Now Syria is at the top of the bad guys' league table

Neocon pressure for regime change in Damascus is building up

Jonathan Steele
Friday February 25, 2005
The Guardian

In the world of the American neocons, salsa is not a sexy dance. It is in-group jargon based on the initial letters of a congressional bill which George Bush signed into law just over a year ago.
At the time, European chancelleries barely noticed the Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act. If spotted at all, it was written off as ideological froth with little practical relevance. Even now, in spite of the international interest caused by Washington's accusations of Syrian involvement in last week's murder of the former Lebanese prime minister, Rafik Hariri, salsa has not got many European policy-makers jumping.

More's the pity, since the act increasingly looks like a key marker in setting the tone for Bush's second term. Don't be fooled by the president's visit to Europe this week. With its grand talk of a new era in transatlantic relations, the trip was designed to sound a note of reconciliation, like the earlier foray by the new secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice.

Washington understands European concerns about the need for multilateral consultation and more use of diplomacy, we were told. Even on Iran, where Europe clearly diverges from Washington, Bush put the soap on softly.

Welcome though these assurances on Iran are, they do not go to the heart of the matter, which remains the neocons' agenda for the Arab world and their support for the most hardline elements in Israel. Europe needs to be highly wary. What Bush does in the Middle East is more important than what he says in Europe.

Ariel Sharon and his Likud party have long seen their Syrian neighbour as a more direct menace than distant Iran, and the evidence suggests the Bush administration shares this view and has started to take action accordingly. Removing Saddam Hussein was the primary foreign policy goal in Bush's first term. The No 1 focus for regime change under Bush Two is Damascus, not Tehran.

For one thing, the government of Bashar al-Assad is seen as less popular and more fragile than the Iranian mullahs. With no oil resources, Syria's economy is weaker. Top army and security service posts are in the hands of a minority sect. Long-standing unrest from banned Islamic fundamentalist groups, as well as Kurds, can be manipulated.

This is not to deny that Iran's nuclear ambitions are a major concern for Israel. But it is Syria's support for Hizbullah guerrillas in Lebanon and the Hamas movement in the Palestinian territories which irritates Sharon most. Hizbullah's reputation within the Arab world as the only group which has forced the Israeli army to retreat is a constant source of annoyance, even though the withdrawal from Lebanon took place under an Israeli Labour prime minister.

Iran also backs the two movements, but removing Syria from the equation is seen as a quicker route to weakening them. So neocon pressure on Syria has been building for several years. The key text, which analysts of US policy have been hastily dusting down, is called A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm. Drafted in 1996 for the government of Binyamin Netanyahu, it was signed by several men including Richard Perle, Douglas Feith and David Wurmser, who later joined the Bush team. Though some have since left, they remain influential.

Rejecting the notion of "land for peace", the paper advocated "weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria". Salsa emerged from the same stable. Under it Bush imposed economic sanctions on Syria last May. In September he persuaded France to co-sponsor a UN security council resolution which called for Syria to withdraw the troops it has had in Lebanon since the civil war.

Bush's notorious axis of evil in 2002 did not include Damascus, but in his latest state of the union address Bush named Syria alongside Iran, signalling its rise up the bad guys' league table. It should have been no surprise that, whoever assassinated Rafik Hariri, Washington quickly activated a plan for international pressure, which was already prepared.

As the US campaign developed last year, Damascus reacted in confusion. It made the mistake of pressing the Lebanese parliament to extend the pro-Syrian president's term. On the other hand it accepted several Washington demands. It agreed to joint US-Iraqi-Syrian controls over its border to stop insurgents passing into Iraq. While Iraqi radicals called for a boycott, Syria organised polling stations for expatriates to vote in last month's Iraqi elections.

Unlike over Iran, European policy on Syria is in danger of getting too close to Washington's. Jack Straw says Syria is the prime suspect behind the Hariri assassination, though there is no evidence to prove it. France joined the US this week in calling for a withdrawal of foreign troops from Lebanon. Both countries may soon come under US pressure to impose sanctions.

President Chirac did at least tell Bush that he is not ready to put Hizbullah on a list of "terrorist" organisations. The group has widespread support in Lebanon, with 12 members in parliament. Those who want a fair election in Lebanon in May can hardly advocate banning important parties.

The same is true in Palestine, where Hamas is making a similar transition from resistance movement to political party, a decade later than Hizbullah. In contrast to the Iraqi polls, it was little noted in the western media when Palestinians queued to vote in municipal elections in Gaza, giving Hamas significant victories over the Fatah party of the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas. Hamas won 75 out of 118 seats on a turnout of 85%.

Next week Tony Blair hosts a conference on Palestine. It will mainly be ceremonial now that Sharon and Abbas have started their own dialogue, but it is important that it is not used to give the new Palestinian leadership monopoly support, particularly on security issues. Europe has to resist the Bush-Sharon agenda of wanting Abbas to "crack down on terrorism" in advance of Israel's Gaza withdrawal, especially when all Palestinians have accepted a ceasefire.

Hamas's election success shows Palestinian politics are in a state of great fluidity in the post-Arafat era, as does the strong showing in the presidential poll by Mustafa Barghouti's civic reform movement, the Palestinian National Initiative. This week's row in the Palestinian parliament as to whether the new cabinet should be technocratic or political shows the same desire for competence and professionalism in place of corruption and suppression of debate.

The west has erred in too many countries by favouring personalities over process. Palestine should not be added to the list. Just as on Syria, Europe must take a sensitive and independent line

http://www.guardian.co.uk/syria/0,13031,928812,00.html