Syria, the Obama key to the Middle East deadlock?
The Middle East dynamic has fundamentally shifted of late, but there is a danger that the past US policy set remains in play. The axis tilted its geopolitical alignment and the resultant dynamics will demand a new approach from President Obama. The drivers of the shift in the regional alliances are varied. Iran was freed to pursue a broader regional role inadvertently by the US, when it deposed the Iraqi strongman, Hussein. This broke the surface tension and allowed Iran to take its eye off immediate border defense. Additionally, Iran knew that when the US had to eventually leave Iraq, it would have great influence over Iraqi agendas. The US by its actions granted Iran further space and influence in the region. In fact, as many as 23 of the Iraqi parliament may have been past members of the Iran Revolutionary Guard. The Iraqi parliamentary coalition is like homecoming week for the Iran Administration. The US, in effect, just handed de facto control of Iraq to Iran, emboldening and buoying its ‘enemy’. The Iraq War , from a Western perspective, was not just a costly military blunder, it was foreign policy ineptitude of the highest order. One change in the regional dynamic, is the growing strength and influence of Iran, and the political consolidation of Iraq and Iran into one effective functional bloc.
The second primary change is a hardening of Muslim positions following the 2006 Lebanon and 2008 Gaza conflicts conducted by Israel. These actions have essentially fractured the Arab League and the uneasy co-operation of the Muslim nations. As evidence of this, when then President Clinton called an emergency conference at Sharm El-Sheikh in Egypt in 1996, 27 world leaders assembled on a short notice to support Israel, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and the head of the Palestinian authority at the time, Yasser Arafat, against Hamas. Contrast this, to the same emergency conference at the same location in 2009 when only 10 Arab moderate and Europeans leaders could be convinced to attend in order to reach a convenient closure to Israel’s Gaza actions. The support of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Israel (termed, the ‘moderate powers’ given the alignment with the West’s agenda) was of course predictable and reliable. However, among the other regional powers it was a paltry showing. There is now a growing power bloc developing in opposition to the ‘moderate powers’ including of course Iran, but now seemingly encompassing Turkey, Algeria, Qatar and, as before, the other Arab nations. What is telling is the emerging co-operation between the two large non-Arab Muslim nations, Iran and Turkey, in opposition to the past tacit approval of Israel’s periodic military incursions. This is an unhealthy alliance from the US Foreign Policy perspective, but a reality of the current schism. Given Iran’s nuclear ambitions, it is highly unlikely that President Obama (and/or Israel) canprevent this in isolation. There will be, in all probability, a race for others to follow the same route by other regional powers as a balance. This would include Saudi Arabia and Turkey. Another option, perhaps unpalatable to the US populace, is that the US extends its ‘nuclear umbrella’ (i.e. the guarantee of US retaliation if a party under its ‘umbrella’ is attacked) to the members of the ‘moderate powers’ and Israel specifically (as opposed to the tacit implication).
This is the new dynamic in region that President Obama faces. In breaking this deadlock, he may well need to look to Syria as means to attack this Gordian knot. The US Administration, given the Bush legacy and the perceived early missteps by Obama over Gaza. has little moral authority or credence to negotiate directly with Iran. The US may have intended to use Turkey as its go between, but the implied US approval of the Gaza incursion has seriously weakened this relationship. There is no other party at this point, besides Syria, that could act as the bridge between the US and Iran. Syria is well aware of its pivotal role. Some recent quotes by by Syria’s Deputy Prime Minister, Abdullah Dardari, in an interview with Reuters, show there will be a price to pay for Syria’s co-operation.
“The U.S. should lift its economic sanctions on Syria before relations improve between the two sides. The lifting of such sanctions will likely have a positive effect on increased foreign investment in the country”.
“Though the effect of the sanctions has been limited judging by the nearly 30% increase in foreign direct investment, the lifting of sanctions will remove psychological barriers for some foreign investors”.
“Syria’s foreign trade makes up 70% of GDP and this means that the country’s dependence on external factors is very large. We are studying the ways this crises is affecting investments into the country. Syria hopes to attract investments in infrastructure projects that include energy, electricity, better roads and airports and it hopes to do this through a partnership between the private and public sectors.”
Dardari proceeded to specify that ‘Syria’s infrastructural needs are estimated to cost $50 billion over the next 10 years’. This appears to be an overture to the Obama Administration. No doubt to ensure Syria’s diplomatic co-operation in assisting the US and the ‘moderate powers’ negotiate with Iran, Syria will also be requesting the return of the Golan Heights from Israel too. Syria has sent a signal it wants to be included, it can help, but that the price of the past treatment of Syrian interests will need to be repaid first.
In toppling Hussein therby freeing Iran to pursue a regional agenda, and not curbing Israel in attacking Gaza, the US has put in place complex and costly requirements for its regional rehabilitation. Whether the US can be rehabilitated at all, is willing to pay the price, or will attempt to woo a seemingly intransigent Turkey as an alternative, is yet to be determined. Turkey voiced its disapproval about the Gaza forcibly at the Davos conference, so maybe its patience with Israel is finally exhausted. Syria seems to be Obama’s indirect route into Iran, whether he takes up their offer will be an early test of his regional diplomacy. The clock is ticking for him, as Iran moves closer to its nuclear ambition, and Israel holds elections that may push it even further towards the hawks of the right. Syria has a power position, has signalled its interest in engaging with the US, and is now waiting for a response.
Sphere: Related Content
