The Syria-Jordan Deal; Potential Break With Iran?

Syria is part of the Iran-led axis. But in Amman, as well as in Riyadh and Cairo, strategists regard the alliance between Assad and the Iranian theocracy as mere "a thawaj bil-mut'a", as one leading Arab diplomat on Dec. 1 put it to APS - i.e., a temporary marriage for pleasure, in Shi'ism a "legalised alternative" to adultery/prostitution. They believe this alliance may end when Assad gets what he wants from a US-led peace process with Israel - Greater Syria, which most of these strategists say is impossible. Many Arab strategists agree with US counterparts that Greater Syria, including Lebanon and Palestine, means potentially Greater Persia in control of the whole Middle East.

The deal King Abdullah II brokered between Assad and the Saudi leadership - a deal partly on behalf of the reluctant Americans - was that if Syria participated in the Annapolis event Saudi Arabia will not boycott the next Arab League summit meeting in Damascus in March 2008 and the US will include the Golan in the agenda for Nov. 27. Thus, at the last minute, Bush had to insert in his opening speech a brief mention of Syria.

Bush warned the Syrian regime against interfering in Beirut's efforts to elect a president, to succeed Assad's puppet Emile Lahoud whose term ended at mid-night on Nov. 23, saying: "The Lebanese people are in the process of electing a president. That decision is for the Lebanese people to make, and they must be able to do so free from outside interference and intimidation. As they embark on this process, the people of Lebanon can know that the American people stand with them and we look forward to the day when the people of Lebanon can enjoy the blessings of liberty without fear of violence or coercion".

The Assad regime, accused of being behind the murder of a number of Lebanese VIPs including Hariri, has given ample hints that he will not accept fully peaceful relations with Israel just in return for the Golan Heights - seized by Israel in the June 1967 Arab-Israeli war. In fact, Iran now controls the Assad regime in many ways; one of the reasons Assad agreed to participate in Annapolis was to show the world he was still able to act independently from the Shi'ite theocracy of Iran and its Lebanese offshoot Hizbullah - the latter actually being part of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

As part of the Assad-Abdullah II deal, the Syrian regime freed 18 Jordanian prisoners who arrived in Amman on Nov. 29. The Jordanians were not all detained in Syria for political crimes. The Jordanian Minister of State for Information said they were jailed in Syria for "various reasons".

Tehran has denounced the Annapolis event, describing it as an attempt to salvage falling US credibility in the region. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad said: "The US and Israel intend to deceive a bunch of people...to make them give concessions to the criminal Zionists".

For years Syria has been relying heavily on Iran to resist international pressure. It tilted further towards Tehran after Ahmadi-Nejad became president, whose supportive statements compensated for the lack of sympathy in the Arab world. Political, economic and military accords were signed and Iran became the largest foreign investor in Syria. The July/August 2006 Hizbullah-Israel war in Lebanon raised the importance of this alliance.

In the past few months, however, several signs indicated differences between Syria and Iran. On Lebanon, Iran began to read the Syrian withdrawal in April 2005 - after 29 years of occupation and control - as key to enhancing its position in that country. For Iran, the Syrian army was the only force able to disarm Hizbullah, should Assad's interests deem that necessary. On Iraq, the differences have grown even wider.

Assad suspects Iran is seeking to divide Iraq on sectarian grounds. That would weaken Syria. Assad has been watching with concern Iran's influence growing larger at a time when Syria's role in Iraq was diminishing. Apart from their interest to prevent the establishment of a Kurdish state in northern Iraq, Syria and Iran have little in common in that country.

On Palestine Assad and Tehran agree on some points and disagree on many others. Whereas Syria uses its support to Hamas and Islamic Jihad as a tool to resume peace talks with Israel, Iran does that as a deterrent to stop Israel from attacking its nuclear sites.

Yet not much has emerged from Annapolis to justify Assad breaking his alliance with Iran. He is not deterred by such US/Western distinctions as moderates Vs radicals, diplomacy Vs violence, etc. The main tool of control Assad inherited from his father, the late Gen. Hafez al-Assad  who died in June 2000 after ruling Syria with an iron fist since 1970, is to block things through violence, including terror and assassinations - to block any peace process which does not offer Damascus the chance of making his Greater Syria project a reality and to eliminate any opponent.

Assad has other regional brokers for dialogue between Syria and the US: Turkey, which intends to organise another regional conference in Istanbul; and Russia which, with at least tacit US support, wants to host a follow-up Middle East peace conference in early 2008. Both Turkey and Russia want to help establish direct Israeli-Syrian negotiations. Meqdad, who headed Syria's delegation to the Annapolis event, told The Washington Post in an interview published on Nov. 28: "It is our hope that we can revive the Syrian track in Moscow".

Top US national security man Hadley on Nov. 28 said Syria had "a fundamental choice", adding: If Damascus decided to "give up their support for terror, let Lebanon alone, support a new Iraqi government rather than obstruct it, then I think there are opportunities for them on...Golan... If they don't, I don't see how they can be part of this process".

Delivering Lebanon's address, Acting Foreign Minister Tareq Mitri said Beirut "rejected permanent resettlement of Palestinian refugees on its territory", adding: "This is a question of national consensus which is stipulated in [the] constitution, as it pertains to the very fabric and the specific identity of Lebanon".

Mitri listed issues of "vital concern", such as the end of Israeli occupation of Sheb'a Farms and the Kfar Shuba Hills and the northern part of Ghajar, release of prisoners and detainees, turning over of maps of Israeli minefields and cluster bombs in the south, the halting of Israeli territorial violations, and obstacles to Lebanon's right to make use of its water resources. He said: "These questions must not be a subject of negotiations for their solutions are governed by the relevant UN Security Council (UNSC) Resolutions, more particularly Resolution 1701".

Mitri's participation in Annapolis sparked angry debate between Hizbullah and the "March 14 Forces". Youth and Sports Minister Ahmad Fatfat, of the "March 14 Forces", which is part of the US-led alliance, expressed surprise at Hizbullah stance, saying: "Why would they criticise Lebanon's participation at the conference, but not Syria's?" Hizbullah said the government had no right to attend the talks because it lacked legitimacy. Hizbullah MP Hassan Fadlallah accused the government of "acting on Bush's orders and over-looking Lebanon's rights" - though Hizbullah in Lebanon is an armed theocracy within the state.

The PNA Position: PNA negotiator Sa'eb 'Ereqat on Nov. 28 told CNN whatever role Washington played, it was now up to the Palestinians and the Israelis to make crucial decisions, adding: "I don't think President Bush or any Arab leader or any European leader can make the decisions for us... We can reach a common ground. If you ask me the question, 'Is it doable?', yes, it's doable".

Mark Regev, chief spokesman of the Israeli Foreign Ministry, agreed with 'Ereqat that any solution would involve agreement on core issues, saying: "I think Sa'eb is 100% correct when he says there'll be a package, there'll be trade-offs". Asked whether final agreement could be reached by end-2008, Regev said: "There's a good chance, we are hopeful, we'll make every effort". He said the relationship of trust forged by Olmert and Abbas, and the wide international support for peace shown at Annapolis, had led to "a certain optimism today that wasn't there in the past".

Still, Regev said, Israelis had no illusions about the fierce opposition to reconciliation, including by the Iran-led axis. "Our security forces back home are on high alert today", he said, lest those groups try to "torpedo" moves towards peace. Hamas and Islamic Jihad act in line with what Israel's rightwing rejectionists want: to kill the peace process.