End of the Comment Section

Syria Comment no longer has a comment section. I have decided to eliminate it. A small handful of people have effectively "taken over this platform," as they trumpeted. They bullied and insulted anyone who disagreed with them, chasing off most commentators. It wasn't civil and it didn't promote anything constructive. It became a detriment to my effort to promote different views. A number of my regular contributors said they didn't want to have their articles posted, either because they didn't want to be insulted by the commentators or because they didn't want to be associated with them by sharing the same internet site.

I have tried to warn the commentators to be more civil several times if they wished to have the comment page continued, but to no avail.

Best,
Joshua Landis

Why Washington will NOT make a deal over Mehlis Report

Here is what one friend wrote to me based on Michael Young's recent commentary in the Daily Star here.

There have been suggestions in recent press analyses that Assad is out to cut a deal, any deal, to salvage his regime. In exchange for being declared innocent of the Hariri hit by Mehlis, the Syrians are said to be willing to do whatever the United States wants them to - in Iraq, Lebanon, on the Palestinian front, and on the Golan Heights. The buzz is that Assad's visit to New York for the annual General Assembly session is designed to reach such an arrangement with the Bush administration.

Many Lebanese are very excited about the prospect of nailing Syria for Hariri's murder by the use of international courts, the Mehlis report, and perhaps another UN resolution, which would sanction Syria further. Many have talked themselves into the notion that the Syrian regime is weak because of its withdrawal from Lebanon and America's presence in Iraq and can be toppled by further international pressure. I think this is wrong.

I cannot believe that Bashar is going to the US for a deal. He is going to New York and the UN because Washington will not talk to him and refuses to make a deal. That is my hunch. He is trying to break out of his isolation. If he had a deal, he would not have to go. With so many expectations now stirred up over the Mehlis report, it is probably too late for a deal. Chirac is on record saying that no deal will be made and the full truth needs to come out. The Washington hawks are more likely to be waiting for his arrival in New York with glee, so they can rip his eyes out. They will paint him as a murderer and not a reformer. If the Mehlis report turns out to be damning for Bashar, he may well cancel his visit to the UN and New York. Some in Washington are already guessing he will cancel.

Here is an earlier article by Michael Young, "What If Syria Is Guilty? ," (copied in full blow) in which he prays that Hizbullah is not connect to the Hariri's murder, but that Syria is and will be taken down. Young has long argued that true democracy will only be realizable in Lebanon, when Syria becomes democratic. Michael argues that Lebanon will always be a dependent state so long as the region is dominated by Arabism and authoritarianism. This belief is one reason why many in Lebanon argue it is so important to marshal the West to deal a lethal blow to the Syrian Baathist state.

Here is a letter that I wrote a friend in the States yesterday trying to explain why I think Lebanon will be doing itself a disservice by getting on board a US and UN frontal attack on Bashar al-Asad and the Syrian regime.

The big question here is the Mehlis report, which is likely to destroy his plans. Now that it is due to be published (mid-September is the new date) at the time of Bashar's arrival, he may decide to back out, but I haven't heard anything about that.

The arrests of the top Syrian intelligence guys in Beirut by Mehlis have got everyone buzzing. The Lebanese are frothing at the mouth to get Syria. I don't see how they can. If I were they, I would concentrate on hitting the people I could kill off - the Lebanese security apparatus that is compromised and perhaps even Lahoud. They could then carry out the last steps of the Cedar revolution that Syria frustrated. I would give Syria a pass with a wink and a nod, leaving that battle for another day, because it is a loser for Lebanon.

Lebanon is externalizing its problems again. It will play the poor victim when all of this turns sour on them and they get stuck in the middle of an American-Syrian battle. Their government will be torn apart over it and will miss the window of good will they have from the West to get something constructive done - get debt re-scheduled, push through economic reforms and begin to confront massive corruption and payola which has driven their debt to the moon. Once Lebanon has been used to squeeze Syria and has failed to build an effective central government it will be forgotten by the West because it will be useless. "America will be stuck with Lebanon and Iraq - and where will that get them?" That is what one smart Syrian businessman remarked to me the other day. He is well plugged in, lives in France much of the year

Syria cannot take revenge on America, but it can kick Lebanon, which it will do with glee. The national sentiment here is high when it comes to anti-Lebanonism and the regime has been playing it. The border closings were very popular. We will likely see more of them if the Mehlis report is bad. This is just what Syria asked Lebanon not to do - to be used as a US aircraft carrier to attack Syria. Lebanon will get lost in this battle. I understand the Lebanese desire for justice and to get back at the Syrians for their misdeeds, but I can't believe this is what Hariri would do, or want, if he were alive. He was Mr. Lebanon and would have thought about what he could accomplish for Lebanon.

It is brave of Asad to go to New York - maybe foolish now. He needs to do something because he has been really frozen out - even by the Europeans. Chirac is playing ball with Washington and Bashar is in deep isolation. He cannot get invited anywhere and no one will come see him. Several people I spoken with recently, complained about this, but get their back up when asked why they don't cooperate more. They think they are cooperating. They insist that Syria will do reform on its own. Import from the East, etc., scrape by.

If the headlines in all the US papers and TV chat will be that Bashar is a murderer and not "a reformer," as he hopes he can spin them, than his trip will be a humiliation.

Syria is now in a state of confusion. Many people are wondering if Bashar will announce a new government before he goes to New York. It is coming soon, whichever. In the meantime, no one knows where Syria is headed. Most of the people he is rumored to appoint are good. There will be more technocrats. The big questions are over who will be prime minister and how much power Dardari - the new deputy prime minister - will have. Dardari is the big hope now. He has many new plans in the works for investment laws, etc. But he doesn't have the power to make them work. They need to fire lots of people deep-down into the various ministries and hire new people, but they can't. The top pay allowed in the ministries is $300 dollars according to state law. No one good comes for that. It only breeds corruption. Most of the good people are hired as consultants through the UN. That is the only way around the salary cap here, and it is what Dardari is doing. But there is a limit to how many people he can bring on board that way. It is a mess.

But Syria will stumble through. There are many good people here and they are trying to make a go of it. They bitch and moan about government incompetence, but they are also optimistic. Perhaps they are crazy. I spoke to a young and smart guy from the Aleppine elite this morning. He came over wanting to chat Aleppo - during his Damascus visit. He said the young elite of Aleppo were making money and optimistic about the future. He also said they like Bashar. They don't like the amount of lying and cheating they must do to make things happen in their businesses, but they are making money and still take Bashar at his word. they think he is trying and headed in the right direction.

It is the poor that are getting whacked here. New liberalization laws mean the rich are making out well and getting many new opportunities - as in Sadat's Egypt, but the little guy gets nothing. They are un-educated and useless. The small salaries are buying less. Bashar will keep the lid on it for the next several years successfully though. That is my hunch - even if America throws its worst at him. The Iraq mess plays to his strengths - Arabism, go slow, be careful, America wants to harm you, sacrifice, trust me for I am your only protection from civil war and rampant sectarian chaos and Islamism. He has won the local propaganda war by being the anti-Bush and for having opposed Iraq from the beginning. Syrians even like his willingness to bend and wiggle when pressured by the States. All the same they are very confused and worried about the future. Many people miss Hafiz al-Asad for his decisiveness and control. The more unstable the environment around Syria becomes, the more they have nostalgia for big daddy. Older people especially worry that Bashar doesn't have the courage or guile to make the hard decisions.

Anyway, that is the word from Sham.

Meanwhile, Michael Doran of the National Security Council (He recently replaced Eliot Abrams), met with Farid Ghadry yesterday. Ghadry is preparing a "government in exile." Here is his news release. This suggests that Washington is not interested in a deal with Syria. The line that many are taking in Washington is that Bashar is Arafat. He is too weak and indecisive to deliver anything, so Washington should not make a deal with him. They should try to replace him.

RPS Meets with the National Security Council

Washington DC, August 31, 2005/RPS/ -- Farid Ghadry, President of the Reform Party of Syria, met with the Director of Policy Mr. Michael Doran at NSC yesterday. The meeting took place about two weeks before Baschar al-Assad arrives New York for the UN World Summit and the day most of the pro-Syrian Lebanese ex-intelligence officers were detained for questioning in Lebanon.

The discussions centered around the Human Rights situation in Syria and specifically the release of Riad Seif from prison as well as all the other prisoners of conscience languishing in Syrian jails under abhorring and inhumane conditions. It also discussed the importance of pressuring the Assad regime to allow the Atassi Forum, a pro-democracy group, to conduct business free from intimidation and harassment.

RPS also discussed the anticipated Syrian National Conference to take place soon in Europe that would unite all the opposition political parties and figures. The Syrian Democratic Coalition, made of nine political parties and organizations, also intend to develop a Transitional Parliament (in exile) that would be instrumental in transitioning Syria peacefully from a dictatorship to a democracy after the fall of the regime. Syrians will rely on this body to help move away from a Bremer-type situation as well to conduct business in accordance with Syrian customs. The purpose is to cushion for the fall of Assad by uniting all the influential organizations be it political. economic, or social to avoid the mistakes taking place in Iraq today.

Additionally, RPS is working on a 200-page project to be provided to the Europeans and the American administration on the "After Assad" era that would encompass support for a peaceful transition. Syria is a special country with its culture and customs. Any effort not to take into account that culture will be met with failure if planning is not done today.

Reuters reports (Washington DC, August 30, 2005) that

The Lebanese police arrested three former top pro-Syrian security officials and a pro-Syrian former member of parliament on Tuesday, a security source said.

The source said Jamil al-Sayyed, former chief of the General Security Directorate, Ali Hajj, ex-head of police, and Raymond Azar, ex-head of military intelligence, were arrested in raids at their homes at dawn by police.

It was not immediately clear why the arrests were made but the three men had been blamed by some Lebanese politicians of having a role in the February 14 killing of ex-prime minister Rafik al-Hariri.

Former MP Nassir Qandil was also arrested, the source said.

President Chirac insists on full implementation of UN resolutions

“French President Jacques Chirac confirmed that the UN resolutions regarding Lebanon must be fully implemented. He called upon Syria to take the opportunity to rebuild good relations with Lebanon, and to start a development process the whole world is waiting for,” An Nahar, a Lebanese opposition newspaper, reported on August 30. Chirac spoke during a conference for French ambassadors in which he did not mention the international investigation of Hariri’s assassination when talking about Lebanon. “Chirac said that the mobilization of people (in Lebanon) with international support was able to overcome a long Syrian military presence. The Lebanese people finally were able to express themselves freely. Chirac added that UN resolutions 1559,1595, and 1614 should be fully implemented,” An Nahar reported.

On the other hand, President Chirac talked about the importance of solving the Middle East conflict, because it is a destabilizing factor for the whole region. He encouraged both the Israelis and Palestinians to continue the efforts to implement the ‘Road Map’ plan. Chirac added that the international community will continue supporting reforms in the Middle East. - An Nahar, Lebanon

"Mehlis informed Lebanese officials of political assassination list"

Al Seyassah, an independent Kuwaiti newspaper, reported on August 30 that: “The journalist and Lebanese member of Parliament Gibran Tueini revealed yesterday that the International Investigation Committee [investigating the assassination of previous Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri] informed the Lebanese security forces of a list of Lebanese who are in danger of getting killed.”

Tueini said in an interview with Al-Sharq radio station: “There is a direct threat to some Lebanese politicians, and I am one of them.” He confirmed that he had personally received a report from Lebanese security officials, showing that the International Investigation Committee had given them information stressing that there is a list of politicians who may be assassinated. Tueni’s name is on that list. Tueni’s statement came after Chouf MP Walid Jumblatt and the previous Secretary-General to the Lebanese Communist Party George Hawi - who was assassinated on June 21 - had both spoken of such a "black list." - Al Seyassah, Kuwait

Jumblatt joins Hariri and Geagea in Paris, fearing assassination

Al Quds Al Arabi, a Palestinian-owned independent, pan-Arab newspaper, reported on August 30 that: “The Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Boutros Sfeir, made remarks yesterday which reflect the danger of the upcoming stage, during which the final report of the international investigation of the martyr Rafik Hariri’s death will be announced.” Sfeir said that Lebanon has always lived in danger, and that the danger increases or decreases, but this time the danger is big.

The danger Sfeir is talking about is not too far from him, because his name is on a list of figures in Lebanon who have been threatened with assassination. Many of those endangered have fled Lebanon to ensure their safety. One of those endangered is MP Saad Hariri, son of Rafik Hariri, who has been in Paris for over a month. He was joined by the Druze leader Walid Jumblatt, who traveled to Paris yesterday on a private jet. He left after having been stranded in his home for over a month and a half. Jumblatt did not deny that he was threatened with assassination but said that it is about fate; the fates starting with Kamal Jumblat (his father and a notable political figure) through to Renee Mouawad (President), and Rafik Hariri and Hassan Khaled (highest Sunni figure).

Syria has been accused by some of assassinating all these figures. On the other hand, the leader of the Lebanese Forces militia Samir Geagea, who was just released after spending 11 years in jail, is also in Paris, under the excuse of having medical examinations and therapy. His stay was scheduled for only one month, but sources said that he will return end of September when the results of the investigation are publicized.

Also on the list of those who are threatened is Nabih Berri, the Lebanese House Speaker, who has only attended three parliamentary sessions this year since his re-election. He has also taken to staying inside his house. In addition to that, journalists are also under threat, such as Gibran Tueni, the chief editor of An Nahar daily newspaper, whose reporter Samir Kassir was a victim of a car bomb attack which led to his death. - Al Quds Al Arabi, United Kingdom

Bilal El-Amine of MWU has a good article on how Syria struck back after UN resolution 1559 to reestablish its influence in Lebanon. He also gives a good overview of Aoun's role and how it is likely to evolve.

Here is Michael Young's full article.

What If Syria Is Guilty?
By Michael Young Published 08/30/2005

BEIRUT -- Late last week, Detlev Mehlis, the German prosecutor investigating the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri on behalf of the UN Security Council, released a preliminary report on his inquiry, scheduled to be completed by mid-September. The Western media have given relatively little attention to the investigation; however, if Syria is found guilty, as many observers are beginning to foresee, this could lead to the destabilization of Syria's regime, if not to its actual downfall.

The preliminary report did not address the substance of what Mehlis and his team had found, though it did offer details allowing for some educated guesses. For example, the prosecutor, while admitting that further interviews of witnesses might extend the three-month deadline of his report (renewable for one additional three-month period), nevertheless mentioned that he expected his work to be completed on time. This may indicate, as sources close to the Hariri camp have maintained, that Mehlis has already completed the bulk of his inquiry, implying he has found a guilty party or parties. Nor have there been signs of faltering, since Mehlis underlined that the second month of the investigation had been a good one, with the team receiving particularly useful information.

Mehlis also highlighted the fact that Syria had refused to cooperate with the investigative team, which had asked to speak to five Syrians - four intelligence officials who had held posts in Lebanon, and, the London-based daily Al-Hayat alleged last week, President Bashar Assad himself. Initially, the Syrians, citing constitutional clauses, had refused to allow oral interrogations, and asked Mehlis to submit his questions via the Syrian Foreign Ministry, so they could be answered in writing. When the UN rejected this, and after warnings were directed at Syria last week, even from friendly countries such as Russia, Assad backtracked, telling the German newsmagazine Der Spiegel, in an interview published on Monday, that he would allow Mehlis to speak to Syrian officials after all.

If Assad is the "fifth man", then this would be particularly revealing. A previous UN report on the assassination, authored by the Irish deputy police commissioner, Peter Fitzgerald, specifically mentioned that the Syrian president had threatened Hariri in a meeting they held last August, when Syria effectively bullied the prime minister into endorsing an unconstitutional extension of Lebanese President Emile Lahoud's mandate. By raising this incident with Assad (and it is difficult to see how it would not come up in an interview), Mehlis would show he is not to be intimidated by wherever his investigation might lead.

While one must await the final report, the latest rumors in Beirut suggest that senior Syrian officials, including members of the Assad family, will be implicated in Hariri's death. Maybe, maybe not; however the accusation has received an echo from reliable sources, as well as from press reports, noting that Assad all but admitted to Syrian involvement (while exonerating himself personally) in a meeting he held last March in Riyadh with then-Crown Prince Abdullah, now king of Saudi Arabia.

What many Lebanese fear is that Mehlis might also implicate Hizbullah. There is nothing implying the party played a role in the Hariri assassination (though press reports mentioned that the UN team had asked for detailed maps of areas around the Palestinian camps in Beirut's southern suburbs, where Hizbullah holds sway). Some analysts hint the finger pointing may be manipulation, perhaps by the fearful Lahoud camp, to derail full disclosure in the inquiry, since involvement of the Shiite Hizbullah in the death of a Sunni politician raises the prospect of communal conflict. But few are especially sanguine. Last March, a senior Lebanese politician told me, "I do not discount Hizbullah's involvement in the assassination," though he offered no evidence.

Yet another rumor difficult to corroborate, published without attribution in internet and press reports, is that a Syrian intelligence officer who sought political asylum in France has been providing detailed information on the assassination to French intelligence, including names. One Arabic internet site, Elaph.com, identified him as Maj. Zuheir S. (his full last name was unspecified). Reference in the article to the intelligence service to which he belonged was unclear, but he apparently headed the office of the former Military Intelligence chief, Gen. Hassan Khalil. Again, however, the story should be treated with caution until Mehlis publishes his findings.

Amid all the rumors, one conclusion seems increasingly likely: Lebanese officials will be blamed for at least trying to cover up the crime. In an interview with France's Le Figaro in July, Mehlis described the head of the Presidential Guard, Mustapha Hamdan, as "a suspect." Few believe that Hamdan - in reality Lahoud, his superior and patron - was responsible for ordering the assassination. However, there have been numerous indications that the presidential palace sought to cover up the blast site soon after Hariri's murder. The Fitzgerald report specifically mentioned that evidence had been tampered with, concluding: "[T]he manner in which this element of the investigation was carried out displays, at least gross negligence, possibly accompanied by criminal actions..."

According to UN Security Council Resolution 1595, which established the Mehlis commission, it is Lebanon's judiciary that must prosecute those deemed responsible. In his preliminary report, however, the German investigator wrote that many witnesses were afraid of having their testimony handed over to the Lebanese authorities. It is ever more obvious that Lebanon's courts, given the country's political divisions and weaknesses, do not have the means to bring anyone to justice; nor its security agencies the wherewithal to protect witnesses, particularly if Syrian involvement is confirmed. This has led to growing speculation, buttressed by statements from Lebanon's prime minister, Fouad al-Siniora, that a special international tribunal might become necessary to act against the guilty. This would deeply alarm the Syrian regime (again, if Mehlis does find a Syrian connection), as it means Syria would become even more of an international pariah than it already is. That Assad could politically survive such pressure is doubtful.

In the coming weeks, we will know whether the Mehlis inquiry produces the "earthquake" that many have predicted it will. For the moment, the Lebanese are holding their breath fearing the Syrian backlash, but also hoping that Hizbullah is innocent, so that Sunni-Shiite tension can be averted. Everyone is anxiously aware that the truth may be painful.

Michael Young is opinion editor of the Daily Star newspaper in Lebanon and a contributing editor at Reason magazine in the United States.

Bashar al-Asad, place and date not given entitled "Bashar al-Asad Interview in German news magazine Der Spiegel

The following is the text of an interview with Bashar al-Asad, place and date not given entitled "Bashar al-Asad: 'I cannot afford any mistakes'" published by German news magazine Der Spiegel website on 29 August; subheadings inserted editorially:

Interference in our affairs from abroad

[Spiegel] Mr President, here and there in the Arab world there are tender beginnings of democracy. Not much can be felt of it in Syria. Why not?

[Bashar al-Asad] The Arab states are developing at different speeds and under different historical conditions. For example, Egypt has not experienced as many coups as Syria. Furthermore, Cairo has made peace with Israel whereas we are in a state of non-war but also non-peace. In addition, we just began the development a couple years ago and there are inevitably widely differing expectations. The main thing is that we are conducting a dialogue in Syria.

[Spiegel] But all that is taking longer than many people would like.
[Al-Asad] The pace of our development depends on the challenges we must face and that we cannot always influence. There is interference in our affairs from abroad.

[Spiegel] You mean the demands of the United States for more democracy and the end of support for terrorists?

[Al-Asad] The greater the intervention, the slower will be the pace of development in Syria since the democratic process should penetrate the entire country. Naturally, the unresolved Middle East conflict also hampers development. And then the question sometimes arises as to what should have priority: political development or economic growth.

We urgently need the assistance of the EU

[Spiegel] Does the one exclude the other?

[Al-Asad] There is a great gulf between the two goals. To promote growth we urgently need the assistance of the EU. For many Syrians I meet, the experience of poverty is much more important than the prospect of a democratic constitution. Furthermore, there is still terrorism, which hampers democratic development. We must simply act as quickly as possible, otherwise there will be setbacks.

[Spiegel] But you do not make it easy for your countrymen either: parties may be able to form but they are immediately banned again and opposition figures are arrested.

[Al-Asad] But you are speaking with opposition figures in our country. If we were to arrest all of them there would not be enough space in the prisons.

[Spiegel] Most opposition figures we have spoken with were in prison for a very long time.

[Al-Asad] But now they are out again. Furthermore, it is not easy to compare your situation in the West with ours. For example, take religion. A book appeared in the UK in which the author maintains that Jesus Christ had children. In Europe, there will be neither a revolt break out or blood shed because of such statements. But if you write something comparable about Islam in Syria, the result could be bloody rebellions.

We still do not have a pronounced party landscape

[Spiegel] What does that have to do with the real opposition in Syria?

[Al-Asad] When we call someone to account it is not as an individual. Instead, it is a matter of whether he attacks the religious and ethnic structure of the population. The roof of stability must not be damaged. Two months ago we allowed the formation of parties and at present we are looking at these parties very closely. I do not dispute the fact that we still do not have a pronounced party landscape. I just wanted to show you where we have to be careful.

[Spiegel] What are you afraid of specifically?

[Al-Asad] Developments like in Algeria since 1991. At that time the government incorrectly assessed the people and the Islamists threatened to assume power. The Algerians are still paying the price of this miscalculation with their blood.

[Spiegel] For example, there is the case of the parliamentarian Riyad Sayf, a businessman and self-made man. He criticized the omnipotence of the monopolies and was sentenced to five years in jail.

[Al-Asad] He called into question the unity of the nation and we have a law now that punishes anyone who encroaches on the mosaic of the various ethnic and religious groups.

No-one is called to account who personally attacks me

[Spiegel] Did not Sayf simply question the balance of power?

[Al-Asad] No, no-one is called to account who personally attacks me. But infringing on the composition of the Syrian society is simply too explosive.

[Spiegel] Journalists too are still hampered in their work or even jailed. When will there be genuine freedom of the press?

[Al-Asad] We have never locked up anyone because of his personal opinion.

[Spiegel] The correspondent of the leading Arab paper al-Hayat had to spend several months in jail.

[Al-Asad] That is something different. Under Syrian law, a journalist may not report on military affairs. That may be right or wrong, but that is the way it is now.

[Spiegel] You have said that fighting poverty is more important than democracy. Does this mean you want to emulate the Chinese model: economic opening without political reforms?

[Al-Asad] When I say the economy has priority, that does not mean by far that we neglect political reforms. In the last five years the economy may have taken priority because it means improving the population's living standard. If someone gets up tomorrow and has nothing to eat, that is a dangerous matter. If I tell such a person 'I will allow parties for you,' what will he answer me? It is not important for us whether it is the Chinese model or something else. We act according to our country's needs.

[Spiegel] When will a democratic party system be evident in Syria?

[Al-Asad] We needed five years for the social dialogue. We are now in the second stage, the discussions of the parties. That will not happen so quickly. Morocco, for example, needed three years.

[Spiegel] Will you be that far by the 2007 general elections?

[Al-Asad] Quite probably, but in our part of the world you cannot simply make long-term predictions. I cannot afford any mistakes. Instead of jumping four metres and perhaps falling, we do better to divide our workload into small steps.

"Abu-Ghurayb is not an example of freedom"

[Spiegel] How do you intend to prevent the Algerian model: the formation of religious parties that are elected democratically but act undemocratically?

[Al-Asad] Once again: we cannot use Western standards of measurement for the development of the East. In Germany, with the CDU [Christian Democratic Union] you have a party that is religious-Christian but that has integrated into the country's life very well. Given your history, you have no large nationalist parties. Experience has taught us that the situation in Syria became stable because the entire society is secular. We must preserve that.

[Spiegel] In many speeches, American President George W. Bush has complained that freedom must too often take a back seat to stability. Do you feel this is aimed at you?

[Al-Asad] Freedom and democracy are only instruments, just like stability. The goal is progress and growth. Someone who puts freedom in place of stability damages growth. Furthermore, Abu-Ghurayb [prison in western Baghdad] is not an example of freedom, nor is Guantanamo or Iraq.

[Spiegel] In Washington you are seen as a sort of "Saddam light".

[Al-Asad] There were genuine hostilities between Saddam Husayn's regime and my father's, in which 15,000 Syrian troops lost their lives. Saddam always allowed only his opinion; I also involve people outside the party in decision-making. If we had taken a direction like Saddam in Iraq, I could not trust myself to walk on the street with my wife and children. Saddam had to hide. The fact that there are people who criticize me does not mean people hate me.

[Spiegel] In the 1991 Gulf war your father supported Bush Senior, whereas you sharply criticized the war in 2003.

[Al-Asad] The first war involved the liberation of an Arab people suffering under occupation. The latest war resulted in the occupation of an Arab country. That is a huge difference.

"Terror operations in Iraq... but there is also a resistance movement"

[Spiegel] Do you have understanding for the insurgents fighting the occupation power and the new government in Iraq?

[Al-Asad] There are terror operations in Iraq in which innocent people are victims; we absolutely reject those. But there is also a resistance movement and that is a different matter, an entirely normal matter.

[Spiegel] Are suicide attacks also legitimate as a weapon against the occupiers?

[Al-Asad] Even religious scholars argue about that and I have the impression the majority of them are in favour of them. But that is a hypothetical debate. Someone who is truly determined to blow himself up asks neither you nor me. This debate is a waste of time.

"Impossible to completely control the border with Iraq"

[Spiegel] The American government accuses you of smoothing the way for the insurgents through Syria to Iraq.

[Al-Asad] It also accused Saddam of having weapons of mass destruction. But seriously: if someone asks the Americans whether they are successful in sealing the border with Mexico they say it is very difficult. We say to the Americans in no uncertain terms that it is impossible to completely control the border with Iraq.

Yet we also tell them that the basis for the chaos must be sought in the war. It is not fair to make a mistake oneself and then blame others for it.

[Spiegel] The American government has included Syria among the "rogue states". Do you fear Washington wants to remove you from office?

[Al-Asad] Look at the results of the regime change in Iraq. You will certainly not want to assert it was successful.

[Spiegel] At the last Spiegel interview in 2001 you predicted Israeli Prime Minister Sharon would plunge the entire region into war. Now he has withdrawn the settlers from Gaza. A new opportunity for peace?

[Al-Asad] The withdrawal of settlers and troops from Gaza is certainly not a wrong step, but by itself it will not bring peace. That can only be done by complying with all relevant UN resolutions and those include the return of the West Bank and East Jerusalem and repatriation of refugees, the return of the Golan Heights and the question of a sovereign Palestine.

"Realization of peace is the best way to fight terror"

[Spiegel] Such maximum demands are unrealistic.

[Al-Asad] It is not a question of maximum or minimum demands. The place where the interests of all parties are linked is the international community with its resolutions.

[Spiegel] Israel was always threatened by war and terror and therefore considers it incompatible with its national interests to meet some of the demands.

[Al-Asad] We are also threatened by terror, even your country is threatened by terror. Conversely, the realization of peace is the best way to fight terror.

[Spiegel] The offices of the terror organizations Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Damascus have formally been closed, but their leaders continue to live in the country undisturbed. Are you not playing a double game?

[Al-Asad] Normally, these people would live in the Palestinian areas. We have not invited them to Syria. Israel chased them out.

"Syria has nothing to do with this murder"

[Spiegel] Many politicians in your neighbouring country of Lebanon hold your regime responsible for the murder of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq al-Hariri. Some have even said you argued heatedly with him during his last visit to Damascus.

[Al-Asad] Some have even said I threatened him. Others suggest that a security official pointed his pistol at Al-Hariri's head. That is simply ludicrous.

In that conversation we talked about an extension of the term of office of Lebanese President Emile Lahhud. And it is completely clear that Al-Hariri did not agree. I said to him: "We want to exert no pressure on you now. Go back to Lebanon and inform us then of your decision." His agreement came a few days later.

Why should Syria kill someone with whom there are no differences? That makes no sense. In reality, we Syrians are the ones who have reaped the most disadvantages from this affair.

[Spiegel] You had to withdraw 14,000 occupation troops from Lebanon. But you did not travel to Al-Hariri's funeral.

[Al-Asad] Naturally not. It was a matter of self-respect. After all, there were these accusations.

[Spiegel] A German prosecutor is to clarify Al-Hariri's murder on assignment for the UN. How will you react if he becomes convinced that Syrians were also involved in the murder?

[Al-Asad] We are being wholeheartedly cooperative. We have an interest in the investigation because we are convinced we will be exonerated unless the results are falsified for political reasons. Syria has nothing to do with this murder, nothing at all.

[Spiegel] Can you really rule out completely that neither one of your secret services nor any other Syrian is involved?

[Al-Asad] I am quite certain. Such an action requires the cooperation of multiple people and institutions. If this teamwork had existed we would know about it.

[Spiegel] And the Syrian who prosecutor Mehlis would like to question can testify?

[Al-Asad] I have said that anyone can testify with whom he wants to speak. That is in my interest and in Syria's interest.

[Spiegel] Mr President, we thank you for this interview.

Source: Der Spiegel website, Hamburg, in German 29 Aug 05

© 2005 Dow Jones Reuters Business Interactive LLC (trading as Factiva). All rights reserved.

What Can America Salvage in Iraq? By Ray Close and others

The following commentary was sent to me by Ray Close. From the 1950s through the 1980s, Ray Close worked for the CIA in the Middle East. As a young man in 1957, he and his brother flew Ibrahim al-Hussayni, President Shishakli's former head of police, from Rome to Damascus to help organize Operation Straggle, an abortive coup attempt against the top Syrian officers guiding Syrian politics. It was meant to keep Syria from "going communist," but had the reverse effect. A day after the conspiracy was nipped in the bud by Syrian intelligence, Syria's "conservative" Chief of Staff, General Nizam al-Din, resigned and was replaced by `Afif al-Bizri, who the New York Times described as a "ranking Communist." This was not true, but Bizri did help engineer Syria's unification with Egypt several months later. By trying to isolate and destabilize Syria, the US was partly responsible for de-legitimizing Syria's remaining pro-Western politicians and driving the country toward the East Block, Nasser, and socialism.

Syria was already headed in this direction, but it is quite possible that without the failed British-Iraqi coup attempt at the time of the Suez Crisis in 1956, followed by the US plot in 1957, Khalid al-Azm would have become president of Syria in 1958 and not Nasser. Azm was one of the greatest Syrian politicians of the early independence era. He hoped to steer Syria on a neutral course balancing between the USSR and the West on the international stage and between Iraq and Egypt in the local Arab arena. He was against unification with Egypt.

Anyway, Ray Close is a long-time student of Middle Eastern affairs. He is highly critical of the US role in the region and of his own participation in that role during the 1950s. He was one of the most outspoken American opponents of the United State's invasion of Iraq.

Here is Ray Close's commentary:

The article in the current issue of Foreign Affairs magazine entitled "How to Win in Iraq", by Andrew Krepinevich, is a "must" read. But it is even more important to study the following commentary about that article, written by the highly respected conservative columnist David Brooks, found today on the op-ed page of the Sunday New York Times (28 August 2005). Brooks summarizes the main points of the Krepinevich thesis very accurately and succinctly, and adds his own personal agreement that the present U.S. strategy for "winning" the Iraq war that has been pursued from the beginning by Bush, Rumsfeld & Company, is fundamentally flawed, and must be completely revised.

Point taken. If "winning" the war is still a rational and reasonable objective, then the Krepinevich method should indeed be employed, and I commend David Brooks for his persuasive advocacy of that point of view. But please note a critically important point: David Brooks fails to acknowledge the all-important caveat contained in the last paragraph of the Krepinevich essay.

I have appended that last paragraph for all of you to read at the end of the David Brooks op-ed piece. After thinking about what Brooks has to say, read Krepinevich's final summation, and then ask yourself if his new formula for "How to Win in Iraq" is a strategy to which you yourself would subscribe if the decision were yours today. And finally, after doing that, please take a few minutes to formulate in your own mind an explanation of exactly what you understood were our reasons for launching a war of choice against Iraq in the first place. Exactly what were our goals and expectations then? Are any of them still realistic today?

Ray Close

New York Times -- op ed page -- Sunday, 28 August 2005
Winning in Iraq
By DAVID BROOKS

Andrew Krepinevich is a careful, scholarly man. A graduate of West Point and a retired lieutenant colonel, his book, "The Army and Vietnam," is a classic on how to fight counterinsurgency warfare.

Over the past year or so he's been asking his friends and former colleagues in the military a few simple questions: Which of the several known strategies for fighting insurgents are you guys employing in Iraq? What metrics are you using to measure your progress?

The answers have been disturbing. There is no clear strategy. There are no clear metrics. Krepinevich has now published an essay in the new issue of Foreign Affairs, "How to Win in Iraq," in which he proposes a strategy. The article is already a phenomenon among the people running this war, generating discussion in the Pentagon, the C.I.A., the American Embassy in Baghdad and the office of the vice president.

Krepinevich's proposal is hardly new. He's merely describing a classic counterinsurgency strategy, which was used, among other places, in Malaya by the British in the 1950's. The same approach was pushed by Tom Donnelly and Gary Schmitt in a Washington Post essay back on Oct. 26, 2003; by Kenneth Pollack in Senate testimony this July 18; and by dozens of midlevel Army and Marine Corps officers in Iraq.

Krepinevich calls the approach the oil-spot strategy. The core insight is that you can't win a war like this by going off on search and destroy missions trying to kill insurgents. There are always more enemy fighters waiting. You end up going back to the same towns again and again, because the insurgents just pop up after you've left and kill anybody who helped you. You alienate civilians, who are the key to success, with your heavy-handed raids.

Instead of trying to kill insurgents, Krepinevich argues, it's more important to protect civilians. You set up safe havens where you can establish good security. Because you don't have enough manpower to do this everywhere at once, you select a few key cities and take control. Then you slowly expand the size of your safe havens, like an oil spot spreading across the pavement.
Once you've secured a town or city, you throw in all the economic and political resources you have to make that place grow. The locals see the benefits of working with you. Your own troops and the folks back home watching on TV can see concrete signs of progress in these newly regenerated neighborhoods. You mix your troops in with indigenous security forces, and through intimate contact with the locals you begin to even out the intelligence advantage that otherwise goes to the insurgents.

If you ask U.S. officials why they haven't adopted this strategy, they say they have. But if that were true the road to the airport in Baghdad wouldn't be a death trap. It would be within the primary oil spot.

The fact is, the U.S. didn't adopt this blindingly obvious strategy because it violates some of the key Rumsfeldian notions about how the U.S. military should operate in the 21st century.
First, it requires a heavy troop presence, not a light, lean force. Second, it doesn't play to our strengths, which are technological superiority, mobility and firepower. It acknowledges that while we go with our strengths, the insurgents exploit our weakness: the lack of usable intelligence.
Third, it means we have to think in the long term. For fear of straining the armed forces, the military brass have conducted this campaign with one eye looking longingly at the exits. A lot of the military planning has extended only as far as the next supposed tipping point: the transfer of sovereignty, the election, and so on. We've been rotating successful commanders back to Washington after short stints, which is like pulling Grant back home before the battle of Vicksburg. The oil-spot strategy would force us to acknowledge that this will be a long, gradual war.

But the strategy has one virtue. It might work.

Today, public opinion is turning against the war not because people have given up on the goal of advancing freedom, but because they are not sure this war is winnable. Why should we sacrifice more American lives to a lost cause?

If President Bush is going to rebuild support for the war, he's going to have to explain specifically how it can be won, and for that he needs a strategy.

It's not hard to find. It's right there in Andy Krepinevich's essay, and in the annals of history. [End of David Brooks column]

Last paragraph of Krepinevich article in Foreign Affairs:

"Even if successful, this strategy will require at least a decade of commitment and hundreds of billions of dollars and will result in longer U.S. casualty rolls. But this is the price that the United States must pay if it is to achieve its worthy goals in Iraq. Are the American people and American soldiers willing to pay that price? Only by presenting them with a clear strategy for victory and a full understanding of the sacrifices required can the administration find out. And if Americans are not up to the task, Washington should accept that it must settle for a much more modest goal: leveraging its waning influence to outmaneuver the Iranians and the Syrians in creating an ally out of Iraq’s next despot.”

The Local Elections of 2007 by Ibrahim Hamidi

MAKE OR BREAK?
(This story by Ibrahim Hamidi originally appeared in "Syria Today" in this month's issue.)

2007 has the potential to be a great year of progress for Syria with the promise of free-list local elections ahead of parliamentary and presidential elections. It also has the potential for Crisis. Here, al-Hayat Damascus bureau chief Ibrahim Hamidi looks ahead to a make or break year.

The year 2007 will, no doubt, be a turning point in Syrian political history; a year that is expected to mark the end of an era and the beginning of a new one, with parliamentary elections, local administration elections and presidential elections all taking place simultaneously.

If the discussions currently circulating among Syria’s political elite following the recommendations of June’s Ba’ath Party Conference do indeed come true, the year 2007 will witness Syria’s soft landing from a politically-authoritarian, economically-centralized regime to a pluralist regime embracing market forces.

However, internal frustrations, hesitant decisions and a poor awareness of the country’s socio-economic problems could equally turn that year into a catastrophe, threatening Syria’s stability. So how could 2007 turn out on a positive curve?
The 10th Ba’ath Party Conference came out with many political recommendations including the “revision” of the emergency law - in place since the early 1960s - the elimination of extraordinary courts - also established during the 1960s - and passing new legislations for political parties and local administration elections. Moreover, there was a recommendation to reconsider the Syrian Constitution “to match the above recommendations”.

Looking to the full half of the glass, this means that the year 2007 will mark the end of a reign, started with the Ba’athists assumtion of power in 1963. The circles of pro-regime reformists say the coming years will witness preparations for a “bloodless coup” including the issuance of a law allowing new political parties to take part in the local elections of 2007.

One of those optimists, the Minister of Local Administration and Environment Hilal Atrash, told me that a political decision has already been taken to prepare for a new local administration law that will allow the more than 15,000 members of the municipal councils to be freely elected. This would mark an end to the previous system of nominations and closed lists that are controlled by the Ba’ath Party and its partners in the National Progressive Front, the parliamentary alliance of parties authorised by the Ba’ath.

Atrash said the decision coincided with other major steps towards “decentralization” and the delegation of more powers to local authorities in order to establish “good governance” based on “procedure facilitation” and “red tape reduction”.
Handling open list elections will mean that 2007 will, for the first time since the Ba’ath assumed power, allow Syrians to elect more than 15,000 local council representatives. Local governors will still appointed by virtue of presidential decrees.

Syria has 14 governorates, 107 towns and 2480 villages. The population of these units elect 15029 representatives for the respective councils.

Optimists also look at the local administration elections as a warm up exercise for the parliamentary elections, to elect 250 MPs, and for the presidential election.
Seven years will have passed since the inauguration of President Bashar a-Assad who told foreign reporters that Syria will have democratic elections.

The current changes will include reconsidering Article 8 of the Constitution of 1972, which states that the Ba’ath Party is “ruler of state and society”. However, contrary to these rosy expectations, there are some distressing ideas that 2007 could be the trigger for an internal crisis. How?

Some observers think that the Ba’ath Conference recommendations were developed on the principle of “constructive ambiguity”; while they look like a good foundation for reform they may actually be as good for hardliners. The recommendation talked about separating “the Party from the power”, but at the same time they stated that prime minister as well as parliament speaker should be Ba’athists; this is a contradiction. They talked about a new parties law while stressing “security and stability”, which can be a good pretext for more inflexibility and regression; another contradiction.

Pessimists think the coming years will witness wide-scale regression in terms of refocusing on security issues and not developing any major political or economic reforms. They say there will be only some cosmetic reform, such as establishing unpopular parties and annexing them to the NPF as was the case with the Syrian Social National Party, or even refraining from ratifying the Association Agreement with the EU to avoid any serious commitment towards reform.

What is more worrying in fact is the fact the year 2007 will more likely witness a number of negative developments: the further deterioration in oil production, currently at 470,000 barrel a day, and even the possible end of oil exports; unemployment will reach 20% of the workforce, with more than 380,000 newcomers entering the labour market every year.

Four other factors loom large and foreboding on the horizon. The first is the rising Islamic tide in secular Syria and the increase in radical groups, some of whom have already resorted to violence. Close beside that is the fact that 80% of the unemployed are between 18 and 25 years’ old and the fact that the selective opening of the economy is making the rich richer and the poor poorer, with Syria now home to 5.3 million citizens within the poverty zone and 2.2 million of them “can not get the basic needs”, according to UNDP report released lately.

Meanwhile the middle class, often perceived as the guarantor of stability, is increasingly melting away. There is also the negative impact on patriotism, with the country recently witnessing several sectarian/ethnic clashes due to a variety of political, economic and regional reasons triggered by the changes in Iraq, where the political structure has shifted towards sectarianism after the Iraqi regime failure to build a civil state.

Nonetheless, observers cannot draw a clear picture of Syria’s future; every day there are contradicting indications. Today we can say there is optimism as regards the scope of the problems and the appropriateness of the decisions made; tomorrow we face the opposite. The only thing to do is wait and see what the future holds.

Miraculous Crying Madonna of Aleppo.

Elyse Semerdjian, an American professor of Middle East History now visiting Syria, just sent me this note about the miraculous crying Madonna of Chaldean church in Aleppo.

I was dropped off in Aleppo by the taxi driver a few blocks away from Aunt Elyse, but I know this neighborhood, I stop in to say hi to a semi-crippled store owner named Artance....she got polio when she was small and walks with crutches, but owns a nice toy shop and works very hard. While I was in his shop, she told me about a miracle that occurred yesterday.

A woman was in the Chaldean church praying at 2 am. There is a statue to the virgin Mary there outside the church, she prayed in front of it, and as the original story goes, the statue began to move its lips speaking a language no one understood. Then it began to cry. Immediately the police came to secure the place (whatever that means...they certainly did not help crowd control inside the gates of the church). I was very interested in seeing this, so I went to my aunt's house and took her to the church. You would not believe the crowd, hundreds of people....all there to see the miracle. People were recording it on their cell phones and sending it around the city so many seen it without even going to the church! High tech miracles! So, we went, but between the crowd and the hefty women it was rough, like a game of rugby to get through that crowd. I got close, but didn't get close enough to see. We got fed up and left, I was upset that the police were only posing outside the church, but did nothing for crowd control. I swear that a Who Concert in 1979 was probably safer that this crowd of buxom women who were pushing, shoving, pinching to get to the statue yesterday.

There were women along the side, singing songs, and making the zaghlouta...that trilling sound we often make at weddings and festivals . It was pretty exciting. Then I was listening to stories in the crowd....the stories were that the statue was speaking a strange language which was Aramaic, so, it was added that it was Aramaic "the language of Jesus", but my original story did not have that detail. It was interesting to see it evolve.

I am going to try to go tonight, hoping the crowd will die down to see it for myself.

Jordan, Canada, Mehlis, and Business

Sami Moubayed has written an excellent overview of radical Islam in Jordan and Zarqawi's place in it all. Here is a bit of it.

Until the end of 2003 there were three major Salafi jihadi outfits in Iraq: Ansar al-Islam in the north, Jaysh Ansar al-Sunna (operating between Mosul and Baghdad) and Zarqawi's network, Jamaa al-Tawhid wal-Jihad. Zarqawi's crucial and deadly business expansion in 2003-2004 happened because more than 200 Jordanian jihadis - mostly from Zarqa and al-Salt and some of them members of traditional Jordanian clans - joined him in the Sunni triangle and proclaimed him their emir.

The key cleric legitimizing their operations was also a Jordanian - Omar Yussef Joumoua, also known as Abu Anas al-Shami. This led to the now-notorious move of Zarqawi pledging allegiance to al-Qaeda in October 2004, when Zarqawi's network adopted its current denomination, al-Qaeda in the Land of the Two Rivers (Tanzim al-Qaeda fi Bilad al-Rafidayn), and Osama bin Laden recognized Zarqawi as the jihadi-in-chief in Iraq in a December 2004 audiotape.

The strategy of al-Qaeda in the Land of the Two Rivers is not Jordanian, though: it is dictated by the Saudi branch of al-Qaeda. The strategy is spelled out in a series of documents supervised by Sheikh Yussef al-Ayeeri. The most strategic of these documents is called "Iraq al-jihad, awal wa akhtar" (The jihad in Iraq, hopes and dangers). It's all there: centralized resistance in Sunni Arab cities and villages; close collaboration with Saddam Hussein's former Mukhabarat (intelligence) officers; attacks against other members of the coalition to isolate the Americans and the new Iraqi defense forces; keeping an atmosphere of chaos at all costs; and, crucially, disrupting by all means the flow of oil. Another point of the document is now becoming clear: the setting up of jihadi networks in the Shi'ite south capable of protecting Sunni minorities in case of civil war - a de facto situation considering the escalation of sectarian killings.

Another interesting article on the recent Aqaba attack is Lee Smith in Monday's Weekly Standard, entitled, "Jordan's Baathist Boom; The economy is humming, thanks to Iraqi cash." He says Syrian businessmen are helping to finance Jordan's boom as well.

Indeed, some of the cash coming in is a direct result of Syria's forced withdrawal from Lebanon. "Lots of Syrian money came after it left Beirut," says Braizat. "The Syrians are investing to escape Bashar [al-Assad's] regime."

So, what does it mean that Syria's merchant class is putting money into the coffers of the country's long-time regional rival? "If the private sector in Syria is connected to the private sector here," Braizat argues, "then this is cementing its relationship with the government here, and they don't see the [Syrian] regime surviving."

The Canadian papers are producing some interesting stories on the role of the Canadian Secret Service in sending Canadian Syrians to Damascus to be investigated. Everyone has hear of the Arar case, which has been causing an uproar in Canada. It now seems that the Canadian Secret Service didn't want to have him brought home to Canada. But the more interesting story is about Abdullah Almalki, who tells his story of being tortured at the suggestion of the Canadian governemnt for the first time. "The federal government was complicit in an international anti-terrorist operation that ultimately resulted in Canadian citizens being tortured in Syria to elicit ..."

UN's first report accused Syria of hindering Hariri investigations

The United Nations has accused Syria of delaying the work of the international investigation committee that is investigating the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri on February 14, 2005. The accusation came in the light of Syrian refusal to provide the committee with needed documents or to let the committee interrogate certain Syrian officers,” An Nahar, a Lebanese opposition newspaper, wrote on August 26. The United States termed the Syrian refusal to cooperate with the International Committee “unacceptable.”

“The United Nations’ statement called upon Syria, without mentioning the country by name, to cooperate completely with the investigation,” An Nahar reported. Diplomats who took part in the Security Council meeting said that the report of the Committee shows that the Syrian government, unlike the Lebanese, did not cooperate. They expressed their hope that the Syrian government will cooperate like the Lebanese government in the coming few weeks. “The investigation should be finished by September 16, and the committee did not ask for any extensions, although the UN decision give the committee the ability to ask for a three-month extension,” An Nahar added.

“US sources said if the committee reaches the conclusion that Syrian officials are involved in the assassination of Hariri, the international community will move against Syria through the Security Council,” An Nahar reported. Reports say that France has mentioned Syria by name in the first draft of the Security Council report regarding the investigation, but some countries like Russia and Algeria refused to name Syria in the report. “The International Investigation Committee will meet with Syrian officials in Geneva in order to discuss future cooperation,” An Nahar concluded. - An Nahar, Lebanon

Kuwait has important investments in Syria -- official

DAMASCUS, Aug 26 (KUNA) -- Kuwait, in a variety of sectors, has important investments in Syria, said Friday a source from the Syria Cabinet's Investment Authority.

In a press statement, the source added that Kuwait United Investment Company (KUIC), established by a Kuwaiti-Syrian committee, played a great role in establishing a variety of projects in Syria through a capital of USD 200 million.

He added that investments are not limited to KUIC, as there are other firms and individuals establishing a number of projects.

While Turkey has 12 projects in Syria, both Kuwait and Saudi Arabia come second with seven projects in industry, transportation and agrigulture.

Through ownership or partnership with foreigners or Arabs, he explained that 27 projects were established since Syria has issued its 10th investment law in 1991, adding that 12 of these ventures were established by Arab investors.

Bolton Bashes Syria on Mehlis Report

I just wrote about the politics of the Mehlis report in my last post - but Bolton's most recent intervention to give the "American translation" of a recent UN statement indicates that the fight is on. America seems determined to take this fight to Damascus.

Bolton's behavior cannot please Condoleezza Rice, his boss, who is proving to be a good diplomat. But Bolton is Bush's private appointee now that he failed to get Senate confirmation and was given a recess appointed by the President.

Syria Thwarting U.N. Inquiry, Bolton Says
WARREN HOGE in the New York Times.
Published: August 26, 2005

The work of a United Nations team investigating the February car bomb assassination of the former Lebanese prime minister, Rafik Hariri, is being obstructed by Syria, Ambassador John R. Bolton said after a closed door briefing of the Security Council.

Many Lebanese hold Syria responsible for the killing, but the council, responding to objections from Algeria and Russia, refrained from naming Syria in a statement urging the cooperation of all neighboring countries. Citing his disappointment at that outcome, Mr. Bolton said, "That's why I came out here to give you the American translation."

Opposition Meeting Planned for Paris Collapses

The Opposition meeting that was supposed to take place in Paris this September is falling apart. Riad al-Turk's Syrian Social Democratic Party and the People's Party of Aleppo both said they would not attend because the time was not right for assembling a "Syrian national Assembly." The Muslim Brothers then officially said they would not be attending as well. Other main opposition groups have also dropped out, leaving some Kurdish parties and Anwar al-Bunni to go alone.

In August the "Gathering for Syria" issued invitations to the national assembly in order to discuss "peaceful democratic change in Syria."

Also the Grand Mufti of Damascus announced that he is opposed to the creation of religious parties because it separates the religious from the non-religious, which is something that will be decided in the hereafter.

Here are the articles from today's Akbar al-Sharq.

الأحزاب السورية الرئيسية لن تشارك في مؤتمر باريس المقرر عقده في أيلول

لندن - أخبار الشرق

أعلنت أحزاب المعارضة الرئيسية في سورية عدم مشاركتها في مؤتمر باريس الذي دعا إليه بشكل أساسي "التجمع من أجل سورية"، والمقرر عقده أواخر أيلول/ سبتمبر القادم. وقد اعتذرت جماعة الإخوان المسلمين "رسمياً" عن عدم المشاركة، فيما أكد الناطق باسم التجمع الوطني الديمقراطي في سورية (خمسة أحزاب معارضة) حسن عبد العظيم أن أحزاب التجمع لن تشارك في المؤتمر أيضاً. وكانت هذه القوى قد تلقت دعوة رسمية من المنظمين للمؤتمر.

وكانت خمسة أحزاب سياسية معارضة قد أصدرت بياناً في 17 آب/ أغسطس الجاري، دعت فيه إلى عقد "مؤتمر وطني سوري" بين 26 و28 أيلول/ سبتمبر في باريس، للتوصل إلى "ميثاق" من أجل "التغيير الوطني الديمقراطي السلمي" في سورية. وذكر البيان أن الدعوة مفتوحة أمام "كل الاطراف الوطنية، أياً كان توجهها الفكري أو العقائدي"، لكنه استثنى من الدعوة "حزب البعث الحاكم" في سورية، و"رفعت الأسد" عم الرئيس السوري بشار الاسد، وأحزاب الجبهة الوطنية التقدمية.

ورداً على سؤال حول ما إذا كانت جماعة الإخوان المسلمين المعارضة المحظورة في سورية، والتي تطالب بعقد "مؤتمر وطني شامل"، مدعوة لحضور المؤتمر، قال الناطق باسم "التجمع من أجل سورية" فهد المصري: "إنهم على رأس المدعوين"، حسب ما نقلت عنه وكالة فرانس برس.

لكن الإخوان المسلمين، وبعد تلقيهم دعوة "رسمية" للمشاركة في المؤتمر، اعتذروا "رسمياً" عن عدم المشاركة، وفق مصدر في المكتب السياسي لجماعة الإخوان المسلمين.

ورغم تأكيد المصدر الإخواني في تصريح خاص لأخبار الشرق؛ إيمان جماعته "بأهمية عقد المؤتمر الوطني الشامل الذي سبق أن طالبنا به" ومع تأكيده أن الجماعة "تقدر الجهود والمبادرة في هذا المجال، وتحترم الجهات الممثلة في لجنة الإعداد والتنظيم للمؤتمر"، إلا أنه عبر عن الاعتقاد بأن "هناك شروطاً لا بد من توافرها لتحقيق الأهداف المرجوّة" من مثل هذه المؤتمرات. ومن بين هذه الشروط "الحوار والتشاور والتنسيق مع كافة القوى الوطنية قبل توجيه الدعوة إلى المؤتمر"، و"تشكيل لجنة تحضيرية تمثل كافة القوى الوطنية، تكون مهمتها اختيار الزمان والمكان المناسبين لعقد المؤتمر، وتوجيه الدعوات للمشاركين والمراقبين، وإعداد الأوراق والمشاريع التي ستعرض على المؤتمرين، وكذلك إقرار الترتيبات المالية والإعلامية للمؤتمر" حسب المصدر في المكتب السياسي لجماعة الإخوان المسلمين.

وأوضح المصدر الإخواني أن اعتذار الجماعة عن عدم المشاركة "ينطلق من الحرص على نجاح المؤتمر الوطني الشامل الذي دعونا (الإخوان) إليه مع كافة فصائل المعارضة السورية"، لكنه أكد في الوقت ذاته أن الإخوان المسلمين ما زالوا "يلحون على ضرورة عقده" (المؤتمر الوطني الشامل)، مبدياً ترحيبه ودعمه "لكلّ جهد يجمع بين مختلف القوى الوطنية، ولكلّ خطوة لتوحيد جهود هذه القوى على طريق التحرّر من الاستبداد" حسب تعبيره.

من جهته؛ أعلن حسن عبد العظيم أن أحزاب "التجمع الوطني الديمقراطي في سورية" الخمسة قررت عدم المشاركة في المؤتمر، مشيراً إلى أنه تلقى دعوة عبر الهاتف من الناطق باسم "التجمع من أجل سورية" فهد المصري. وذكر عبد العظيم أن "التجمع الوطني الديمقراطي" تلقى مشروعاً سياسياً يتضمن مجموعة من المقترحات والأفكار، من بينها أن يكون التجمع الوطني هو الجهة الداعية إلى عقد المؤتمر الوطني.

لكن عبد العظيم أعلن أن أحزاب التجمع (وأبرزها الاتحاد الاشتراكي العربي الديمقراطي وحزب الشعب الديمقراطي السوري) التي اجتمعت مؤخراً في دمشق، أجمعت على عدم المشاركة في مؤتمر باريس؛ "لأن الوقت ليس مناسباً لعقد مثل هذا المؤتمر"، حسب ما نقل عبد العظيم عن مسؤولي الأحزاب الخمسة في التجمع الوطني الديمقراطي.

ويشار إلى أن الأحزاب الداعية للمؤتمر هي "التجمع من أجل سورية"، و"الحزب الديمقراطي الكردستاني في سورية"، و"حزب الحداثة والديمقراطية"، و"حزب النهضة الوطني الديمقراطي في سورية"، و"تيار المستقبل الكردي في سورية". بينما يشارك المحامي أنور البني رئيس "المركز السوري للدراسات والاستشارات القانونية" بصفة مراقب.

ويهدف المؤتمر، حسب منظميه، إلى "الانتقال بسورية إلى دولة القانون"، مع الإشارة بشكل خاص إلى أهمية الوصول إلى قضاء مستقل وإلى انتخابات حرة، اضافة إلى ضرورة "احترام حقوق الأقليات القومية والدينية".

وقالت لجنة الإعداد والتنظيم للمؤتمر في بيان: إن المؤتمر سيناقش "سبل وآفاق وطرق التغيير الوطني الديمقراطي بطريقة سلمية وتدريجية وفق جدول زمني يقترحه المؤتمر"، مع "المحافظة على الثوابت الوطنية ووحدة المجتمع السوري ورفض التفريط بالأساسيات للوطن، ورفض أي محاولات للغزو العسكري الخارجي، ورفض فرض أي تغييرات في سورية بشكل عسكري سواء من الداخل أو الخارج".

وأوضح البيان أن هذا المؤتمر "مؤتمر مفتوح لا يقصي أحداً من العمل الوطني للتغيير الديمقراطي السلمي في سورية، وهو ملتقى لكل الأطراف الوطنية أياً كان توجهها الفكري أو العقائدي والإيديولوجي في محاولة وإرادة جادة لرسم مستقبل سورية بمشاركة الجميع دون أي استثناء"، معتبراً أن هذا المؤتمر "تمهيدي للمؤتمر الوطني الشامل الذي يعقد في مرحلة لاحقة في دمشق عندما تتمكن كل الأطراف من العمل انطلاقاً من داخل سورية". لكن المنظمين أشاروا إلى أن الدعوة لن توجه لحضور المؤتمر إلى "حزب البعث" الحاكم أو رفعت الأسد أو من يمثلهم، "نظراً لتاريخهم الأسود في القمع والإقصاء والقتل والتعذيب" حسب تعبير البيان.

وأوضح بيان المنظمين أن عقد المؤتمر خارج سورية يأتي نظراً "لاستحالة عقدها في الداخل في الظروف الحالية" مؤكدين في الوقت ذاته أن المؤتمر "غير تابع أو مدفوع لمصالح قوى خارجية أو أجنبية، ولا يمول من دول أو حكومات، بل بتمويل ذاتي سوري".

وسيتم في نهاية أعمال المؤتمر التوقيع على "ميثاق الوفاق الوطني للتغيير الديمقراطي" في سورية، والذي سيشمل "كافة النقاط والمحاور المشتركة بين كل الأطراف المشاركة المتفق عليها بالغالبية خلال المؤتمر حول آليات وسبل التغيير الديمقراطي". وسيكون هناك في نهاية المؤتمر أيضاً مؤتمر صحفي "حتى يتمكن أبناء سورية في الداخل من المتابعة عبر وسائل الإعلام" حسب المنظمين للمؤتمر.


* مفتي سورية يرفض قيام أحزاب إسلامية لأن فرز الناس متدينين وغير متدينين "يخص السماء" .. ويدعو البطريرك صفير "الأب الروحي" للسوريين لزيارة سورية

News Round Up

US-Syrian Damascus workshop in the pipeline, as Assad prepares for UN trip
Ibrahim Hamidi reports in al-Hayat: Translated by mideastwire.com

“Communications [are continuing] between US and Syrian researchers [who intend to] organize a workshop next fall in Damascus in order to discuss US-Syrian relations. The workshop might be attended by US Congressmen and neo-conservatives in the framework of what is known as the ‘second track’ that is parallel to the 'official,' frozen track between Damascus and Washington,” Al Hayat, a pan-Arab newspaper, reported from Damascus on August 22.

Syrian researchers close to the regime are already paying visits to research centers in Washington to prepare for this workshop. “The workshop will be held by The Center of Research and Strategic Studies from Damascus University in collaboration with Stanley Foundation in the United States,” Al Hayat added.

Meanwhile, sources close to Syrian President Bashar Assad confirmed he will visit New York between September 14-17 to attend the United Nations meeting. “Assad will be the first Syrian President to attend such a meeting since the independence of Syria. Assad will give a speech that will include ‘the new policies of Damascus vis-a-vis other countries,’” Al Hayat added. Syria has already started a diplomatic mission to arrange a series of meetings for President Assad with world leaders who will attend the UN meeting.

“Syria has already activated its role on the Syrian-Iraqi borders by arresting 5,300 suspects who tried to cross the borders to fight against the United States. Syria said it has sent a list of 1,300 suspects to the United States - 85 percent of whom are Saudi Arabian - who Syria says tried to cross the borders to Iraq,” Al Hayat reported.

The paper said it is not clear if this series of events augurs for resuming security cooperation between the United States and Syria, but Syrian-American relations analysts are confirming the importance of Syria in fostering peace for the United States in Iraq. “Washington should choose between stability in Iraq and upheaval in Syria. Both cannot be had at the same time,” Al Hayat concluded. - Al Hayat, United Kingdom

Bush, Chirac, and Sharon refuse to meet with Assad in New York

Al Seyassah, an independent Kuwaiti newspaper, reported on August 23 that: “Two Arab leaders failed during the past few days to convince the US administration to bring together US President George W. Bush or one of his head aides or ministers with the Syrian President Bashar Assad during the next international summit at the United Nations headquarters on September 14.” Gulf diplomatic sources in Washington told Al Seyassah yesterday that: “Arab mediators of the highest political stature met with US Vice-President Dick Cheney and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. The mediators failed to convince Bush to meet with Syrian President Bashar Assad. The French diplomatic envoy to Washington also confirmed that French President Jacques Chirac is not prepared to meet with the Syrian President either.

“Qatari diplomatic sources in the American capital pointed out that both Syria and Israel refused a suggestion by one of the Gulf countries to have ‘good' relations between the two countries, with the possibility of bringing together Assad and the Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon either secretly or publicly in New York.” According to Al Seyassah’s sources, Israel did not accept the proposal to better relations. Israel told the Gulf mediators that as long as Syria cannot be brought closer to the United States and France, it would be almost out of the question to have an Israeli-Syrian summit, adding that the time for such an effort would be after reaching a final solution to the Israeli-Palestinian 'problem.'" - Al Seyassah, Kuwait

Tony Badran brings my attention to an al-Balad article. He writes:

This report includes the element that I noted you left out, which is the Mehlis report. It says that the high profile trip to NY is a race against time so to speak, the last attempt at a contact, with ANY official, before the report comes out (which, as I said to you, is rumored to point a finger at ....

"Several members" of "terrorist group" reported dead in clash with Syria

Al Jazeera TV reported on August 22 that Syrian security troops have clashed with a group they described as a terrorist group affiliated with the Jund al-Sham Organization in the Madaya area near the Lebanese border. The clash resulted in the deaths of several members of the group, while the surviving members were arrested. Al Jazeera learned that the group consisted of Syrians, Iraqis and Saudis who were planning to carry out "terrorist" actions in Syria and Lebanon. - Al Jazeera, Qatar

Syrian officer said to be key source for investigators in Hariri probe
Translated by mideastwire.com

Reports close to Rafik Hariri’s political movement say that the key source of information being used by the International Investigation Committee investigating the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri is a Syrian intelligence officer who used to work in the office of the Syrian military intelligence chief,” Elaph, a pan-Arab electronic newspaper, reported on August 20.

This intelligence officer is said to have escaped to a large Arab country with the means to protect the officer from Syrian military intelligence. “The most important information this intelligence officer presented to the investigation committee was the nature of the explosives and the issue of the fundamentalist group who claimed responsibility for assassinating Rafik Hariri,” Elaph added. “The Syrian intelligence officer confirms that Syria is involved in the assassination of Prime Minister Rafik Hariri,” Elaph reported. Regarding the nature of the explosives, the officer confirmed C4 explosives were used, which are only manufactured in the United States, Israel, and some NATO members.

However, the officer confirmed that Syria was able to buy RDX, which constitutes 91 percent of the total substances used to make the C4 explosives, from Slovakia. He added that a Syrian businessman conducted the deal in Istanbul. Elaph added that this officer confirmed that an Islamic fundamentalist group executed the assassination; however, he said the Syrian intelligence was controlling the group.

“The reports that are mentioning all this information all highlight the sensitivity of the information, and that it should be received critically, especially given the number of countries involved in the issue so far,” Elaph concluded. - Elaph, United Kingdom

Iraq is now accusing Jordan, and not Syria, of harboring command central for the Iraqi Baathist resistance should give Damascus a little relief.

BAGHDAD, August 22: The new Iraqi government on Sunday complained that former officials who served Saddam Hussein were providing funds and organising Sunni Arab insurgency from neighbouring Jordan and said this was "unacceptable".

"There are a large number of regime elements who supervise some of the terrorist groups from Jordan," spokesman Laith Kubba told reporters. "We hope to have an agreement with Jordan on combating terrorism and handing over and pursuing suspects."

He stressed that Baghdad wanted good relations with Jordan, adding: "We know Saddam’s family is there with huge amounts of money and they legally fund political and media activities. They even back efforts to revive Baath Party organisations.î

Iraq has often accused Syria and Iran of not doing enough to stop insurgents crossing their border into Iraq.

But if Syria thinks it can breath more easily, Hassan Fattah of the N.Y. Times reports, August 23, 2005, that a Syrian was among the men who recently tried to attack American Ships at Aqaba. Evidently the group was being run out of Iraq. I guess the Jordanians can blame the Iraqi's for organizing terror in their country - except that it may be the Jordanian, Zarqawi, who was giving the orders from Iraq.

The Jordanian government said Monday that it had arrested a prime suspect in the rocket attack on two American warships last week in Aqaba, and for the first time it directly tied the attack to Iraqi insurgents.

Late Monday, state-run Jordanian television announced the arrest and identified the suspect as Muhammad Hassan al-Sihli, a Syrian. The report said Mr. Sihli, who it said was in charge of planning the attack, was part of a terrorist cell that included three Iraqis, including his two sons, Abdullah and Abdelrahman al-Sihli, and another man identified as Muhammad Hamid Hussein.

The cell was reported to be directed by an unidentified insurgent group in Iraq. According to the government statement, the men were "in constant touch with their organization in Iraq during preparation for the attack." But the government stopped short of linking the attack to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the Jordanian leader of a terrorist group in Iraq who faces a death sentence here for his involvement in previous attacks.

The number of Turkish tourists to Syria has achieved a remarkable growth so far in 2005 compared to past years, al-Thawra daily reported Monday. “The number of Turkish tourists in 2005 reached 96,000 compared with 22,000 in 2004, 12,000 in 2003, 10,000 in 2001 and 5,000 in 2000,” the paper reported. It attributed the reasons for this increase to the facilities that Syria and Turkey have adopted on borders, the increase of crossing points and air flights in the light of the political rapprochement between the two sides in addition to the economic and trade cooperation.

Investments in Syria hit sp 124 billion first half of 2005
Syria, Economics, 8/17/2005

A senior investment official announced on Tuesday that total investments in Syria during the first half of 2005 reached at SP 124 billion, where foreign capital contributed 23% of it, "a matter that reflects the increased confidence in the Syrian economy."

Director of the investment office at the council of ministers Mustafa al-Kafri called in a press conference on experts and interested persons in investments in Syria to take part at the industrial cities and their investment horizons that would be held in the 4th of next September on the margin of Damascus international fair to focus on promising investment opportunities and facilities that will be offered to those who are considering to invest there.

"There are plans to build seven industrial cities according to the tenth five-year plan of development at governorates of Deir al-Zour, northeast, Hama, central Syria, Raqqa northeast, Hasaka northeast, Idlib northern west to contribute to the developing process in these cities," al-Mouases said.

International investment to be launched in Syria
Syria, Economics, 8/12/2005

Investors in the tourism field expected Syria to become one of the biggest tourist markets because it is still an undeveloped with great potential because it possess important ingredients for those interested in investing in the tourism industry.

Director of the Four Seasons Hotel in Syria, Marx Azli, told al-Thawra daily on Thursday that "a number of big investors have shown desire to enter the Syrian market to launch investment projects for being an undeveloped market." Azli expected his hotel, who's service will start in November " to take hold of 40 % of the Syrian tourist market," clarifying that success of the Four Seasons will encourage investors to come to Syria where the International Hotels Administration Companies are waiting for show the success of big investments in Syria in order to encourage others to invest in Syria.

Asad's Visit to the UN: Why the US Needs to Change its Syria Policy

One of Syria Comment’s readers wrote yesterday that "President & Mrs. Assad are coming to New York in September. The President is going to address the UN General Assembly."

All Damascus has been talking about the scheduled visit of President Asad to the UN meeting in September. Asad's presence in New York will surely "drive the Bush administration crazy," as one foreign diplomat assured me. Washington has been doing everything to keep Syria isolated and to block Bashar's efforts to arrange high level visits with other heads of state. Earlier this year, the US blocked President Asad’s scheduled trips to Brazil and Austria. Recently, it scotched the must anticipated visit of Turkey’s leader to Syria. Two days ago, local papers announced that the delivery of 7 Airbus planes to Damascus had been delayed indefinitely, due to pressure from Washington and Paris. No high-profile Americans have been able to visit Damascus since Washington pulled its ambassador from the country. When a delegation of congressmen recently visited Lebanon, they were told not to come to Damascus.

President Asad’s visit to New York is an attempt to break through this isolation. Farid Ghadry and the Syrian opposition in Washington have written that the US should deny Asad an American visa because he is a terrorist. So far, Washington has intelligently ignored this advice.

People in Damascus have asked me whom the President should see while he is in the States. The president’s agenda is something that Imaad Mustafa, the Syrian Ambassador in Washington, and the President's new public affairs office will arrange. They should do so with care.

Undoubtedly, Bashar will try to get some time alone with Turkey's leader while they are both in New York. He should also take his charming and effective wife with him and try to get on 60 minutes or some comparable news show. If he is smart, he will stay through the weekend and appear on the morning news shows. He should also meet with 5 or 6 opinion makers, such as David Ignatius and Thomas Friedman, to explain Syria’s policies. They will not write glowing reports about Syria. Why should they? Syria has been cracking down on public freedoms in Damascus, arresting Kurdish opposition leaders, and throwing its weight around in Lebanon. More importantly to the US, Asad came out squarely against the US invasion of Iraq. All the same, they should see American interests in cooperating with Syria.

Now that the United States is planning to draw down its troop numbers in Iraq and has lowered its sights on what can be achieved in its regional ambitions, the two countries have much to talk about. Both countries are trying to solve their Iraq problems. Syria no longer has to fear that the United States is preparing a permanent presence in Iraq, which many believed would be used as a base to strike Syria. All the same Washington has pursued a policy of "regime change on the cheap" in Syria. It consists of squeezing the country economically and diplomatically until it falters. Already Syria’s economic growth rate has been halved since America invaded Iraq. Syrian politicians are convinced that Washington wants to destroy the Syrian regime, not change its behavior.

As David Hirst recently wrote in the Guardian:

Officially the US might say that all it wants is a change of Syrian behavior; but, said a senior [Syrian] official, "we have concluded in recent months that they really want to bring us down". European diplomats tend to agree that an apparently systematic refusal to engage the regime at any level reflects the influence of neo-conservative hawks, for whom Syria is a prime candidate for regime change in the region. Even if George Bush isn't ready to embark openly on such a policy, the neocons are strong enough to block any inclination in the opposite direction.

Bashar is trying to break the neocon monopoly on Washington’s Syria policy and to reach out to the West the only way he can, by going to the people. He must go over Washington's head. When asked whether Assad would meet with U.S. Officials, Syria's U.N. representative answered: "It is our duty to seek a dialogue because it may solve the problem between both countries (i.e. U.S. and Syria)".

American officials will shun Asad during his visit. Some will try to vilify and embarrass him, but that will be a mistake.

America's highest interest right now is to guarantee a smooth withdrawal of American troops from Iraq and to leave behind a stable and secure state. To do this, it needs the cooperation of all Iraq's neighbors. Syria would like to cooperate with the United States, but only if it is assured that Washington is not trying to bring down the regime. The two countries share a common interest in subduing extremism and jihadism. They also share an interest in ensuring that Iraq has a united and stable government, as Bashar al-Asad has said many times. But as long as the United States stubbornly hues to its policy of "regime change," the US will remain Syria's number one enemy, and Damascus will refuse to open a second front against extremists. The possibility of meaningful US-Syrian cooperation in Iraq is slight so long as the two countries are at war. Secretary of State Rice has tried to dampen down the rhetorical firefight that has raged between the two countries. In one press conference, she hushed reporters who sought to provoke anti-Syrian remarks from her, by reminding them that Damascus had withdrawn its troops from Lebanon. She did not want to push Syria to the wall. She is also on record saying that Washington does not seek “regime-change in Syria, but a change of Syrian behavior.” These small tokens of American flexibility are not enough to convince Damascus that Washington has changed its spots. Everyone knows that the State Department loses most of its battles with Defense or the Vice-President’s office. It will take more than Rice's off-hand remarks to reassure Syria that the US does not ultimately seek Asad’s overthrow.

Washington believes it would be an easy matter for Bashar to reverse his policy of opposing America’s presence in Iraq and to crack down on the Syrian Sunni population that gives comfort and assistance to Arab fighters traveling though Syria to fight in Iraq or Baathist Iraqis who have become ensconced here. It will not be easy.

Washington is asking for background security checks on all 4 million Arabs who visit Syria yearly. It is asking for arrests and surveillance of the Iraqi refugee community living in Syria, which is estimated to be around 750,000 strong. It is also asking for a crack down on the Syrian mosques and Imams who propagate an anti-American and pro-resistance line. There are many possibilities for information exchange with Damascus. Syria has already taken the easy steps to meet American demands in a sign of good faith. It has built a large sand wall and placed thousands of extra troops along its 600 kilometer border with Iraq. It has arrested some 1,200 fighters it claims were headed for Iraq. Two weeks ago, it initiated UNDP sponsored workshops to teach ecumenicalism to hundreds of mosque preachers. But it has not undertaken the more painful internal activities required of it or begun to openly support America’s occupation of Iraq.

To appreciate the difficulty Bashar will have in implementing Washington’s full demands, one must compare his present predicament to Hafiz al-Asad’s intervention in Lebanon in 1976. President Asad’s father sent Syrian troops into Lebanon to stop that country’s civil war at Washington’s request. He did so at great cost to his own presidency. By striking down the PLO and crushing Lebanon’s Muslim forces in an effort to defend Lebanese Christians, he enraged Sunni Muslims within Syria.

The Muslim Brothers went on the warpath, accusing Asad of selling out Arabism and Islam. They began a campaign of terror against Hafiz al-Asad’s secular regime and his Shiite coreligionists. It was the bloodiest period in Syria’s history and very nearly drove the country into civil war. Asad put an end to the Muslim Brothers’ organized presence in Syria in a violent showdown at Hama. It cost his government dearly. Some 20,000 Syrians were killed. The shadow of that dark period still hangs over Sunni-Alawi relations today.

Washington is asking Bashar al-Asad to do something similar by cracking down on the Sunni population that sympathizes with the Sunni Iraqi community and opposes the emergence of a Shiite dominated Iraq. Bashar may well be amenable to launching such a campaign and risking a new chapter of sectarian strife in Syria, but he can only do so if Washington supports him openly. So long as he believes Washington is trying to isolate him and topple his regime, he cannot. It would be suicide for him to open a second front against Muslim extremists in Syria, while Washington seeks his downfall. Syria is the one Arab country that has not been wracked by extremist violence over the last 20 years. That is because the government has not swum against the tide of public opinion by embracing American policies in the region. Syrians overwhelmingly believe that the US is waging a war against Arabism and Islam. For Bashar to attack this common perception and to support America’s fight in Iraq, he must have Washington’s backing. It is basic realism.

Those in Washington who insist on continuing President Bush's campaign to "reform the greater Middle East" by ratcheting up the pressure on Syria and refusing to engage President Bashar, even at the price of added instability in Iraq, are foolish. First, such a policy will fail. There is no internal opposition to President Bashar worthy of the name. Second, it is bad for the US. More American soldiers will be killed in Iraq because of it, and Iraq's chances of finding a way out of its downward spiral into chaos and civil war will be diminished. The US needs Syria's cooperation, and it should put its Iraq policy above that of bringing regime change to Damascus.

Washington must choose between stabilizing Iraq and destabilizing Syria. It is that simple. It cannot pursue both policies at the same time.

Bashar’s decision to go to New York and talk to Americans is wise. It shows he is willing to meet Washington half way. Hopefully, someone there will be listening.

News Round Up: Aug. 26, 05

The Syrian government will apply press laws to the internet and blogging - a dangerous precident. It will mean prison time for anyone convicted of publishing "false" news on the web. So far there are no laws governing blogging in Syria, which means that bloggers have had it easty. One can only be prosecuted for endangering state security, a higher and more troublesome bar.

Syrian government plans to control electronic publishing

On August 18, the independent Al Wasat newspaper reported that Taleb Kadi Amin, assistant to the media minister, said: “Syrian authorities are planning to control electronic publishing, [because] the current mess that is happening now does not benefit anyone.” This statement comes as a result of Media Minister Mehdi Dakhlallah’s initiative to develop the media sector while upholding freedom of speech which the constitution guarantees. The issue of electronic publishing was raised by Syrian journalists who showed great concern over the possibility of being controlled by the government, given that Syrian authorities have been dealing very firmly with many news websites like “News from the East,” “Elaph,” “IslamOnLine,” and “Al Quds al-Arabi,” sometimes shutting them down or forbidding them from publishing altogether, Al Wasat reported.

Al Wasat stated that the electronic sites are the only free platform for Syrian journalists and writers who are not capable of publishing in the official newspapers. Hakam al-Baba, the journalist and webmaster of the website “Freedom” said: “The government’s inclination toward having a new law for publishing restrains the electronic publishing sector and sends Syria to the middle ages and to the days of inspection boards for the sake of having only one chain of thought.” - Al Wasat, Bahrain

The Mehlis Report is now the talk of the town in Lebanon. Everyone is speculating whether it will point the finger at Hizbullah and Syria or be contained to attacking the Lebanese state security system and Lahoud. The politicians at the UN and in Lebanon will have to decide ultimately if they want to take on Syria in a battle, which can probably not be won, and will surely complicate relations between the two countries for years to come. Perhaps they will content themselves with containing the direct allegations to the Lebanese security structure? This battle, which Jumblat and Hariri failed to accomplish at the election box, when they didn't get two thirds of the parliament, could be won through the Mehlis report. That is the hope of many. Its success will depend on whether the ambitions of the report are limited and directed at realistic political goals. Even then it will be a tough and difficult battle. It may derail the tough economic reforms that are pressing if Lebanon is to win continued backing from the US and Europe.

Lebanon`s as-Safir said it hoped the U.N. report into the slaying of the country`s premier would end some tensions in Lebanon.
(AMMAN, Jordan (UPI) -- Arab press roundup for Aug. 25:)

German prosecutor Detlev Mehlis was due Thursday to turn in the report on the Feb. 14 killing of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri to the U.N. Security Council.

The independent daily said the report was supposed to end rumors surrounding the international investigation over Hariri`s assassination, which it said had reached "serious limits on the verge of sectarian sedition between the Sunnis and Shiites." It commented many Lebanese had misread U.N. Security Council Resolution 1595 -- related to Lebanon in connection with Hariri`s assassination -- when they believed it expressed international concern for Lebanon or that it would reveal the truth over Hariri`s death.

It said these people missed the "more important background to this resolution, which is the international prejudgment and suspicion of Syria`s involvement in his assassination, and its aim is to provide evidence and testimonies contributing toward this accusation against Syria."

Therefore, it predicted, Thursday`s report to the U.N. will directly commit Syria in cooperating with the international investigation and that this cooperation will not be enough for the investigation commission.

"This will constitute a justification to seek an extension for the commission`s investigation for a few more weeks," the paper predicted.

It expected the next several weeks will likely be dedicated to force Syria to allow the investigators to question the Syrian intelligence officers who were in Lebanon during the time of Hariri`s assassination because the investigation and Resolution 1595 were targeted toward Damascus. It added Mehlis might give the international community the opportunity to "switch the decision of suspicion to one of accusation and trial, which is a decision for the Security Council if it wants to investigate into the assassination or to be a tool for blowing up or organizing international ties with Damascus."

Oman`s al-Watan commented Thursday was critical because the report into the killing of the former Lebanese premier was to be submitted to the Security Council.

The pro-government daily opined the Mehlis report, named for its author, German prosecutor Detlev Mehlis, had become a curse and source of worry for the Lebanese if rumors were true that a booby-trapped truck that blew up former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri`s convoy had originated from the Shiite Hezbollah-controlled southern district in Beirut.

It warned this could ignite internal sedition and strife between the Shiites and Sunnis, as well as cause ot