Tomorrow, Pres. Obama will give his much-awaited address “to the Muslim world” in Cairo. On Sunday, Lebanon holds parliamentary elections– and Iran holds its elections June 12.
I’m in Damascus this week. Officials and non-officials here are very eager for improved relations with the US, and express some concern that despite all his rhetoric of “change”, Obama has so far done precious little to implement that promise.
The WaPo’s Glenn Kessler reported this morning that Sec. of State Clinton spoke with her Syrian counterpart by phone Sunday, and made plans for both Israeli-Arab peace envoy George Mitchell and a US military team to visit Syria later this month.
The military delegation will be discussing coordination in combatting insurgent forces in Iraq. That is something the Syrian government has an interest in. But it has an even stronger interest in not having this be the only level at which relations improve. Having a political delegation visit is seen as even more important here…
However, Obama still has not returned to Damascus the ambassador who was peevishly withdrawn by Bush some years ago. (A high-ranking official in the Bush White House recently told me that the US was in a state of “quasi-war” with Syria in those years. What the heck does that term mean? A state of war is a clear category in international relations, that imposes certain responsibilities on both sides. And often, indeed, even in a state of war, the sides still have ambassadorial-level representation in each other’s capitals… But ‘quasi-war’???)
Obama has also done, or failed to do, a number of other things that could have started to improve relations with Syria.
One of my concerns is that unless he and his people (including Mitchell) pay serious and sustained attention to any issue– including Syria, but including other key issues in the region, too– then the bureaucrats in the State Department will just continue on the same kind of auto-pilot course they became habituated to adopting throughout eight years of GWB– and prior to that, eight years of the also strongly pro-Israel Pres. Clinton.
Remember that throughout those 16 years, any State Department employees who– like Ann Wright and a few brave others– strongly disagreed on grounds of principle with the course US policy was taking in the region resigned their posts. And those not courageous enough to resign who still dared to raise different views within the department rapidly found their careers sidelined.
Turning that great ship of the State Department’s bureaucracy around until it is seamlessly and effectively following the lead of the country’s recently elected new “Captain” will take some sustained attention and energy.
(Another question: Is Hillary Clinton the right person to actually do this inside the department that she heads?)
Anyway, what I’ve been hearing for many weeks now, in Washington DC and elsewhere, is that Washington has been waiting to adopt some kind of a new, more inclusive policy toward Syria after the Lebanese elections.
Okay, that’s next week.
George Mitchell will be in the region next week– he already has plans to visit Israel and Ramallah then.
It would make excellent sense if he also visits Damascus then, for the first time in his role as peace envoy.
He needs to hear the views and concerns of the government here, which has a lot to contribute to the peacemaking venture– especially if, as I strongly hope, Obama and Mitchell are aiming at securing a serious, sustainable, and comprehensive agreement that will end all outstanding portions of the Arab-Israeli conflict.
My judgment is that there is now very little likelihood at all that a viable peace agreement can be concluded only on the Palestinian track– which is all that Obama and Co. have talked about, as of yet.
We need to hear him say out loud that a “comprehensive” Arab-Israeli peace is in the US national interest– not just a “Palestinian-Israeli” peace.
… Anyway, I don’t have time to write much here. But regarding the prospects around the Lebanese elections, the best commentary so far is still this piece by the astute Lebanese blogger Qifa Nabki.
6 thoughts on “Big days ahead for the Middle East…”
Comments are closed.
America is not serious and honest in its dealing witht he Middle East….
I do not think Clinton is the right choice after all she is Pro Israel and her views on Palest.. are well known..However give peace a chance…
America is not serious and honest in its dealing witht he Middle East….
I do not think Clinton is the right choice after all she is Pro Israel
HD, when was American serious and honest when it comes to ME?
Can you give one American official him /her not Pro Israeli when it comes to ME and the conflicts between Israeli and Arab?
Even UN official who serve in ME and many members I came to know names and accidently I met in different times in the last 15 years I felt they are more Pro Israel side than Arab or ME countries when it comes to the conflicts and the rights of both side of the conflict.
Sadly the only reason I can say why this so bold in western world is the megaphone and propaganda of Israelis and Pro Israel in western world in different levels /media while the Arab failed to use their resources to defend and build their case and make their voices heard in this very noisy Pro Israel environment.
Turning that great ship of the State Department’s bureaucracy around until it is seamlessly and effectively following the lead of the country’s recently elected new “Captain” will take some sustained attention and energy.
Ahhh… you just spent eight paragraphs documenting the lack of any real leadership from the “Captain”… so perhaps in fact the ship of State IS seamlessly and effectively following his lead?
(Another question: Is Hillary Clinton the right person to actually do this inside the department that she heads?)
Obviously not. Do you actully suppose she’ll be replaced? That Dennis Ross will be replaced? That Rahm Emanuel will be replaced? I don’t think so…
I was originally quite disappointed by Obama’s actions, but I am gradually changing my mind. Putting Hillary and Dennis in the government may serve to keep them on a leash. Imagine still Senator Clinton’s reaction to the more even handed comments of Obama if she were not constrained by her position? Dennis Ross seems already to be wandering off the reservation, though, and he could possibly go. Obama not only has to turn around the great ship of the State Dept, he also has to turn around the monster tanker of US public opinion. Conditioned by many years of White House and MSM propaganda the public has some very fixed ideas on the situation:
1) Israel is a small nation of civilized people just like us, in constant danger of being overrun and its people massacred by hordes of relatively uncivilized Arabs (and the Arab controlled UN is antisemitic),
2) Any action Israel takes is justified if it is for Israel’s security,
3) All Arabs are intrinsically different from us and therefore basically evil (although any who support us may be considered moderate),
4) The currently most evil nation bent on the destruction of Israel and its people is Iran (not even Arab, but who cares)and Syria is a close second,
5) Despite all evidence to the contrary, Iran is hell bent on developing nuclear weapons to destroy Israel,
6) It is good that Israel has nuclear weapons and no one else in the region does and there is no need for Israel to join the NPT,
6) Hezbollah and Hamas are simply agents of Iran and have no legitimate grievances or interests of their own for their own people,
7) Israel is entitled to all of Eretz Israel because God gave it to them (the Bible says so) and their willingness to allow the native people of Palestine, Lebanon, Jordan, Sinai, etc., to live there (without any political or human rights)is a great compromise and show of generosity on their part,
8) Arabs in general, and Palestinians in particular are not capable of governing themselves (maybe sometime in the distant future when we have educated and civilized them),
9) Israeli intelligence is the best in the world, its Army the most moral (although there is some question since Gaza), its policies are the most realistic and enlightened, and Israel’s interests are our interests,
10) Because of all of the above (plus the guilt of the West in general for the holocaust), the US must follow Israel’s lead in everything, support Israel in every way including financially, and do Israel’s bidding without question.
I am sure I have left out a few, but I believe that the majority of Americans today would actually subscribe to the above. Hence the need for a great reeducation before embarking on too many new actions.
(apologies for being too long winded)
Here’s an intersting blog post from Andrew Sullivan of the atlantic on Iran’s elections:
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/06/something-is-happening-in-iran.html
Obama is pushing me to the point of being ashamed of being American. What right does he have to go under the Saudi majesty as if we were less than that retrograd kingdom. Obama said he is there to seek his highness wisdom and counsel. Shame on him, what wisdom, that of having being born to a royal family? That is not our values? Obama preaches being true to our values except when it comes to external situations like this one.
We have a faustian bargain with these Saudi lowlifes that goes back to the 40s, nothing to do with wisdom or morals. What wisdom? That there was oil under their sand? Otherwise they would be nothing.
And where is Michelle? How come she is not there on the trip? He is giving in to the female invisibility of the Saudis? All males today at the ceremony. Shame. The reality is that no PR can make Arab countries like the US. The best Madison Ave firms were enlisted to the heart and soul of the muslim effort to no avail. Just like the Saudi lifestyle is not sellable here (that is why you here nothing about Saudi, just silence) ours doesn’t work there.
Goes begging in my name for cheaper oil? No thanks. I’d rather pay than beg. Goes to praise Mecca the place where it all began, just the day a moslem convert goes on a killing rampage in the name of Allah here in the US. And Obama kisses the old fart highness and doesn’t condemn the killing.
Pakistan is boiling because of wahabi expansionism. Some fools are obsessed with Zionist expansionism (look at the size of Israel on a map to see how large it became you fools) while the actual expansion that threatens us is radical islam. And there is my president on his knees today in Ryad and tomorrow in Cairo. All apologies on our side, the Arabs can do no wrong. Maybe the Saudis are very wise and their 9/11 strategy did work like a charm.
Thanks for keeping me company on such a lonely and sad day.
Respectfully,
Tito