Damascus Matters: Syria, the US, and the New Middle East

Video: Palestine Latest - Settlements and Blockades but No Reconstruction
After The Obama-Abbas Meeting: A Palestinian Stuck between Washington and Tel Aviv
Video and Full Transcript of Obama-Abbas Meeting (28 May)

Much has changed in US foreign policy since the Bush Administration pulled its ambassador from Damascus in 2005 to protest Syria's suspected involvement in the assassination of the former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. Since the advent of the Obama Administration, not only the hopes of change in US-Syrian relations but the quest to unblock the Palestinian-Israeli peace process has brought the prospect of dialogue.

The latest signal came on Thursday when two Democratic Congressmen, Senator Edward E. Kaufman of Delaware and Representative Tim Waltz of Minnesota visited Syrian President Assad. According to Syria's official Arab News Agency, talks focused on "the necessity to remove obstacles that hinder relations and to promote stability in the Middle East". Specifically, the exchange points to a visit to Damascus by President Obama's envoy George Mitchell in June.

The Kaufman-Waltz visit is the fourth by US officials or legislators since January. Three days after the hard-line statement of the new Israeli Foreign Minister, Avigdor Lieberman, “Peace will only be in exchange for peace.”, Democratic Representative Stephen Lynch of Massachusetts and Republican Bob Inglis of South Carolina, met Assad.

Assad's comment after this meeting that he wanted to meet Obama personally was matched by the US Embassy's statement that the talks were constructive on Syrian-Lebanese relations, security on the Syria-Iraq border, and the situation in Gaza. On 5 May, two senior US officials, Jeffrey Feltman and Daniel Shapiro, made their second journey to Damascus in two months and found some “common ground” with the Syrians.

The 2nd Feltman-Shapiro visit was particularly significant as it came on the
same day that Assad and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad met to re-confirm their ‘strategic alliance.’ Contrary to the claim of many that this was a declaration of Syria's "strategic needs" being met by Tehran; Assad's manoevure was more a temporary alignment with no advance on the "road map" of the Palestinian-Israeli and Syrian-Israeli peace processes. In the absence of tangible steps, Damascus is covering itself against any unilateral concessions.

Hence, the second visit of Feltman and Shapiro was needed to maintain close contact between Washington and Damascus until the peace process could be restarted. Other regional leaders have also contributed. On May 11, the Jordanian King Abdullah visited Damascus, as he and Assad affirmed the need for a comprehensive solution on the basis of Israeli and Palestinian states in a regional context. The newly-appointed Syrian ambassador to Ankara said on 12 May that Damascus was ready to resume Turkish-mediated indirect talks with Israel, despite Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s statement that he would not cede the Golan Heights.

In contrast to the Bush Administration's attempt to get the "right" Middle East through exclusion of those whom it did not like or trust, the Obama Administration in four months has rebuilt relationships with key leaders. Still, the outcome of those initial breakthroughs awaits an even bigger signal: the US President's speech in Cairo next Thursday.

Video: Palestine Latest - Settlements and Blockades but No Reconstruction

Latest Post: Damascus Matters - Syria, the US, and the New Middle East
After The Obama-Abbas Meeting: A Palestinian Stuck between Washington and Tel Aviv
Video and Full Transcript of Obama-Abbas Meeting (28 May)

Maxwell Gaylard, the Deputy Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process and UN Coordinator for Humanitarian and Development Activities in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, appeared on Enduring America the day before the end of Israel's Operation Cast Lead in Gaza, announcing that Tel Aviv “deliberately blocked the United Nations from building up vital food supplies in Gaza that feed a million people daily”.

Gaylard is back, declaring on Thursday, “Blockades continue in order to protect Israeli settlements.” There are now 630 blockades in the West Bank for 139 outposts with more than 400,000 Israelis.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXV2MxUgrD8[/youtube]

Gaylard added that 80 percent of civilians in Gaza now rely on some sort of assistance either through the United Nations or other international aid institutions. No cement, wood or other housing items have been allowed in, even though more than 40,0000homes were damaged or destroyed by missiles and gunfire in December and January.

Gaylard concluded that, although donor countries had pledged billions of dollars for Gaza’s reconstruction, this could not begin because of the blockade. The only "solution" is the words of Gaylard's UN colleague, Robert Serry: “We will wait and see…”

After The Obama-Abbas Meeting: A Palestinian Stuck between Washington and Tel Aviv

Latest Post: Damascus Matters - Syria, the US, and the New Middle East
Video: Palestine Latest - Settlements and Blockades but No Reconstruction

Video and Full Transcript of Obama-Abbas Meeting(28 May)

At his meeting with Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas, President Obama again highlighted the significance of an Israeli freeze on settlements in the West Bank. Obama did not mention any timeline for his demand being accepted by the Israeli authorities, indicating that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu needed time to persuade his Cabinet; however, he also did not want his position to be seen as weak and passive. So Obama stated that he would not wait until the end of his first term to make progress; if is no action on the Israeli side, US pressure is likely to be applied on Tel Aviv. Obama also stated his general hope for a settlement “if they (Israel and Palestine) keep in mind not just the short-term tactical issues that are involved, but the long-term strategic interests of both the Israelis and the Palestinians to live side by side in peace and security".

Mahmoud Abbas, however, does not have the luxury of general aspirations and time: every passing hour undermines his authority.

Abbas acted fast to form a new government last week after the failure to form a unity administration between Fatah and Hamas. Abbas wanted to strengthen his hand before his visit to Washington; however, the new government was rejected not only by Hamas but also by many in Fatah and by several other Palestinian factions such as the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and the Palestinian People's Party amidst accusations of nepotism, cronyism, and lack of accountability or transparency.

In Gaza, Hamas has been increasing its support since the end of Israel's Operation Cast Lead. So Abbas needs the symbolic as well as practical support offered by the popularity of President Obama. That is why the Palestinian politician told Jackson Diehl and Fred Hiatt, in his audience with [italics]The Washington Post[/italics]:
[blockquote]
The Americans are the leaders of the world; they can use their weight with anyone around the world. Two years ago they used their weight on us. Now they should tell the Israelis, "You have to comply with the conditions."
[/blockquote]
But, even if Obama is happy to be Abbas' saviour, there's the small matter of the Israeli dynamic. Even if Prime Minister Netanyahu wanted to freeze settlements, he might be have trouble convincing 30 Ministers in his Cabinet. Nor is Obama's "more time" likely to alter the situation, with the Israeli public becoming more intransigent as time goes by.

For the time being, the Netanyahu Government is trying to fudge the issue. The Prime Minister Netanyahu has already stated that there would be no freeze in current settlements, but new settlements would not be authorised and illegal outposts would not be tolerated. Rhetorically, however, Netanyahu's ministers are dismissing the issue. Strategic Affairs Minister Moshe Ya'alon told Israel's Channel 2, “Settlements are not the reason that the peace process is failing, they were never an obstacle, not at any stage."

Netanyahu may not have staked himself to the rhetoric of Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman: “Peace for Peace” without any preconditions. Yet it is difficult to see what Tel Aviv is willing to offer, especially when Arab states backing the peace initiative have declared that they are ready to recognise Israel.

Thus Obama, less than a week before his Cairo speech, still has nothing --- not even a modest Israeli concession --- to anchor his general wishes for peace. Stiil, in comparison to others, he might be considered fortunate. For Mahmoud Abbas does not even have the trappings of authority as the non-peace process drags on.

Gaza: Scientific Mission Finds Evidence of Israeli Use of Depleted Uranium and White Phosphorous

In April 2009 a four-person mission including Jean-François Fechino, an international specialist in the effects of banned weapons upon the environment and sustainable development, visied Gaza under the auspices of the Arab Commission for Human Rights. The samples of earth and dust that they brought back from Gaza were analyzed by a specialist laboratory.

While a United Nations committee under Richard Goldstone, the former International War Crimes Prosecutor, has not been authorized by the Israeli government to investigate such incidents in Gaza, the findings of the ACHR team raises the possibility that the use of depleted uranium, in addition to white phosphorous bombs, by the Israeli military during Operation Cast Lead will be confirmed.

The report concluded that Palestinian fighters had only unsophisticated weapons, such as Qassam and Grad rockets, while Israel was able to employ the most modern weaponry to bombard the population of Gaza from the air, land, and sea.

Israel initially denied it had used white phosphorous in the offensive; it later admitted its use but denied this was unlawful. The Committee was satisfied on the available evidence that white phosphorous was used as an incendiary weapon in densely populated areas.

The Committee found that the Israeli Defense Forces were responsible for the killing, wounding, and terrorizing of civilians. The Committee based this finding on the number of civilians killed by 22 days of intense bombardment by air, sea, and land. The Committee also found the weapons used by the IDF, particularly white phosphorous and flechettes, caused superfluous and unnecessary suffering.

The Committee echoed the assertions of other reports on white phosphorous, for example, the Amnesty Report which several instances of its use in carrier shells “throughout Gaza”, including:

The United Nations Relief and Works Administration primary school in Beit Lahiyeh, where approximately 1,600 people were seeking shelter from the ongoing fighting. Two brothers, aged 5 and 7, were killed and 14 others were injured when a white phosphorous shell landed in a second-floor classroom;

The UNRWA field operations headquarters where tens of tons of medicines, food and non-food items were destroyed;

The residential areas in and around Gaza City and in the north (at Jabalya refugee camp) and the south (at Khuzaa, east of Khan Younis) of the Gaza Strip.

In March 2009, Human Rights Watch (HRW) published a report entitled “Rain of Fire. Israel’s Unlawful Use of White Phosphorous in Gaza.” The report detailed the confirmed uses of white phosphorous in Gaza during the conflict “in densely populated areas”, at the “edges of populated areas", and “in open areas.”

HRW reported six cases where white phosphorous was allegedly used in urban and outlying areas.

• In the Tel al-Hawa Neighborhood, Gaza City on 15 and 16 January 2009;
• At the Al-Quds Hospital, Tel al-Hawa Neighborhood, Gaza City on 15 January 2009;
• At the UNRWA Headquarters Compound, Gaza City on 15 January 2009
• At the Beit Lahiyeh UNRWA School on 17 January 2009;
• Siyafa Village, Beit Lahiyeh on 10 January 2009;
• Khuza’a Village, between 11 and 13 January 2009.

HRW concluded that the use of white phosphorous in “densely populated neighborhoods, including downtown Gaza City, violated international humanitarian law (the laws of war), which requires taking all feasible precautions to avoid civilian harm and prohibits indiscriminate attacks.”

The Evacuation of an Outpost in East Jerusalem: Is It a Sign?

On Thursday, the Israeli police destroyed an outpost of seven huts in the East Jerusalem, considered illegal under the Israeli law and built without government authorization. While the inhabitants of these settlements vowed to rebuild their houses (and some did), the Israeli officials are worried about the evacuations of larger settlements if there is a broad-based dismantlement plan in the future. About 500,000 Jewish settlers live in the West Bank .

For those thinking there is a  connection between US pressure and the demolition, Defense Minister Ehud Barak publicly stated that the dismantlement of illegal outposts had nothing to do with the Obama Administration. At the same time, is this really a sign of the independent willingness & readiness of  Tel Aviv to freeze the current settlements in the West Bank? Beyond the question of whether the Netanyahu Government's strategic intentions, as opposed to its tactical manoeuvres, is any Israeli administration strong enough to face the resistance of settlers, especially with memories of the 2005 Gaza pullout still very fresh amongst the Israeli public?