It’s time for the U.S to engage Syria in “Serious” talk
In the past 3 years the current U.S administration has opted to follow a policy of disengagement and isolation with the Syrian regime. Today this policy continues to be the cornerstone of the Bush administration, yet developments on the ground are proving it fruitless. This administration must open the way to the next one and lay down the ground work for a new foreign policy towards Syria that will be pivotal in securing U.S interests
and restoring some of the U.S influence lost in the region since the start of the Iraq war. Syria is begging for Washington’s attention, The White House ought to listen.
Background
Following the assassination of the Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in 2005, the U.S pulled its ambassador out of Damascus and worked tirelessly to isolate the regime regionally and internationally. U.S demands were simple and direct, stop the flow of jihadists and foreign fighters into Iraq, stop the support of terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah, Hamas, and Islamic Jihad, stop interfering into the Lebanese internal affairs, respect its citizen’s civil-rights and cooperate positively with the international community to bring peace and stability to the region.
After Hezbollah’s military coup earlier this year, the Prince of Qatar Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani invited all Lebanese factions to a round-table which produced the Doha Agreement on May 21 that ended an 18 months long political crisis in Lebanon. But not before Sheikh Hamad met with President Bashar Assad in Damascus two days prior to the Doha Conference. President Michele Suleiman was elected soon after and a national unity government was formed. Syria naturally claimed the credit for the agreement.
Things moved faster since then, in July President Nicolas Sarkozy invited President Assad to attend the summit of European and Mediterreanean countries and Syria was back on the world stage with fury. French President Sarkozy reciprocated with a visit this month which put him on the same table with President Bashar Assad, Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and Qatar’s Emir Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani. The quartet summit was trumpeted by the official Syrian news media and its pundits as a success for the wise and clever maneuvering of President Assad’s foreign policy in placing Syria back into the preeminent position of the sole “key” player in the Middle-East.
In June, Israel with its beleaguered Prime Minister Ehud Olmert felt it worth the time and efforts to open up indirect negotiations through the Turkish channel with Syria on the issue of the Golan Heights with the hope to distance Syria from its alliance with Iran and stop its support to Hizbollah and other terrorist organizations.
But President Assad didn't stop there, during the Georgia/Russian crisis these past few weeks President Assad tried but failed to re-ignite a cold war stand in the region. His press statements inviting Russia to counter the U.S move in deploying missiles in Poland by opening Syrian territory for missile deployments and requesting the purchase of ground-to-air missiles were rebuffed by Putin and Medvedev immediately.
While all this going on, the U.S did not flinch nor changed its stand when it comes to its demands from Syria and such policy should not be changed.
What needs to be changed is the position of "no dialogue".
The U.S has lost and continues to lose its influence in the region. Most Arab countries have adopted the position of "not with the U.S but not against it" in terms of their respective foreign policies. A necessary step in a region filled with popular hatred towards the U.S and on the verge of another regional all out war. Israel nerves are being shattered by the prospect of a nuclear Iran and a nervous Israel could and would be the spark needed for such a war.
Conclusion
U.S moral and political influence in the region is at an all time low in the Arab world. China, India, and other Asian countries are reaping the economic benefits of such a position. France and Europe are taking clues from those countries actions and moving to fill the gab. At a time when the U.S economy is in desperate need of developing markets to offset its economic crisis at home the U.S must regain some of that influence and in the same time repair its tarnished moral position in the region by being part of the solution instead of being popularly perceived as the problem.
The debate raging for the past few months in Washington's think-tank circles whether such a U.S policy towards Syria is making any sense is a valid one.
President Bush goals for the new democratic Middle-East free from fundamentalism and extremism is also valid. Yet without dialogue none of these objectives can be achieved. The U.S position in the M.E while militarily strong, yet the diplomatic is suffering from serious credibility issue and has severely been damaged since the start of the Iraq war. I say engage Syria in a serious talk today on one condition only, the release of those prisoners of conscious out of Syrian jails. Top of the list are the "Damascus Declaration Council Members" and in return the U.S will send its ambassador back into the country. The other U.S demands can be dealt with one by one but not without an ambassador as the conduit for dialogue.
In his State of the Union address in Jan. 2004 President Bush answered his critics of his new vision for a democratic Middle-East with an eloquent clarity; “We also hear doubts that democracy is a realistic goal for the greater Middle East, where freedom is rare. Yet it is mistaken, and condescending, to assume that whole cultures and great religions are incompatible with liberty and self-government. I believe that God has planted in every human heart the desire to live in freedom. And even when that desire is crushed by tyranny for decades, it will rise again.”
Supporting authoritarian regimes has been the single biggest factor in damaging U.S popular perception in the region. The U.S can not afford to be reluctant in its efforts to win the hearts and minds of the Arab population to repair its tarnished moral position.
Democracy promoters in Syria are the only hope for "flipping" the regime, let us stand behind them without the barrel of a gun, and they will be the best long term foreign policy guarantee for the U.S which will advance the forces of moderation and stability in the Middle-East.
and restoring some of the U.S influence lost in the region since the start of the Iraq war. Syria is begging for Washington’s attention, The White House ought to listen.
Background
Following the assassination of the Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in 2005, the U.S pulled its ambassador out of Damascus and worked tirelessly to isolate the regime regionally and internationally. U.S demands were simple and direct, stop the flow of jihadists and foreign fighters into Iraq, stop the support of terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah, Hamas, and Islamic Jihad, stop interfering into the Lebanese internal affairs, respect its citizen’s civil-rights and cooperate positively with the international community to bring peace and stability to the region.
After Hezbollah’s military coup earlier this year, the Prince of Qatar Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani invited all Lebanese factions to a round-table which produced the Doha Agreement on May 21 that ended an 18 months long political crisis in Lebanon. But not before Sheikh Hamad met with President Bashar Assad in Damascus two days prior to the Doha Conference. President Michele Suleiman was elected soon after and a national unity government was formed. Syria naturally claimed the credit for the agreement.
Things moved faster since then, in July President Nicolas Sarkozy invited President Assad to attend the summit of European and Mediterreanean countries and Syria was back on the world stage with fury. French President Sarkozy reciprocated with a visit this month which put him on the same table with President Bashar Assad, Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and Qatar’s Emir Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani. The quartet summit was trumpeted by the official Syrian news media and its pundits as a success for the wise and clever maneuvering of President Assad’s foreign policy in placing Syria back into the preeminent position of the sole “key” player in the Middle-East.
In June, Israel with its beleaguered Prime Minister Ehud Olmert felt it worth the time and efforts to open up indirect negotiations through the Turkish channel with Syria on the issue of the Golan Heights with the hope to distance Syria from its alliance with Iran and stop its support to Hizbollah and other terrorist organizations.
But President Assad didn't stop there, during the Georgia/Russian crisis these past few weeks President Assad tried but failed to re-ignite a cold war stand in the region. His press statements inviting Russia to counter the U.S move in deploying missiles in Poland by opening Syrian territory for missile deployments and requesting the purchase of ground-to-air missiles were rebuffed by Putin and Medvedev immediately.
While all this going on, the U.S did not flinch nor changed its stand when it comes to its demands from Syria and such policy should not be changed.
What needs to be changed is the position of "no dialogue".
The U.S has lost and continues to lose its influence in the region. Most Arab countries have adopted the position of "not with the U.S but not against it" in terms of their respective foreign policies. A necessary step in a region filled with popular hatred towards the U.S and on the verge of another regional all out war. Israel nerves are being shattered by the prospect of a nuclear Iran and a nervous Israel could and would be the spark needed for such a war.
Conclusion
U.S moral and political influence in the region is at an all time low in the Arab world. China, India, and other Asian countries are reaping the economic benefits of such a position. France and Europe are taking clues from those countries actions and moving to fill the gab. At a time when the U.S economy is in desperate need of developing markets to offset its economic crisis at home the U.S must regain some of that influence and in the same time repair its tarnished moral position in the region by being part of the solution instead of being popularly perceived as the problem.
The debate raging for the past few months in Washington's think-tank circles whether such a U.S policy towards Syria is making any sense is a valid one.
President Bush goals for the new democratic Middle-East free from fundamentalism and extremism is also valid. Yet without dialogue none of these objectives can be achieved. The U.S position in the M.E while militarily strong, yet the diplomatic is suffering from serious credibility issue and has severely been damaged since the start of the Iraq war. I say engage Syria in a serious talk today on one condition only, the release of those prisoners of conscious out of Syrian jails. Top of the list are the "Damascus Declaration Council Members" and in return the U.S will send its ambassador back into the country. The other U.S demands can be dealt with one by one but not without an ambassador as the conduit for dialogue.
In his State of the Union address in Jan. 2004 President Bush answered his critics of his new vision for a democratic Middle-East with an eloquent clarity; “We also hear doubts that democracy is a realistic goal for the greater Middle East, where freedom is rare. Yet it is mistaken, and condescending, to assume that whole cultures and great religions are incompatible with liberty and self-government. I believe that God has planted in every human heart the desire to live in freedom. And even when that desire is crushed by tyranny for decades, it will rise again.”
Supporting authoritarian regimes has been the single biggest factor in damaging U.S popular perception in the region. The U.S can not afford to be reluctant in its efforts to win the hearts and minds of the Arab population to repair its tarnished moral position.
Democracy promoters in Syria are the only hope for "flipping" the regime, let us stand behind them without the barrel of a gun, and they will be the best long term foreign policy guarantee for the U.S which will advance the forces of moderation and stability in the Middle-East.
تعليقات