Syria has taken a number of steps to win US favor and get relations back on a solid footing. I had dinner with a Western Diplomat in Damascus whose job is to coordinate with Syrian Security. He was nonplussed by America’s inability to fully engage with Syria and to name an Ambassador to Damascus, the stumbling block preventing better relations. “Why not just name and ambassador?” he wondered. “It is not a concession or humiliation for America. It is natural to have diplomatic relations with countries you want to deal with.” Besides, he listed a number of things Syria has done to build confidence to convince America to move ahead. They are:<\/p>\n
1. Syria gave US diplomats direct access to Syrian intelligence officials. Of course, this did not mean that intelligence officials “gave” Americans useful information, but it was an indication of Syria’s willingness to work together with Americans should the US resume normal diplomatic relations. Evidently, the Americans wanted “a scalp,” or the arrest of a prominent Iraqi opposition member resident in Syria, which they could take home to impress the doubters. Syria refused to give it.<\/p>\n
2. Syria has, according to this diplomat, let Iraqi opposition members resident in Syria know that they must not engage in smuggling, because it will be against Syria’s national security interests. This means that Syria is actively restraining Iraqi opposition leaders from hurting the Maliki government even if Damascus will not turn them over to American or Iraqi officials for interrogation.<\/p>\n
3. Syria has stopped an important shipment of Iranian arms to Hizbullah, using the same rational: it is against Syria’s national security interests. (This suggests that Syria’s and Iran’s defense agreements have an escape clause which hinges on “national security interest.” )<\/p>\n
The Hizballah Dilemma<\/a> By Andrew Lee Butters in Time (Thursday, Jun. 04, 2009)<\/p>\n Butters’ article is one of the best I have read on US policy toward Hizbullah and the region. The US inability to deal with Hizbullah helps explain its inability to properly engaging Syria. Butters underlines why it was such a mistake for the US to partner with Israel in 1982, during during the Jewish State’s invasion of Lebanon. When Hizbullah killed Americans in its effort to defeat Israel and liberate its land, it earned undying US hatred and a desire for vengeance. Israel’s enemies became America’s. Butters gets the following answer from a US State Department official in Beirut when he asks if the US is prepared to talk to Hizbullah:<\/p>\n “Do you ever have any contact with Hizballah these days?” I asked the official. Not only is it illegal for U.S. government officials to have dealings with terrorist organizations, she said, but the photographs of her predecessors killed by Hizballah that hang from the embassy walls serve as a daily reminder of why America doesn’t talk to the group.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The search for vengeance that has taken root between America and its enemies in the Middle East affects even little things. I spoke to a Syrian friend the other day who explained that he had been called in by the mukhabarat (state security) for the first time not long ago. His sin was that he had attended a reception at the US embassy. The security official asked him: “Why do you need to eat the American’s food? They have placed sanctions on us and try to starve us. Do we really need to eat from their table? Isn’t it better that we show them that we can feed outselves?” My friend looked at me — most of his business if with foreign companies — and he said, “I could not disagree.”<\/p>\n To follow Lebanon’s elections<\/strong>:<\/p>\n Sharek961<\/a> invites people to participate – in English and Arabic – through SMS, email, Twitter and web reports on what is happening around the country, from political rallies and polling centres to vote-buying and violence. Sharek961 anonymously publishes these reports alongside news reports, blog posts, photos, videos and tweets, all in one place.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Meshaal on Obama speech: Good, but–<\/a> By Helena Cobban (She has also interviewed Foreign Minister Moualem, so keep tuned to “Just World News.” U.S. Official: Polls to Decide Between Independence and Extremism<\/a><\/p>\n A high-level U.S. official told pan-Arab daily al-Hayat that Lebanon’s parliamentary elections would either put Lebanon on the path of independence or extremism. Sunday’s polls would either put the country on the path of “completing independence and sovereignty” away from foreign meddling or the path of “the forces of violence and extremism to reach political objectives,” the source said in remarks published Friday.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n IAEA Finds More Uranium Traces in Syria<\/a> The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has found traces of uranium at an additional location in Syria, according to the agency’s report from Friday which also focussed on the country’s alleged nuclear reactor site at al-Kibar. The Vienna-based agency made it also clear it did not believe Syria’s explanations about the al-Kibar site that was bombed by Israel in 2007 and which Damascus claims was a conventional military facility.<\/p>\n “The information provided by Syria to date does not adequately support its assertions about the nature of the site,” IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei wrote in the report to member countries.<\/p>\n It was the second find of man-made uranium after IAEA inspectors detected such particles at the bombed site.<\/p>\n The new traces were found at a small reactor in Damascus that is used for education and teaching purposes and that is under routine IAEA surveillance.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Hezbollah Coalition May Win Lebanon Vote in Tilt Away From U.S. June 5 (Bloomberg) — A Hezbollah-led coalition may expand its power in Lebanon\u2019s June 7 parliamentary elections, helping the Iranian-backed Shiite group preserve a militia the U.S. has sought to disband.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The U.S. supports Prime Minister Fouad Siniora and his pro- Western coalition and classifies Hezbollah, led by Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, as a terrorist organization. It also backs United Nations resolutions calling on Hezbollah to disarm its militia, which fought a monthlong war with Israel in 2006.<\/p>\n Significant electoral gains for the Hezbollah bloc would challenge President Barack Obama\u2019s efforts to pacify the Middle East and move toward resolving the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. The group mocks pro-U.S. Arab states such as Egypt for failing to help the Palestinians, and says its private army is essential to defend Lebanon against Israeli attacks.<\/p>\n \u201cWhen the party is in control of the government, it will be harder for Hezbollah\u2019s internal and external opponents to call for its disarmament,\u201d said Amal Saad-Ghorayeb, a professor at the Lebanese American University. \u201cIt would mean the end of a pro-Western government.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Hezbollah, which also has Syrian backing, is set to make gains because \u201cthey respond to grievances, sentiments and emotions of their constituency better,\u201d said Rami G. Khouri, director of the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs at the American University of Beirut. \u201cThey provide social welfare, resistance, services.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Autonomous Militias<\/p>\n A poll conducted earlier this year of about 4,000 people showed the Hezbollah coalition, which includes Christian and other Muslim parties, would win a majority of two or three seats in the 128-member parliament if the election were held at that time. Taken between February and April by the Beirut Center for Research and Information, the poll had a margin of error of 4 percentage points.<\/p>\n The Hezbollah-led bloc currently has 58 seats and the Siniora coalition 70 seats….<\/p>\n As long as Hezbollah maintains its militia, says Marwan Hamadeh, a government lawmaker and Siniora ally, Lebanon will be plagued by political instability and intervention by Iran and Syria.<\/p>\n \u201cWe succeeded in expelling the Syrian army but they\u2019re still here with their militias, intelligence services, aggressive media and unveiled will for a comeback,\u201d Hamadeh said.<\/p>\n The 2005 killing of former Premier Rafiq Hariri in a roadside bomb attack sparked mass protests that forced Syria to end a three-decade military presence in Lebanon, and helped a pro-Western coalition win elections that year.<\/p>\n Political Balancing Act<\/p>\n While Hezbollah has gained popularity by fighting Israel, a larger role in government could blunt its radicalism, said Josh Landis, director of the Center for Middle East Studies at the University of Oklahoma in Norman.<\/p>\n Lebanon\u2019s political system distributes parliament seats and government jobs among different groups. The president is always a Maronite Christian, the prime minister a Sunni Muslim and the speaker of parliament a Shiite.<\/p>\n That makes coalition-building imperative. Hezbollah\u2019s network of allies, for instance, includes a Christian party headed by former army general Michel Aoun. Siniora\u2019s coalition includes Sunnis, Christians and Druze.<\/p>\n \u201cLebanon is a mosaic and it requires consensus and agreement,\u201d Landis said. \u201cUsing the political process to solve important problems allows us to move away from violence and the use of arms.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n From MEMRI <\/a>Jumblatt’s New Strategy<\/p>\n Druze leader Walid Jumblatt recently held a closed-door meeting with a small group of Druze sheikhs loyal to him; the transcript of the meeting was published in the Lebanese daily Al-Akhbar . In the meeting, Jumblatt conveyed a clear and unequivocal message, namely that in light of the growing power of the Shi’ites in Lebanon and the decline in the power of the Druze, the latter must accept the new reality, stop fighting the Shi’ites, and coexist with them.<\/p>\n In support of this position, Jumblatt cited the demographic and political changes in the country. He said that the Shi’ites are growing stronger, both in numbers and in power, while the Sunnis are “more dangerous” than the Shi’ites and the Christians are “dying out.” He also explained that the reality, as well as the attitude towards the Shi’ites, are changing not only in Lebanon but throughout the world, as manifested by Britain’s recent contacts with Hizbullah and the U.S.’s dialogue with Iran; consequently, the Druze too must be realistic and think of the future.<\/p>\n The sheikhs clearly had difficulty in accepting Jumblatt’s position and the new path he urged them to take, but he repeatedly insisted that there was no other choice…..<\/p>\n Jumblatt<\/strong>: “They are the ones who started it in Dir Qoubal.(3) Okay, [but] now can we put an end to it? Or do you want us to create a Druze Karbala?(4) The Sunnis have [already] invented [their own] new Karbala. There was the [original Shi’ite] Karbala of Hassan and Hussein, and now the Sunnis have created a new Karbala called May 7 [out of] the three people who were killed in Beirut. I ask you: shouldn’t we Druze put an end to this matter? They have killed some of our people, and we have killed some of theirs. Shall we stop, or shall we continue the killing? That is the question”\u2026<\/p>\n “On May 7, 2008, the Sunnis Brought in 1,000 Men from [the North]; They Did Not Last More than 15 Minutes [Against Hizbullah] \u2013 We Cannot Start a Religious, Psychological and Political War with the Shi’ites”<\/p>\n “[In 2007-2008, when we argued about who would replace Emil Lahoud as president]… I met with what’s-his-name, [Maronite military leader] Samir Geagea. He wanted war. The Christians wanted us to start a war with the Shi’ites so that they could look on from the sidelines, and even some of the Sunnis wanted there to be a confrontation between the Shi’ites and ourselves. We saw the Sunnis in Beirut [on May 7, 2008]. They brought in 1,000 men from ‘Akar, but they did not last more than 15 minutes [against Hizbullah]. We cannot [afford to] start a religious, psychological and political war with the Shi’ites. Look at those [fundamentalist Sunni Islamists] who shave their mustaches and grow their beards\u2026”<\/p>\n Sheikhs<\/strong>: “They are more dangerous [than the Shi’ites].”…..<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Clinton Rejects Israeli Claims of Accord on Settlements (Post, June 6, 2009)<\/p>\n
\n
\nThe audacity of hope, from Cairo<\/a>, By Sami Moubayed<\/p>\n
\n2009-06-05 17:41:06.297 GMT<\/p>\n
\n<\/a>By Massoud A. Derhally<\/p>\n