Obstacles to Peace
It was in the Jewish Telegraphic Agency e-mail update:
U.S., Iran are new obstacles in renewed Israel-Syria talks: “In their sixth major peacemaking effort since 1991, Israeli and Syrian negotiators face all the old issues – borders, security arrangements, the nature of the peace, water, timetables – and two new ones: Iran and the U.S.”
It was in the Jewish Telegraphic Agency e-mail update:U.S., Iran are new obstacles in renewed Israel-Syria talks: “In their sixth major peacemaking effort since 1991, Israeli and Syrian negotiators face all the old issues – borders, security arrangements, the nature of the peace, water, timetables – and two new ones: Iran and the U.S.”
There was more, but just this much made us ill. There we are – obstacles. If only the United States would get out of the way, Israel could make peace with Syria and everything would be just fine and dandy. Yes indeed. “Iran and the U.S.,” those well-known twin obstacles.
Excuse the bitterness; it was just a journalist, albeit one working for JTA. But Syria presents a problem too important to let pass the idea that the United States has some devious interest in preventing Israel from reaching a secure peace with a willing neighbor. Or that Iran and the United States are simply flip sides of a coin.
According to Ha’aretz, Brig. Gen. Yossi Baidatz, head of the IDF Military Intelligence’s Research Division, told a Knesset Committee this week that, “in his view, Syria was not really considering changing its attitude toward Iran… despite diplomatic contacts with Israel. He added, however, that he felt that the Syrians were earnestly interested in advancing the peace process with Israel. The intelligence chief went on to say that Hezbollah was continuing to enhance its rocket capability both north and south of the Litani River. ‘The rockets are coming in from Syria and Iran,’ Baidatz said.”
Despite the seeming contradiction (Syria is aiding Hezbollah and won’t give up its relationship with Iran but is “earnestly interested in advancing the peace process with Israel”.) Baidatz nails the crucial point. Syria is not interested in peace or in Israel, and the Golan Heights is the third of three Syrian priorities (the other two are to maintain the regime in Damascus and maintain control of Lebanon). Junior Assad wants to end Syria’s estrangement from the United States in order to strengthen his hand at home and get rid of the UN’s Harriri assassination probe. A “peace process” with Israel would engage the Americans and give the United States a stake in the future of the Assad government. The United States does it for the Palestinians, with the added benefit – from the Syrian point of view – that Israel finds itself under some pressure. Assad wants to be Abu Mazen.
U.S. policy toward the Palestinians leaves a great deal to be desired, but it has been clear, even to the State Department, that Syria isn’t the Palestinians. Syria is a country that sponsors terrorism and assassination, undermines Lebanon’s elected government, opens its border with Iraq to al Qaeda and other forces attempting to undermine the Iraqi government and kill Americans, and is trying to acquire nuclear technology from North Korea. All of this it does with the help and support of Iran. This is not the prom, where Israel cuts in on Iran and waltzes Syria away to a rosy future paid for by the United States.
A secure peace between Israel and Syria is to be desired. But one that relies on the premise that Syria will dump Iran and leave Lebanon, and that comes at the expense of American interests in Lebanon and Iraq, by its nature cannot be secure. If that makes the United States an “obstacle” to Syrian or Israeli fantasies, so be it.