Syria’s Bold Choice

Ahmed Quraishi, 18 August 2006

BEIRUT, Lebanon—The semiofficial newspapers of Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt and Kuwait have spent the past week in cutting Syria’s president Bashar Assad to pieces.

Mr. Assad was not exactly surprised. He came out with a blazing speech in Damascus last week, calling the leaders of these Arab countries – without naming them – “half men.”

This is the ultimate insult in the male dominated Arab culture. Mr. Assad was attacking Arab countries that opposed Hezbollah’s kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers on 12 July. This act, several Arab nations believe, was an attempt to drag all of them into a war that served the interests of only two countries in the region—Syria and Iran.

Mr. Assad was not happy that these Arab countries described Hezbollah’s action as “reckless adventurism.” He also condemned Lebanese politicians who want to see Hezbollah disarmed.

In return, one Jordanian newspaper made this sarcastic comment, “Listening to the Syrian president, one would think that resistance [to Israel] was raging throughout the Golan Heights,” which is the Syrian territory under Israeli control since 1967. The point? Syria has religiously avoided sparking a war on its own borders with Israel for the past quarter of a century but it keeps it alive by proxy on the Israeli-Lebanese borders.

What does all of this really mean?

First, it means Syria has decided to firmly ally itself with Iran, burning bridges with the last two Arab governments – Saudi Arabia and Egypt – that provided Damascus a channel to Washington.

Second, it means that the diplomatic warfare between the Iran-Syria-Hezbollah nexus and the rest of the Arab countries has reached new levels. The Arabs, it seems, have decided they want to limit Iran’s growing influence across Iraq, Syria and Lebanon.

Syria wants a role in the region, and some respect from the United States. And that’s why it has allied itself with Iran. But the problem, some analysts say, is that Syria is not an equal to the more powerful Iran. In the eyes of many analysts, Syria is just one more chip in Iran’s arsenal.

Seher Baasiri, a defense analyst for Al-Nahar, explains it this way: “Syria’s problem is that there is no comparison between [Syria and Iran] in terms of the balance of power. No comparison in terms of influence, wealth, or even in terms of international attention. This makes Syria not a partner of Iran but just a part of Iranian strategy.”

But it is not clear how much of this is true. After all, Syria does have genuine interests in allying itself with Hezbollah and Iran. Syria faces a U.N. inquiry into the murder of former Lebanese premier Rafic Hariri. Syria is a suspect and it wants to scuttle the inquiry.

Damascus is also hungry for some international respect and it wants to get it by forcing the United States to talk directly to Syria. The Americans, however, refuse to do so. So what does Syria do? It decides to irk Washington by consolidating the Hezbollah-Iran alliance.

But let’s also look at the flip side of the coin. Syria also happens to be the weakest link in the Hezbollah-Syria-Iran nexus. Let’s just ask ourselves this question: What part of this nexus can ensure the downfall of the other two?

The fact is Israel has been really hurt in its latest war with Hezbollah. And there’s no doubt that many policymakers in Israel and maybe even in the United States have concluded that taking out the weak Syrian regime would automatically result in breaking the Hezbollah-Iran nexus.

The first result of this line of thinking is that Turkey has begun intercepting suspicious Iranian planes flying into Syria through the Turkish airspace. The planes could be carrying weapons to Hezbollah through Syria.

This report was exclusive to AhmedQuraishi.com