needs to compromise and work the return of the Golan Heights into a formula for peace,” the diplomatic cable reported.

The Sad Loss of National Dignity
By RAMI G. KHOURI | I.H.T. Op-Ed Contributor
December 1, 2010

….It is bad enough that a host of Arab countries have spent hundreds of billions of dollars on “security” systems that in the end saw them asking others to make preemptive attacks against neighboring Iran, a country that should have been a partner, friend and even ally.

It is worse that the Arab leaders who looked to the United States and Israel to protect them by attacking Iran asked for this course of action quietly, surreptitiously, without standing up for their positions in public.

But it is far, far worse that all of this should have taken place in a context in which the Arab leaders in question seem to have had zero conclusive proof — zero — that Iran was planning to produce nuclear weapons. Indeed, their policies instead may prompt Iran to consider this option. A collective Arab policy of covert appeals for American and Israeli foreigners to carry out aggression against a (Muslim) neighbor without evidence of that neighbor’s culpability — affirming that one’s own immense, nearly immeasurable, Arab national wealth spent for security in the end is not able to provide that security — is a sad testament to the poor quality of leadership in the national security realm, to say the least…..

Mubarak on benevolent dictatorship for Iraq:

Guardian (GB): US embassy cables: Syrian shows ‘ignorance’ over Prince Charles
2010-11-29

6. (S) Sharaa’s behavior in Kuwait, Muasher said, simply underscores Syria’s “stark ignorance” of the U.S. and the rest of the outside world. Bashar al-Asad had told King Abdullah on his recent visit to Damascus that he was not worried about who would win the U.S. presidential elections, since even a Democrat could choose to keep on the senior civilian officials in the current administration. Similarly, Sharaa had told the Jordanians accompanying the King a tabloid-like story that showed how out of touch with reality he is: Sharaa told the group that British Prince Charles would soon be implicated in a Scottish judicial investigation into Princess Diana’s death, and was consequently planning a trip to Iraq and Iran “to seek the support of the Muslim world.” “They just don’t get it,” Muasher lamented…..

FT [Reg]: Arab paranoia unlikely to go down well in Iran
2010-11-29

The cables also suggest Arab leaders expect nothing will stop Iran from achieving its presumed goal of developing nuclear weapons. One report of a US conversation with King Abdullah earlier this year says he has concluded that Saudi Arabia needed to develop its own strategy to counter Iranian influence, including rebuilding relations with Syria, Tehran’s main ally in the Arab world, and developing closer links with Russia, China and India to heighten the diplomatic pressure on Iran from non-traditional partners.”

“.. US Representative Peter King, a Republican from New York and the incoming chair of the House Homeland Security Committee, has requested the administration of US President Barack Obama to “determine whether WikiLeaks could be designated a foreign terrorist organization,”

First Round of Voting Ousts Islamists From Egypt’s Parliament
By ROBERT F. WORTH and MONA EL-NAGGAR
Published: November 30, 2010

CAIRO — As the results of Egypt’s parliamentary elections trickled in Tuesday, no one was surprised that the governing party of President Hosni Mubarak won a huge victory. Nor were they surprised that the candidates of the Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt’s only sizable opposition, took a beating.

On Monday, in front of a news syndicate in Cairo, demonstrators protested what they called vote rigging and fraud in Egypt’s parliamentary elections.

What did surprise some was the Brotherhood’s share of seats in the new Parliament: zero. The Brotherhood, an Islamist movement with 88 seats in the current body and a vast following among Egypt’s 83 million people, was reduced to political nonexistence, at least for the first round of voting. The handful of other opposition parties won only a sprinkling of seats.

“At least get creative in how you rig the elections,” said Hisham Kassem, a newspaper publisher and human rights advocate. “I was expecting a few more seats for the opposition.”

He added: “Nothing can stun me now.”

The numbers could change: 26 Brotherhood candidates will be in runoffs set for Sunday. But the Brotherhood and other opposition groups seemed to view the early results as a sign that the governing National Democratic Party, intent on tightening its grip ahead of next year’s presidential elections, was orchestrating a near monopoly in Parliament’s 518-member lower house…..

The Washington Times – Turkey

Mr. Davutoglu also denied a second report, published recently by the Israeli newspaper Ma’ariv, which quoted him saying that “Israel will not be able to remain an independent country” and calling for a joint Israeli-Palestinian state.

“I don’t know why the Israeli press is doing this always,” he said. “I am a young person … my memory is quite good. I didn’t make such a speech anywhere.”

The Turkish foreign minister met Monday with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton amid the furor over WikiLeaks’ release of over 250,000 U.S. diplomatic cables.

Some of the documents contain dire assessments of Turkey’s foreign policy course, which – under Mr. Davutoglu’s “zero problems with neighbors” doctrine – has included warming ties with Syria and Iran.

In the cables, Ankara-based diplomats call Mr. Davutoglu “extremely dangerous” and say evidence supports the “thesis that [Prime Minister Recep Tayyip] Erdogan simply hates Israel.”

A physicist involved in Iran’s nuclear program was killed in a bombing in Tehran and another scientist was injured in a second blast, authorities said. Majid Shahriari died early today as he was heading to his
teaching job at Shahid Beheshti University, state-run news agencies including Mehr reported. Fereydoun Abasi, a physicist at the same university, was injured along with his wife, Mehr said. The bombs were attached to their cars by magnets, the 30 billion gdp number is in constant real dollars.

Dardari is reporting Syria’s GDP of $30.4 billion in current dollars. If this is right, inflation is 100%,” Ehsani writes. “This is a real shocker to me. Dardari has been telling us that the GDP is $55-60 billion,” he adds.

Syria’s Gross Domestic Product Rises in 2009, Al Watan Reports
By Zahraa Alkhalisi – 2010-11-29. Nov. 29 (Bloomberg)

Syria’s gross domestic product for 2009 rose to 1.42 trillion Syrian pounds ($30.4 billion) from 1.34 trillion pounds the previous year, Al Watan said, citing preliminary information from the Central Bureau of Statistics.

Government Plans to Raise Energy Prices to Market Level by 2015
The Syrian Government is debating the option of increasing the retail price of energy supplies, including electricity and gas oil, and taking them to market levels by 2015, according to the local press. Read

Damascus Bourse to Allow Shares to Fall By as Much as 5% a Day
By Zahra Hankir,2010-11-23Nov. 23 (Bloomberg)

The Damascus Securities Exchange will allow shares to fall by as much as five percent a day, raising the limit from two percent, the Syrian Commission on Financial Markets and Securities said on its website. The decision was implemented as of today, the market regulator said.

Syrian Stock Market Posts Strongest Weekly Decline since Set-Up : The Damascus Securities Exchange fell again this week, with the market’s main index declining by some 2.5 percent.

Poor Decision Making Weakens Trust in Stock Market (Syria Report)
The authority regulating the Syrian securities market took a controversial decision last week only to reverse it a day later amid strong opposition from stakeholders.