The world vs. Syria

February 2005

WASHINGTON DC -- Whether Syria killed Rafik Hariri or did not, one certainty came to the fore: That the Syrian presence in Lebanon came to a crossroads. The Syrian mandate in Lebanon will either be renewed, or terminated.  In either case, the world community – especially the United States – will play a major role.

Unlike what most Arabs think, the United States is never into “liking” an Arab country or “disliking” it. The yardstick of measuring the United States relations with any Arab country, just like other nations measure their foreign relations preferences, is American interest.

In the case of the Middle East, America’s interest is currently concentrated in two countries namely Israel and Iraq. All of America’s policies toward other Arab countries are a function of these countries’ impact on Israel and Iraq.

In the case of American-Syrian relations, several factors are at hand; the least important to the Americans of these factors are Syrian brutality in treating the Lebanese and the Syrians. Even though the Bush administration first announced that it had a vision for a democratic Middle East, rogue state dictatorships like Libya were spared American political pressure and possible military wrath when it disarmed. Disarming Libya was perceived, in the US, as a step that was much important to American national security and superceded the need to topple the Libyan dictator, Moammar Qadhafi, who has been suppressing his people for the last four decades and is now preparing one of his corrupt sons to take over his rule.

Back to Syria and Lebanon.

Lebanon is important to the United States as long as its different sects live in harmony without going to back to their infamous civil war which ended in 1990. Otherwise, the Lebanese impact on Middle Eastern politics is seen as negligible. Even with the Lebanese Hizbullah placed on America’s list of terrorist organization, Lebanon is not taken seriously since America and the whole world know that the Lebanese organization is sponsored by Iran and directed by Syria.

America, therefore, looks forward to see Syria disarm Hizbullah. This is the first bargaining chip is American-Syrian relations.

Syria has also opposed the war on Iraq, cooperated with the deposed Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein and his regime whose figures amassed fortunes in Syrian banks. The remaining figures of the deposed Iraq Baath are said to have taken refuge in Syria. They are also reported as funding and commanding anti-American groups in Iraq.

Therefore, America looks forward for Syria to shut its porous borders with Iraq, stop the flow of arms and money to anti-American groups in Iraq and hand in the Iraqi wanted figures that are still at large. Syria can do the United States a big favor by giving it a hand and helping it end the Iraqi quagmire.

Last, America aspires to see the Syrians leave the Lebanese alone, and democratize their suppressed country.

In terms of priority, America wants to see cooperate on Iraq, then on Hizbullah, then democratize itself and withdraw from Lebanon. With its army bogged down in Iraq, America’s military is thinly overstretched and it cannot take any military action against Syria, and the Syrians know that.

Alternatively, America may employ political pressure on Syria, which at best would lead to already tense and virtually non-existent American-Syrian diplomatic and trade relations.

With America out of sticks for Syria, it is left to offer Syria some carrots. Once America does that, Syria would ask in return for what it perceives as its utmost priority, the renewal of its mandate in Lebanon.

In this case, it looks very tempting for the Americans to trade off giving Lebanon to Syria, and seeing an end to Syrian support of terrorism in Iraq. The bargain would be a renewed version of 1990 when Syria sided with America in its war against Saddam to liberate Kuwait. In return, America gave Syria a freehand in running Lebanon’s affairs. This, to the Americans, is much better than forcing Syria out and seeing Lebanon going back to civil war.

But also alternatively, a third party might step in and offer a bid higher than Syria to salvage America in Iraq. No one looks in a better position to offer such a bid than France. Eager to depict itself as Lebanon’s savior, France can join America’s war on terrorism – at least politically – and ask the United States to join her in increasing pressure on Syria to comply with UNSC resolution 1559. The French bargain seems much more tempting and puts America at an advantage vis-à-vis Syria, toward achieving the American vision of a more democratic and safer Middle East, which – at least to the Americans – means a safer world and ultimately a safer America.