Is Syria going to Annapolis?
Yes/No. Yes/No.
Well, after the Arab League Ministerial Meeting in Cairo on Friday, maybe.
Our guess: Yes/But.
Whatever happens, Syria will not want to be left out.
Here is a fascinating analysis of the possibility that was just published in the Wall Street Journal: “…[T]here are growing signs the White House may be moving to do something it’s uniformly dismissed in the past: facilitate direct negotiations between Israel and Syria over the disputed Golan Heights. In recent days, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other senior officials have said the U.S. wouldn’t object to Syria’s raising Golan at Annapolis. Meanwhile, Israel has pursued a peace dialogue with Damascus, eager to calm tensions on its northeastern border and quash strong Syrian support for Palestinian extremist groups. Mr. Olmert has used Turkish intermediaries to explore options with the Syrians, according to Israeli officials. Retired Israeli diplomats also have held unofficial talks with a confidante of Mr. Assad’s over the past few years in an effort to find a formula to solve the Golan dispute. Many Israeli officials say Washington and Jerusalem should seek to wean Syria away from its growing alliance with Iran. They see the U.S.’s punitive actions against Damascus as driving President Assad further into the Iranian camp. ‘Maybe it’s time to employ the carrot to remove [Syria] from the axis of evil’, the deputy chief of staff of the Israel Defense Forces, Maj. Gen. Moshe Kaplinsky, said in Washington last month. This will ‘prevent the Iranian influence’, he said. [n.b. there was a golden opportunity at the end of the Cold War, when Syria's former main benefactor, the Soviet Union, collapsed. But no -- the U.S. want to continue to indicate its displeasure with Syria. So, enter Iran ...]
The Wall Street Journal continues: “A number of U.S. officials, particularly in the White House, have voiced reservations about engaging the Syrians. They particularly worry that any talks with Damascus could hurt Lebanon, which Syria occupied for more then 30 years before withdrawing in 2005 after the Hariri murder. The belief is that Syria will demand renewed political influence inside Lebanon in return for peace with Israel. U.S. officials particularly believe Damascus is playing a central role in the current political standoff in Beirut, where governing and opposition groups have been unable to elect a new president for weeks. Lebanon’s president Friday declared a state of emergency , arguing the additional security was needed to ward off a civil war. ‘We wouldn’t have the problems we see today in Lebanon if Syria were deciding to take a different role. Plain and simple’, Assistant Secretary of State David Welch told a Senate hearing earlier this month. at the same time, U.S. officials, including Iraq commander Gen. David Petraeus, have been praising Damascus for what they say has been its ‘robust’ effort recently to cut off the flow of foreign fighters crossing into Iraq. Some Syria analysts say there are indications that President Assad has taken steps to limit the movements of militant leaders based in Damascus, such as Hamas’s political head, Khaled Mashal. A Syrian diplomat said his government has significantly increased the policing of its borders into Iraq, including developing more watchtowers and border patrols. The Syrian government also allowed foreign diplomats, including a U.S. representative, to monitor its border operations during a tour earlier this month”. The WSJ piece can be read here.
The AP reported from Cairo on Friday that “The Arab League decision [to attend the Annapolis event], made after intense discussions late Thursday and Friday, meant that the members of a league committee tasked earlier this year with dealing with the peace process will attend Annapolis. Those countries include Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia and Yemen.
Much of the day’s talks were focused on trying to persuade Syria that the conference would at least in some way address the Golan issue. The league gathering sent a joint letter to Washington demanding that the conference deal with relaunching negotiations between Israel and Syria, which wants the full return of the Golan in return for peace.
At Friday’s Arab League meeting, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas called for the inclusion of the Syrian track at Annapolis.
According to Arab diplomats, while Washington’s invitation did not specifically call for resumption of negotiations on the Golan, it referred to UN resolutions concerning the Arab-Israeli conflict as well as the 2002 Arab peace initiative, which calls for a return for Arab lands seized in 1967 in return for full peace with Israel. [n.b. Israel is adamant that any talks must be based on this UN Resolution 242.]
Earlier this week, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said there would be room at Annapolis to talk about the Golan.” [n.b., this would apparently be in the context of discussion of "national interests".] The AP report from Cairo is here.
A U.S. State Department Spokesman, Karl Duckworth, reportedly told journalists Friday that “All attendees are entitled to express their views and national interests as they see them,” Duckworth said, reading a statement…” This AFP report can be seen here.
The dispute between Israel and Syria apparently comes down to a strip of Golan territory that comes down from the heights to the shore of the Sea of Galilee — or, as Israelis call it, Lake Kinneret. The Kinneret is the source of some one-third of Israel’s water, apparently. On a recent trip there with a group of journalists, our Israeli accompaniers and guides — several with a military background — said that Israel’s position is that Syria never had “its foot on the Kinneret” — and never will.
Well, it turns out that during the time of the Syria Mandate, run by France under the vague authority of the League of Nations, “Syria” (the state we know now did not exist then, this was a Mandatory province) did not have have its toes dipping into the Sea of Galilee. But, in the 1948 war that broke out after Israel’s Declaration of Independence, the modern state of Syria did indeed get itself to the water. Note to myself: check out the borders mentioned in the UN-negotiated armistice agreement between Israel and Syria.
There was also — very significantly — a swap in 1923 between Britain, which administered (by then, separately) “Palestine” and “Transjordan”, and France, which administered “Lebanon” and “Syria” (both formerly part of Greater Syria, as was part of “Palestine”). Britain gave up the Golan to the French. Keep your eyes on the mandate — Israel’s claims and ambitions seem to be to get everything that was included in the British Mandate of Palestine, possibly as later modified by UN Security Council Resolution 242 … Forget UN General Assembly Resolution 181 in this context, which partitioned British-ruled Palestine into two states — one Jewish and one Arab. Resolution 242 calls for a return to the lines of June 1967 — not to the lines drawn by UNGA Resolution 181. Resolution 181 was adopted in November 1947, but in May 1948 Israel acquired a lot of additional territory in the area of the Palestine Mandate — and Jordan and Egypt occupied the rest. The Green Line — the 1967 cease-fire lines — delineated the Palestinian land since occupied by Israel, and from which the UN asked Israel to withdraw.
When the Palestinians declared their own state in November 1988, they claimed the West Bank and Gaza Strip areas occupied in June 1967. At that moment, international law experts say, the Palestinians relinquished any claim on land that was assigned to the “Arab” state that was to be created on the basis of UNGA Resolution 181.
But, that still leaves the question of the Golan. And the Syrians want it addressed in Annapolis. And, they want it back, every inch — apparently according to the 1949 Armistice Lines [note to myself: check this delineation].
A small part of the area where Israel, Syria, and Lebanon intersect is the Shebaa Farms — which Syria and Lebanon have said is Lebanese, but which the UN has said, until now, is part of the Golan — and thus is occupied by Israel. The UN says that Syria must resolve this problem with Israel. But Syria cannot resolve anything with Israel — including the more important question of a slice of territory along the Sea of Galilee (Lake Kinneret).
Oh, and did I mention that Israel may also want to keep some of the “heights” in the Golan? The military men who accompanied us said that this would be only fair — they now occupy three of the heights, and Syria still has the other three. They pointed them out in the distance. Sometimes, however, Israeli officials say that they are ready to give back “all” of the Golan for a peace deal with Syria. “All” but the strip of land along the water. “All” but the heights…? Stay tuned.
Meanwhile, the AP is also reporting from Lebanon that “President Emile Lahoud said Friday that Lebanon is in a ’state of emergency’ and ordered the army to take over security powers, hours before he was stepping down without a successor and leaving a political vacuum in the divided country. The pro-Western government of Prime Minister Fuad Saniora rejected the move …
The president cannot declare a state of emergency without approval from the government, but Lahoud’s spokesman said Saniora’s government is considered unconstitutional … The army command refused to comment on the developments. The military had already been on alert for several days, deploying hundreds of troops in tanks, armored personnel carriers and jeeps along intersections leading to Beirut and around the downtown area where the parliament building is located. The city was normal throughout the day, but traffic was lighter than usual, and most schools were closed. Lahoud was still expected to step down when his term ends at midnight Friday. Both sides had been counting on the military to ensure calm in the political chaos, and it was unclear if Lahoud’s announcement would give the military any powers beyond security measures. But his talk of a ’state of emergency’ raised already high tempers as both sides enter a new phase of trying to find a new president for the country. Parliament made a final attempt Friday afternoon to convene to vote on a president before Lahoud leaves office. But the opposition, led by the Shiite militant group Hezbollah, boycotted the session, preventing it from reaching the necessary two-thirds quorum. Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, who is aligned with the opposition, scheduled another session for Nov. 30 to give the factions more time to try to find a compromise candidate — which they have failed to do in weeks of talks mediated by France’s foreign minister and other international officials … Much of what happens next in Lebanon … may depend in part on Tuesday’s U.S.-sponsored Mideast peace conference. Syria has not formally decided whether to go to Annapolis, Md., but it likely will. Government supporters have accused Syria of using its allies in Lebanon to block a deal on the presidency until it sees what it gets in the conference. Damascus wants Annapolis to address its demands for the return of the Israeli-held Golan Heights“. The AP report on the tense situation in Lebanon is
here.
So, the Annapolis meeting may actually have a bigger immediate impact on the crisis in Lebanon than on the situation of the Palestinian people…
Tags: Annapolis conference, Golan Heights, Israel, Syria
November 25th, 2007 at 7:57 pm
[...] reason that everyone, in the end, desperately wanted Syria to attend [See our earlier posts, here, and [...]