What is American Planning for Syria? 3 Articles

I am leaving for Beirut for 4 days and will be giving a lecture at AUB at 4:00 on Thursday afternoon, October 13 in Nicely Hall, Rm. 409. It will be on public diplomacy and I will be sharing the podium with the Public affairs officer from the US embassy, Juliet Wurr. (I originally wrote Wednesday by mistake! It is Thursday.)

I leave my readers with these three interesting, if a bit overblown, articles. (Thanks to my readers for sending them to me.)

A toy called Assad
By Zvi Bar'el
09/10/2005 Haaretz

Like a cat that tortures a lizard it found in the yard, first plucking its tail, then tearing off a leg before finally boring with it, seems to be U.S. President George W. Bush's attitude toward Syrian President Bashar Assad. Since the beginning of the war against Iraq, Assad has become Bush's toy - until he succeeded in building him up to an enemy on the scale of Saddam Hussein, or at least the president of Iran.

This inflation of the Syrian doll has been so successful that today, without a doubt, if there is someone to blame for the failure of the war against terror in Iraq, it is Assad. If there is someone who threatens the peace of the region, it is Assad. And if there is a leader whose deposal would make all of the U.S.'s problems in the region vanish - lo and behold - it is Assad. Thus, a head of state who is considered a weakling in the eyes of several important Arab leaders and whose deposal the administration in Washington allows itself to publicly contemplate has managed to become such a global threat that he is the subject of complete paragraphs in all of Bush's declarations. And not only in these declarations.

For example, when the president of Turkey visited Washington in June, Bush scolded him for his warm relations with Syria. A substantial part of the conversations Bush conducts with Putin revolve around "the problems Assad is causing in Iraq." And Washington has forged close ties with its rival, France, on the Lebanon issue, for one, because France agreed to cold shoulder Assad. American officials have been leaking information for several weeks about "examining the role of President Assad." And now Washington is building high expectations about the international commission of inquiry chaired by German prosecutor Detlev Mehlis on the murder of Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri. Assad brought President Hosni Mubarak the transcripts of the investigations conducted by Mehlis in Syria, which according to Assad, clearly indicate his regime was not involved in the murder of Hariri. But even if Assad emerges from this inquiry as pure as snow, he will still be guilty.

The building of the American file against Assad is so blatant that there are already those who are sketching scenarios of peace with Syria in the post- Assad era, or at least looking into who would replace him. But don't hold your breath. Assad is a weak leader and it can't be said he possesses any great political insight, but he is an Arab leader and therefore Mubarak and the Saudi King Abdullah were quick to publicly declare two weeks ago that they would not lend a hand to isolating Syria. Neither would Iran and Russia.

But that is not the important thing. Because Syria is not just Assad. Today there are many who wish to see him fall from power, and not all of them would replace him with a leader "desirable" to the West. For example, the fanatic Muslim Brotherhood maintains extensive activity in Syria and is demanding reforms that would allow it to participate in government. Rifat Assad, Bashar's uncle, has aspirations and devotees of his own, who are liable to constitute a more serious regional danger if they were to attain power. A real danger is anticipated from radical organizations, such as those operating today in Iraq, which seek to participate in internal battles and build themselves another stronghold if and when Assad is deposed.

The bloody settling of accounts that is so familiar from Iraq could also easily develop in Syria between those faithful to the Baath regime and those who wish to take over the reins of power. And the Kurds of Syria, the Iranian Revolutionary Guards and the Palestinian organizations would also have something "to contribute" to the turmoil that is liable to develop.

In a situation of internal struggle over a regime in which too many parties are armed, the Iraqization of Syria is not an imaginary scenario. And in such an event, Israel's quietest border is liable to reawaken in a thunder. The Afghani and Iraqi models should already have made it clear what happens when a regime is "revived" from the outside. But how it is possible to give up such an easy plaything?

Assad on the rocks
By NIR BOMS
Oct. 9, 2005

Facing additional pressures at home and abroad, the schedule of Bashar al-Assad, Syria's president, is particularly busy these days. There is much to do and time is of the essence. His timing, however, does not seem to work.

For example, President Assad had planned to head his country's delegation to the United Nations summit last month. While restlessness was growing in Damascus, Assad could have benefited from a visit designed to ease Syria's international isolation and show the 40-year-old president as a young reformist Arab ruler.

But following unwelcoming signals from Washington and increasing turmoil at home, Assad was forced to stay behind.

The accusing fingers in the wake of the February assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri appeared to have come closer to Assad's own door. Detlev Mehlis, the chief UN investigator appointed to investigate the murder, had already named four pro-Syrian Lebanese security officials as suspects. Now with the help of the French and other secret services he is shining the spotlight directly on Damascus and possibly to the presidential palace itself.

Meanwhile, on the domestic front, the Syrian Central Bureau of Statistics and the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) has just published a study categorizing 30 percent of Syria's 18.3 million people as poor, including 2.2 million who are unable to provide for their own basic needs. This study was joined by an International Monetary Fund (IMF) report released last week warning that, baring significant reforms, Syria may become "locked in a cycle of financial volatility, fiscal deterioration, low growth and rising unemployment."

Since coming to power in June 2000, Assad has little to show to his credit. The removal of Iraq's Saddam Hussein not only deprived Assad of his sole remaining Ba'athist ally, but also of a significant source of income that came partly through the UN's massive Oil for Food scheme.

Assad's perceived lack of ability to curb international pressures has caused Syria to unilaterally withdraw from Lebanon, creating a severe financial and prestige crisis in the ranks of the Syrian army. But that withdrawal, unlike the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, has brought little international credit to Assad.

On the contrary, Syria's lack of ability (or will) to control its border with Iraq have not only showed its weakness but also further heightened the level of the American frustration with Syria. Even before President George Bush singled Syria out (along with Iran) as a terrorist-supporting regime in his get-tough speech last week, US Ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad said that American "patience is running out" and that other options will be considered should Syria fail to take matters into its own hands.

This, of course, is making some old Ba'athist stagers desperately unhappy with their eye-doctor-turned-president. Some have already decided to abandon ship.

Asif Shawkat, the head of the Syrian military intelligence and a brother-in-law of the Syrian president flew to Paris accompanied by his wife and children. Shawkat, reportedly, is one of the people wanted by the UN team for questioning over the Hariri murder, and joins another Syrian intelligence colonel, who defected to France with information about the explosives that killed Hariri and about tape recordings recently transferred to the UN investigation team.

Shawkat's testimony has the potential to seal the fate of Assad's regime. Not only is he closely related to Bashar al-Assad, but he has been heavily involved in the intimate planning and implementing of each spoiling action undertaken by the regime.

Shawkat ran a front company during the Oil-for-Food scam and took over from General Hassan Khalil as head of Syrian Intelligence following the Hariri assassination. He is perhaps the most pivotal member of the Syrian government, with the most intimate knowledge of Syrian secrets.

'In Damascus, fear is now in the camp of power, the camp of Bashar," a senior official told The Washington Post. Following decades of tight Ba'athist control, the fear factor appears to have moved closer to the Ba'athist camp itself. And the Syrian opposition can sense that.
The Syrian opposition, a term that was an oxymoron just two years ago, has now over 20 visible outlets, with an increasing number of political activists who meet regularly inside and outside Syria. The Syrian Democratic Coalition, a group of 10 Syrian opposition groups led by Farid Ghadry, have just announced the convening of the largest such opposition conference in Europe. In a location yet to be announced, these organizations will unveil a new draft constitution, a registry for Syrians to vote, and the establishment of a parliament in exile.

These developments already indicate that the Assad regime is losing steam and may approach a tipping point that could potentially change the balance of power in Syria. The US should sit tight as Assad, caught in a trap of its own making, will struggle to give answers to the UN prosecutor on the one hand, and to his growing circle of critics on the other. Again, Assad may be forced to stay behind. In the meantime, the US and Europe should open their ears to hear the new Syrian voices. They may be more important than many now think.

The writer is vice president of the Center for Freedom in the Middle East.

Blundering Into Syria?
The Triumph of Ideology Over Reality
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

Not content with the terrorist-breeding instability he caused by invading Iraq, President Bush is plotting with Israel to repeat the disaster in Syria. The diplomatic editor of the London Telegraph reports (Oct. 5) that the US is aiming at Syrian "regime change."

The British newspaper quotes Israeli defense minister Shaul Mofaz as saying that a report blaming Syria for the assassination of a former Lebanese government official will be the catalyst that starts the ball rolling. Mofaz says the report will be the pretext for Bush to impose sanctions on Syria, "beginning with economic sanctions and moving on to others." The Israeli newspaper, Haaretz, reports (Oct. 3) that the Bush administration has asked Israel's government to recommend a successor for Syrian president Bashar al Assad.

No doubt, the Bush administration will describe Israel's selection of Syria's new president as the workings of democracy. The Stratfor Intelligence Brief reports (Oct. 5) that Bush's National Security Council is deciding whether to bomb Syrian villages along what are thought to be "the infiltration routes used by jihadists" and to have US special forces conduct operations inside Syrian territory.

Obviously, far from heeding demands from US generals and congressional members of his own political party for a plan to withdraw from Iraq, Bush intends to widen the war. How can Bush, his National Security Council, and Israel be so blind to the consequences of destabilizing Syria? A CIA report concluded that the US invasion of Iraq created a training ground for al Qaeda. Doesn't Bush understand that creating chaos in Syria will have the same result?

The National Security Council needs to quickly consult some real Middle East experts before Bush's reckless policies in the face of seething anti-American sentiment cause the overthrow of US puppet rulers in Egypt, Jordan, and Pakistan, and dethrone the princes ruling the American oil protectorates in the Middle East. If the Bush administration cannot defeat insurgency in Iraq, how can it defeat insurgency in Iraq and Syria? In Iraq, Syria, and Iran?

The Bush administration is fanatical, divorced from reality. Last week Lt. Gen. William Odom, former director of the National Security Agency, said that Bush's invasion of Iraq was "the greatest strategic disaster in US history." This is quite a distinction for Bush and his government. Are the morons now going to double the distinction by attacking Syria and quadruple it by attacking Iran? Why don't Congress and the American public understand that the US cannot afford to worsen the disaster in which it finds itself?

Nothing better illustrates the reality-denying capability of the Bush administration than its secretary of state Condi Rice's speech at Princeton University on September 30. It is a fantasy speech, devoid of awareness that "regime change" in Iraq substituted Shi'ite clergy for a secular ruler. The US secretary of state has no inkling of the conflict generated between Shi'ite, Sunni and Kurd by the US imposed attempt to produce and to adopt a constitution? The Bush administration's Middle East policy is the triumph of ideology over reality.

Something must be done to stop Bush before he mimics in the MIddle East Hitler's invasion of Russia. The American people cannot afford the blood and treasure that the fanatical Bush administration is willing to squander in the Middle East. What can be done about a president who is immune to reason? A bill of impeachment is a good start. The Bush administration has already done more damage to Americans than the September 11 attacks. The American people and their congressional representatives must hold Bush accountable before it is too late.

The Bush administration has no intention of stopping with Iraq. At Princeton, Condi Rice again declared the administration's intention to use US military force to transform the societies in the Middle East. "Now is not the time to falter or fade," declared the US secretary of state. Such total oblivion to the "greatest strategic disaster in US history" is far more scary than Muslim terrorists.

Paul Craig Roberts has held a number of academic appointments and has contributed to numerous scholarly publications. He served as Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. His graduate economics education was at the University of Virginia, the University of California at Berkeley, and Oxford University. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions. He can be reached at: paulcraigroberts@yahoo.com

Also see MEMRI's
Increasing Tension between Syria and Lebanon
By H. Avraham, October 9, 2005