|
Books on Syria
|
Update No: 044 - (02/07/07)
Divide and Rule
Barely a month after the start of renewed tensions in Lebanon with emergence
of the Fatah al-Islam militants in the Nahr al-bared Palestinian refugee camp
just north of Tripoli, an attack against UN Forces in Lebanon (UNIFIL) killed
six peacekeepers - three Spanish and three Colombians - in an apparent roadside
bomb attack in southern Lebanon. The attack was met with widespread condemnation
even as the intent and identity of the perpetrators remains unknown.
Nevertheless, as has been the case from the Rafiq Hariri murder in 2005 to the
Nahr al-Bared revolt, the Lebanese government and several western powers have
hinted that Syria is involved. The killing of the UNIFIL troops came just after
the murder of a prominent anti-Syrian Lebanese member of parliament Walid Eido,
in Beirut's beachfront area. The combination of violent events in almost weekly
succession suggests someone is trying to push Lebanon closer to civil war and
blaming Syria - which is alleged to be reprising against the imposition of an
international tribunal to try the Hariri murder (we find this is a 'strained'
argument, surely such incidents would make the tribunal ever more likely) - for
this undesirable tension, as pro-government factions turned out in force along
Beirut's sea front chanting anti-Syrian and anti-Hezbollah slogans.
The Hamas - Fatah War Damages Syrian Interests
Nevertheless, those behind the murder of anti-Syrian Lebanese MP Walid Eido
knew Syria would be blamed, hoping to push the Lebanon closer to civil war.
Meanwhile, in the Palestinian Territories, there was a mini-civil war between
Hamas and Fatah. This has destroyed the Palestinian government of National Unity
formed under Syrian (and Saudi) tutelage in Mecca last winter, all but isolating
Gaza as the sole Hamas enclave. The Palestinian split creates more difficulties
for Syria as well. The leader of Hamas, Khaled Mesha'al lives in Damascus, and
as the West is rallying behind Fatah as the sole legitimate representative of
the Palestinians (at least as far as the 'international community' is
concerned), Syrian support for Hamas can be used by the West as a further lever
of pressure, while reducing Syrian negotiating power, should talks between Fatah
president Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli prime minister Olmert establish the basis
for a renewed peace process. Syria is already feeling the pressure brought on by
the recent Fatah - Hamas war. A state-run Syrian newspaper criticized former
British PM Tony Blair's new appointment as a special Middle East envoy, because
he has 'blood-smeared hands'. Blair had said his task would be to prepare the
ground for a future Palestinian state as an essential first step toward
achieving peace in the region. The editorial in the Tishrin newspaper said
"We would not pin great hopes on his mission simply because a war man could
never be a peace advocate or peace envoy ... This is the first time throughout
history in which we see a peace envoy with hands smeared with innocents'
blood." Blair, who has been appointed to his Middle East envoy role by US
President Bush, Russia, the UN and the EU, is expected to be working closely
with ANP president Mahmoud Abbas. This suggests that Hamas will not be
considered in any talks, which adds another diplomatic blow to Syria.
Syria and Hezbollah Have Nothing to Gain from Attacking UNIFIL
In its condemnation of the attack against UNIFIL, the UN Security Council
(SC) demanded that the peacekeeping contingent be especially vigilant in
safeguarding the security of UN personnel ensuring that UNFIL can achieve
complete freedom of movement in the prescribed area of operations. This area is
of course dominated by Hezbollah, suggesting that the SC is suggesting that
UNIFIL act to restrict Hezbollah further, which is evidently considered a
suspect in the operation. Yet, it would seem improbable that Hezbollah - also
implying Syria - is involved. Hezbollah, which has been engaged in establishing
its role as a Lebanese political force has indicated it has Lebanese interests
at heart. It is unlikely to be willing to stir the regional pot further,
prompting renewed tensions in southern Lebanon after last summer's war. In the
weeks following the Nahr al-Bared revolt, Hezbollah's leader Hassan Nasrallah
spoke in favor of Lebanese unity, warning about the dangers of military action
to end the Islamist revolt in the refugee camp, that to crush Islamist militants
under siege by the Lebanese army, would cause grave internal discord. He urged a
negotiated settlement: "A military escalation risked", said Nasrallah,
"peace and security in Lebanon... it is dangerous for national unity in
Lebanon," (as it would stir tensions between the Lebanese and the
Palestinians - one of the central aspects of the 1975-1990 civil war).
Warning of al Qaeda involvement
Nasrallah's reaction came, as the United States rushed delivery of fresh
military equipment to the Lebanese army (why did the US government not extend
the same offer when Lebanon was under attack from Israel in the summer of
2006…?), leading to fears of possible US direct involvement in Lebanon, as
part of another campaign in the 'war on terror. Indeed, Nasrallah warned that
direct US involvement in Lebanon, would serve to attract al-Qaeda fighters, just
as they have been drawn to Iraq, making Lebanon into another battlefield for the
US led war-on-terror. This would seem to be a safe prediction and coming from
the leading Shi'ite military group about the Sunni al Qaeda - (no friends of
theirs), should be taken seriously.
Moreover, it should be noted that Hezbollah still holds two Israeli military
prisoners, meaning that Israel eventually will have to engage in negotiations to
secure their release, as part of a prisoner exchange. The seemingly reasonable
Lebanese information minister, Ghazi Aridi, said that the UNIFIL attack is
directly related to events connected to Fatah al-Islam and the Nahr al-Bared
camp, where the standoff continues - in fact it appears to be spreading to other
refugee camps in the Tripoli area. As for al-Qaeda, or at least the threat of
Sunni radical islamists, the Egyptian lieutenant of the elusive Osama bin Laden,
Ayman al-Zawahri, had encouraged attacks against UNIFIL, while the infamous 'Ansar
al-Qaida fi al-Iraq' (Partisans of al-Qaeda in Iraq) founded a related
organization 'Qaedat al-Jihad fi al-Lubnan' (something akin to 'leadership of
the Jihad in Lebanon). However credible - or incredible - the claims of an al-Qaeda
network connected to Bin Laden (is he even still alive?) may be, there has been
an emergence of small Sunni based militant organizations in Lebanon and the
Occupied Territories in the last year. These include Fatah al-Islam to Jund
al-Islam in Gaza, the group claiming to have kidnapped BBC journalist Alan
Johnston. Palestinian Refugee camps provide good cover for such groups; under an
Arab League accord from 1969, Palestinians have the right of self defense within
the camps, while armies cannot enter the camps themselves. Local as well as
foreign militants can enter the camps and avail themselves of the same cover.
Who (if anyone) is the Puppeteer?
The question remains as to who is manoeuvring these groups, given that some
of the incidents arise simply because of warring armed factions, and ever more
extreme, irrational religious partisans, bristling with weaponry. When the Nahr
al-Bared siege began last May, Syria was predictably indicted as being the
puppeteer - which no reading of the actual facts can sustain. The reasonable
stance taken by information minister Aridi, does not preclude the current
pro-American Lebanese government from blaming Syria as their traditional
Pavlovian response to any act of terror in Lebanon. The check-list for any
nation state 'directing mind,' for non-spontaneous incidents would have to
include Israel as well as Syria and even, via third parties, elements within the
US seeking provocations, cannot be totally excluded.
Following the 'cui bono' approach, it can be seen that Syria has no interest in
attacking UNIFIL whatsoever. UNIFIL is made up by troops from Spain and Italy,
the governments of both of which have been friendly to Syria, more than most in
the West. Syria cannot afford to further ruin relations with European leaders,
which in the vacuum left by the lack of US engagement, are the only
international powers that could help it pursue its own interest of achieving a
comprehensive peace process that would include the Golan. Even French President
Sarkozy, unlike his predecessor, Jacques Chirac, has offered to talk to
Hezbollah and Syria. Why would Syria risk endangering those relations at such an
especially delicate period with the threat of a conflict in Iran and the roots
of extended Palestinian and Lebanese internal conflicts?
Syria is also trying to ensure that the EU remains independent of the policies
advocated by the Cheney-led White House group and their ilk. Indeed, the
neo-conservative movement is still pushing for war with Iran (and Syria would
inevitably be drawn into such a war), suggesting that Syria needs EU allies more
than ever now. Adding to this prospect, are the frequent Israeli media reports
that Syria is preparing for a summer offensive against Israel because it has
bought weapons systems from Iran and Russia - including MiG 31-E interceptors,
which are considered very capable and are among the fastest available with close
to Mach-3 speed. Nevertheless, a Syrian attack on Israel, which they and every
one else knows could not succeed militarily, would be so much playing into the
hands of the White House war party, as to be totally counterproductive for
Damascus, and would set back prospects of a settlement indefinitely. We find
this just not even barely credible.
Destabilizing Lebanon further would push the UN Security Council to demand
greater UNIFIL action in southern Lebanon, interfering with Hezbollah rather
than merely maintaining the peace. UNIFIL - and there is little doubt that this
would be the preferred role from the US point of view - would be asked to
actively disarm Hezbollah, which in turn would see the force as having less as a
neutral peacekeeping role and more as tool of the Siniora government, the USA
and Israel. Hezbollah, Syria's main ally in the region now would see its
interests threatened. It is highly questionable whether the troop contributing
nations to UNIFIL would allow their personnel to disarm Hezbollah, unless it was
on a negotiated basis which is not on any horizon. It is almost certain that
they would not engage in the fighting implied by any attempts to forcibly disarm
Hezbollah fighters.
Ultimately, this calculus gives added credibility to the notions put forth by
the investigative journalist Seymour Hersh. He has suggested that Saad Hariri's
'Mustaqbal' (The Future) party coalition, backed by the United States and some
elements in the Saudi ruling family, have fostered the rise of 'salafist' groups
such as Fatah al-Islam to act as a counterbalance to Hezbollah.
« Top
|
