Fragile Syria must withdraw from Lebanon
By Patrick Seale
Commentary by
Monday, February 28, 2005
Syria was fragile before the murder of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. It is now in danger. The huge bomb which destroyed his motorcade on Feb. 14 threatens to blow up the Syrian regime itself. Judging from its relentless pressure on Damascus to withdraw its troops from Lebanon - and its thinly veiled accusations that Syria killed Hariri - the United States, in particular, seems intent on overthrowing the government of President Bashar Assad.
Neoconservatives in Washington, still in the grip of their ideological vision to "democratize" and restructure the Middle East, are pressing for Syria to be the next target for "regime change." Arab leaders are desperately worried that the region, already in a highly volatile state because of the war in Iraq, will be further gravely destabilized. Amr Moussa, the secretary general of the Arab League, flew urgently to Damascus, where he was followed by General Omar Suleiman, the powerful head of Egypt's military intelligence service. Both have urged Assad to defuse the crisis by applying the 1989 Taif Accord, which provides for a Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon.
More than 200 Syrian intellectuals, including leading opposition figures, have themselves called for a withdrawal of the Syrian Army from Lebanon in order to put relations between the two countries on a healthier basis.
America's motive in pressuring Syria lies in the situation in Iraq, where the U.S. is battling a nationalist and Islamist insurgency. To win in Iraq, America believes it must seal off the Iraqi battlefield from interference by Iraq's neighbors. It suspects that Syria is letting infiltrators cross the porous border into Iraq to kill American soldiers and that it has given safe haven to former members of Saddam Hussein's regime, allowing them to constitute a sort of rear base for the insurgency. Meanwhile, on Syria's other flank, Israel has launched a campaign to demonize Hizbullah as a "terrorist organization" that should be ostracized, sanctioned and destroyed. Lending support to Israel's campaign, the U.S. has been urging the Europeans, and France in particular, to condemn Hizbullah.
France has resisted the pressure, and considers Hizbullah a major political actor on the Lebanese scene that cannot be ignored or wished away. For the great majority of Arab opinion it is also a national liberation movement which drove Israel out of southern Lebanon after a 22-year occupation. Israel detests Hizbullah not least because it has acquired a deterrent capability.
Syria is therefore caught in a pincer movement between the U.S. on one side and Israel on the other, a regional context which the Hariri assassination has now made even more threatening. Syria may not be guilty of Hariri's death. It is certainly not in its interest to destabilize Lebanon and expose itself to fierce attack at precisely the moment when it is being squeezed on both flanks. Several of its enemies - Israel first and foremost - would have an interest in perpetrating the crime and pinning it on Damascus so as to create international pressure for the overthrow of the Syrian regime. But, whether or not Syria was responsible, it is now suffering the devastating fall-out, and must act fast to save itself.
France and the United States have called for the immediate withdrawal of foreign troops from Lebanon under UN Security Council Resolution 1559. In Brussels a week ago, President Jacques Chirac joined President George W. Bush in affirming their "common determination to work for a free, independent and democratic Lebanon."
But France's motives are very different from America's. Whereas the U.S. is absorbed by its struggle in Iraq, France is more concerned with protecting its position in Lebanon, a country where its influence has been strong for well over a century.
Unlike the U.S., France is not seeking Assad's overthrow, only the reform of his government. Chirac has something of a personal axe to grind. He strongly supported Assad when he came to power in 2000 - favoring him with a state visit to Paris and pleading Syria's cause with other European capitals - but he has been bitterly disappointed by his performance ever since, and in particular his failure to carry out promised economic and political reforms. Chirac strongly objected to Syria's move last year to force the Lebanese to amend their constitution so as to extend the mandate of the pro-Syrian President Emile Lahoud. And he has now been outraged and sickened by the murder of his close friend Hariri.
It remains to be seen whether Syria will act to defuse the crisis, or whether it will dig in its heels and seek to ride out the storm. To protect itself against American and Israeli threats, Syria needs to secure European support. Assad seemed to understand this when he undertook a series of successful visits to European capitals during the past two years. But his efforts have been all but annulled by Syria's quarrel with France, by its painfully slow negotiation of an association agreement with the European Union, and now by the international outcry over the Hariri assassination.
There are, nevertheless, a number of moves which Syria might consider. Withdrawal of the Syrian Army from Lebanon would seem to be inevitable. Its troops have already been reduced from 40,000 to 14,000 and are largely deployed in the Bekaa Valley. Withdrawing them altogether would not reduce Syria's influence, but would almost certainly increase it.
More to the point would be the recall to Damascus of General Rustom Ghazaleh, the head of Syria's military intelligence network in Lebanon, who has been widely held responsible for the crude way in which the extension of Lahoud's mandate was handled. It is the gross interference of Syrian intelligence agents, and their Lebanese counterparts, in almost every aspect of Lebanese life that has rallied the opposition and created a strong current of anti-Syrian opinion. Syria should cooperate with the international commission, headed by an Irish police commissioner, which has been appointed to enquire into Hariri's murder.
It would also be wise for Syria to allow international observers to monitor the forthcoming elections in Lebanon so as to ensure that they are free and fair. This would signal that Syria is seeking a new relationship with its smaller neighbor, based on mutual equality and respect, which could be enshrined in a new treaty of friendship and cooperation.
Above all, Syria needs to press ahead with long delayed reforms at home, which include releasing political prisoners, allowing greater freedom of expression, encouraging the emergence of a vigorous civil society, and creating a favorable climate and regulatory framework in which local and foreign capital can invest in the country without falling victim to the extravagant financial appetites of a handful of local power-brokers.
Syria has certain vital interests in Lebanon. It cannot allow its neighbor to conclude a separate peace with Israel until its own claims have been addressed, notably the recovery of the Golan Heights seized by Israel in 1967. Nor can Syria allow Lebanon to become a base for hostile operations against it.
But, apart from these red lines, its interest is to befriend Lebanon, not to bully it. Assad is facing as grave a crisis in Lebanon as the ones his father, the late President Hafiz Assad, dealt with successfully in 1976, when Syria first marched into Lebanon to protect the Christians, and in 1982, when Israel invaded the country.
Patrick Seale, a veteran Middle East analyst, wrote this commentary for THE DAILY STAR.
dailystar.com.lb |
