Friday 21 May 2010

Washington beware: Bashar Assad is scheming!

Via Friday-Lunch-Club


Seriously, I believe that Michael Young shows signs of dementia ... Old scribblings like "controlling the Sunnis, ... stifle Geagea' ... Hezbollah card" have been throttled to death ...Daily Star/ here

"... Syrian weapons to Hizbullah appear to be there to serve a more complex purpose. I continue to believe that the primary Syrian objective is to create the proper conditions for a Syrian military return to Lebanon. This is not an easy venture, or one guaranteed of success.... That loss was a bitter one for Bashar, striking at the very heart of his political self-esteem.
But there are more pragmatic reasons as well. Only a military presence allows the Syrian regime to control Lebanon’s Sunni community,.... also allows Syria to stifle its old bugbear, the Maronite community, where Samir Geagea has made headway ..... But perhaps most important, only if Syria is physically present in Lebanon can it turn the “Hizbullah card” to its advantage by projecting itself as the sole actor able to contain the party – which it would nevertheless allow to pursue a “resistance’ agenda, since Syria could use this as leverage whenever it needs to bargain with the Arab states, the US, Israel, even Iran.
If Syria can guarantee that the next war between Hizbullah and Israel is particularly vicious and that Hizbullah can hold its own (Syria’s passing of game-changing weaponry, for example more effective anti-aircraft missiles, would help do so), this could open up numerous possibilities. Israeli retaliation would be ferocious, the Lebanese state and government would emerge from the maelstrom discredited and weak, United Nations resolutions on Lebanon would effectively collapse, and Hizbullah would be perceived by Arab states and Israel as a major regional menace, which Assad could then use as a wedge to facilitate acceptance of a Syrian military comeback.
The absence of a credible UN-sponsored post-conflict framework would be Syria’s opening. No one, least of all the Israelis, would take seriously a new international force in southern Lebanon. That conviction could swing the Americans. Subcontract Lebanon to Syria once again and everyone is happy, the rationale might go.
That’s where the hard questioning should come in Washington. If Syria’s energies are primarily geared toward reestablishing a military presence in Lebanon, then American engagement of Damascus will not change much in Bashar Assad’s plans. Washington needs to move beyond Robert Ford to address the real issue: Syria’s intention to again use Lebanon as the platform from which to become a dominant Arab state."

Posted by G, Z, or B at 7:52 PM
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

No comments: