Muddled thinking
Tuesday, April 1st, 2008
Attention in the Middle East has been focussed on the fighting in Basra and in Afghanistan, with an increasing nervousness about the outcome in both countries.
Arab countries have been making their own judgments on how long the United States will want to remain militarily engaged in the region. With varying degrees of fear and resignation, they look at Iran as the one major regional power emerging out of the invasion of Iraq. Some wish to accommodate Iran , others are more hostile.
At the weekend an Arab summit took place in Damascus. 12 out of the 22 Arab League members sent heads of state to the conference, with Saudi Arabia and Egypt represented by minor officials, and a boycott by Lebanon. Some saw the hand of the United States in these snubs.
However the Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak at the weekend echoed remarks by the Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, and called for a dialogue with Syria. At the same time the new UN Panel head investigating the assassination of Rafiq al- Hariri has curiously blamed a ‘crime network,’ whilst many Lebanese blame Syria for the death, as do others in the region.
If we assume that the judgment of many Arab politicians is correct and that Iran will remain an assertive regional power, then what strategy should be deployed? If Syria is a conduit for arms to Hezbollah, and has influence on Hamas, then surely it should be a key objective to disengage Syria from its relationship with Iran. Boycotts and isolation certainly do not appear successful. Israel knows that the key objective of Syria is the return of the Golan Heights.
Syria with over 1 million Iraqi refugees, many of whom are Christians, carries a considerable burden arising out of the Iraq invasion. It is a secular society and is violently opposed to Islamic fundamentalism.
If Iran is the biggest twin challenge in the region, along with the interconnected Israel – Palestine conflict, then reducing its influence should be a priority. To the extent that there is a strategy to do this, it is currently confused and contradictory.
Ultimately there can be no resolution of the region’s problems without Syria, warts and all. It is time to road test the constant offers by the Syrians of a formal dialogue. For Israel, less secure than ever before, what is the downside?