For Syria’s Detractors, the Real Issue is Iran

People attend a rally to show support for Syria's President Bashar al-Assad,in Damascus 20 November 2011. (Photo: REUTERS - Sana - Handout)

By: Ibrahim al-Amin

Published Sunday, November 20, 2011

It is not the ongoing confrontation between the regime and pro-reform protesters in Syria that preoccupies the Arab states supporting the overthrow of the Syrian regime. Diplomats from these countries make no mention of the internal situation when discussing their calculations. Instead, they speak candidly of the regional scene and the need for sweeping changes to be made in order to create new options.

In the words of one senior Gulf diplomat, an entire decade and billions of dollars have been spent trying to pull President Bashar Assad away from his alliance with Iran. He adds that efforts were also made to persuade Assad to change his country’s foreign policy in two key areas – Iraq and Lebanon – while keeping Syria’s relations with Iran intact. But to no avail.

Palestine did not figure in these discussions, according to the diplomat. The Arab states felt it was not essential to compel Damascus to toe their line on this issue. They were also wary of forcing Palestinian resistance groups close to Syria to look elsewhere. They were – and still are – hoping the US would agree to an early declaration of a Palestinian state and, eventually, act to help bring one into being. This, to their thinking, would undermine the advocates of armed resistance, and in turn deprive Iran and Syria of a powerful card. If agreement could meanwhile be reached with Assad over Iraq and Lebanon, life would be made harder for Iran and its allies, particularly Hezbollah in Lebanon.

According to the Gulf diplomat, the Syrians did attempt to make some policy changes.

As a result of a series of communications about Iraq – involving Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and other countries – an understanding was reached to support Ayyad Allawi becoming prime minister. Assad initially went along with this, and Syria helped encourage various Iraqi parties to participate in the last general elections. But he then proceeded to renege on the understandings reached with Ankara and the Gulf states and joined Iran in supporting Nouri al-Maliki instead.

This was accompanied by intensive lobbying aimed at bringing all the Iraqi political groups allied to Tehran and Damascus together in a united front. It was clear that the main rationale for forming this coalition was to oppose prolonging the presence of US forces in Iraq, which Allawi had endorsed. To achieve this, the Gulf diplomat said, the Iranians had to work hard to resolve the many disputes preventing Iraqi factions – especially the Sadrist current and the Supreme Islamic Council – from agreeing to join the same government as Maliki.

With regard to Lebanon, the Gulf diplomat said, Turkey and Qatar made a major effort to persuade Saudi Arabia to put on hold the issue of the UN Special Tribunal (STL) dealing with the assassination of former prime minister Rafiq Hariri. This entailed a deal under which then-premier Saad Hariri would make concessions over the STL in exchange for remaining in office. The terms were clearly spelled out in the final paper that was agreed upon. But Assad, the Gulf diplomat charged, deferred to Iran and Hezbollah and opted to oust Hariri.

The Qataris and Turks tried to patch things up. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyep Erdogan and the Emir of Qatar Hamad bin Khalifa even paid a surprise visit to Damascus – they were already airborne when Assad learned they were coming. According to the diplomat, the pair departed from the Syrian capital under the impression that Assad would persuade Hezbollah to accept the deal. But their respective foreign ministers, Ahmet Davetoglu and Hamad bin Jasem, were then told to their surprise that Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah had given it the thumbs-down, and that the then-opposition would press ahead with its moves to depose Hariri, who was duly toppled.

The Gulf diplomat had little to say about the nature of contacts with Syria in the immediate aftermath of these events. But he indicated that things took a new turn after protests broke out in towns across Syria and it became clear that the regime was unable to contain the situation. It was decided to devise, and forcefully pursue, a plan aimed at forcing Assad to make concessions on two fronts. First, to share power with an expanded array of political forces – the Turks and Qataris made clear in their correspondence and discussions that this meant the Muslim Brotherhood. Secondly, to put Syria’s foreign policy in abeyance, pending its reformulation to reflect the new political order.

Syria’s response was to halt all further contacts. Assad saw these stipulations as American dictates. He told a number of Arab and other visitors that these same demands had previously been conveyed to him directly by the US, and also via Europeans.

The senior Gulf diplomat left many questions unanswered. But it is safe to say that the US-European-Gulf axis will continue piling the political, security and economic pressure on the regime in Syria, and that it is likely to go further.

Ibrahim al-Amin is editor-in-chief of Al-Akhbar.

This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.

Comments

What i do not realize is in reality how you are no longer really much more well-favored than you might be right now. You're very intelligent. You understand thus considerably with regards to this subject, produced me personally believe it from so many varied angles. Its like women and men aren't involved until it is something to accomplish with Lady gaga! Your individual stuffs great. Always deal with it up!

Hassan Nassrallah in Lebanon thinks that revolutions are only contagious in Bahrain, Egypt, etc, but not Syria. I think history will prove Nassrallah dead wrong this time. Even if his supporters think that he's the "Mahdi", he won't be able to save the regime of Bashar.

Sayyed Nasrallah Clarifies Hezbollah's Position towards Situation in Syria - ENG Subs

check this on Youtube. The uploader don`t let me comment on his video. I wanted to clear the false explanations of Nasrallah. But he blocks my comments.

The Assad Regime is a fake Sadam Hussain Regime. Both are Baathist Arab Nationalist. Even Saddam was more nationalistic .Both are or were minority sects in there country. Both aliened themselves with other minorities like christians and majority sect puppets and clerics. I mean the former iraqi foreign minister was a christian. Both killed a lot of the majority sects. Assad senior killed 1982 about 47000 sunnis in Hama alone. Not to mention torturing them. Saddam did the same. Maybe he killed much more. But I have no numbers.

so you think you've unearthed the mother of all analogies with this. a pattern is starting to develop in your comments. you're parsing out the world in clear cut black and white terms, like dubya did. It's not so simple. Historically, Hezbollah has always taken positions, even at their own expense, which allowed them to fulfill their agenda which is resistance to the zionist entity. Besides, what do you care what the Sayed says. If it's a popular revolution, it'll happen no matter what he says or what position he takes. I for one believe that the uprising has been hijacked by the Saudi/Qatari/US-franco interests as Joseph Mass'ad said. Also, find on this site, the interview that was done with Haytham Al-Manna and see what he said about the Ikhwan and their attempts to inflate their representation in the opposition. You must agree that he is a credible source in the syrian opposition and a staunch opponent of the regime.

Since when NATO/Saudis are on the side of revolution? What is their role in REAL revolutions - i.e. the same Egypt and Bahrain?

One does not need to wait for "history" - just look into history of the ME, including Libya. What a great revolution NATO/Saudis made in Libya! Do detractors of Nassrallah want the same plight for Syrians?

Stop using the fake Anti-imperialist card. Why he don`t build an alliance with sadam back in the days. Why. They were both Baathist.

It is NOT fake but truth to point into imperialist/Saudis/Zionist support for anti-Assad "revolutionaries". Those forces are still not worth believing no matter their target. They are not for good in ANY case, period.

that's very insightful comment. very original too. I can't wait for history to unfold.

Yes, just wait for History to unfold, because this time his calculation is not on the side of the Syrian people (who were the real generous host during the 2006 war).

can't wait. I am too impatient. I have ADD. Firstly I love syria and the syrian people and I do want for the syrians a country and a regime that respects each and every one of them. trust me my friend, I don't think it's ok that this regime continues its mistreatment of its population whether pre or intra-uprising. That has to stop and people have to be held accountable. The comments the sayed made ( I am not a secular leftist or anti-rafidha so I call him "Sayed" if you allow me) do not mean that he wants that the people continue to suffer at the hands of the regime. However, one cannot ignore the amount of external meddling into the syrian uprising, western and otherwise who are direct enemies of Hezbollah. You just can't expect the Sayed to be one day a close ally to Bashar and an opponent the next when that's taking place. And by the way, you knew that the Sayed was a close ally of Bashar in 2006 why didn't that stop your generosity. And why would a good-natured person remind of one's own generosity? Is that a threat? So you will not be as generous the next time Hezbollah takes on the zionist entity? ta7ya Souriya.

Yeah, and you want me to believe that he’s unlike the other sectarian leaders in Lebanon, that he’s does not take orders from regional powers!

I don't want you to believe anything. but you should only believe that which can't be refuted (except in the case of religion, there it's a matter of choice).

what do you think about the massacre of 47000 Hama residents in 1982? Are you a former fan of saddam Hussain since he fired rockets on the zionists and hold anti-american stands. Plus he was anti-gulf too.

no I am not. I never was a fan. You're in a quandary now, aren't you

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><img><h1><h2><h3><h4><h5><h6><blockquote><span><aside>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.
^ Back to Top