By Nizar Abdel-Kader
Robert Ford, the first American ambassador to Syria since 2005, arrived in Damascus on Sunday, January 16, during a time of regional turmoil with mutual and continuing distrust between Washington and Damascus.
This distrust was clearly expressed when the Obama administration accused Syria and Iran of destabilizing Lebanon by providing arms to Hezbollah. Such harsh criticism came from the US ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, in October last year. Dr. Rice accused Syria and Iran of seeking to undermine Lebanon’s independence and stability, emphasizing, “If Syria wants to have a better relationship with the United States, then it has to be a more constructive player in the region.”
Ford took up his post just as Hezbollah and its allies, supported by Syria, brought down the Lebanese government while Prime Minister Saad Hariri was sitting in the White House, meeting with President Barack Obama.
The return of a US ambassador to Damascus was a controversial issue between Obama and the Republicans. Obama’s decision to dispatch his ambassador to Syria during Congress’ recess is consistent with his pledge as a presidential candidate to open channels of communication with Syria and Iran. He is signaling that the US is no longer in the business of trying to isolate Syria. To Republican congressmen and a few officials within the administration, to send an ambassador to Syria was seen as rewarding it– at the wrong time, with no guarantee of gestures made in return.
The main argument for the return of an American ambassador to Damascus was centered on the idea of splitting Syria from Iran. The idea has been around for a long time–since the Syrian-Iranian alliance took shape in the early 1980s. Syria was playing a negative role towards the Lebanese government and the Palestinian Authority, as well as in regional nuclear proliferation.
With the return of the US ambassador to Damascus, is there some hope for a grand bargain to be made between the US and Syria? If so, what do the Syrians expect it to be and what is the US ready to give?
In my opinion, the Syrians are masters of spin. It will be very hard for the Obama administration to satisfy Syrian ambitions to remain a major regional player. Soon, the Obama administration will have to convey a serious warning and ratchet up pressure on Damascus to reverse its disruptive policies in Lebanon and destructive action vis-a-vis the Palestinian-Israeli peace process. Syria has long played a negative role backing Palestinian rejectionist factions, and it is solidly backing Hamas and harboring its leadership.
The situation in Lebanon serves as a real test of Washington’s diplomatic outreach to Syria, especially as the Syrian president seems most likely to stand by Hezbollah and Iran in their demand to negate the indictments of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon. Syria, for one, has tried to soften the impact of upcoming indictments by discrediting the court. This attitude goes hand-in-hand with the positions taken by Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khomeini, and by Hezbollah’s General Secretary Hassan Nasrallah, who are saying that the court’s findings were influenced by Israel and the US and thus are null and void.
The main question facing the Obama administration now is what kind of leverage it might have over the Syrian regime to stop it from driving Lebanon towards a deadlock in the process of forming a new government. The US should make it clear that Syria should pay a price for the new diplomatic overture by ending its bullying role towards Lebanon.-Published 20/01/2011 © bitterlemons-international.org
Nizar Abdel-Kader is a political analyst and columnist at Ad-Diyar newspaper in Beirut.
