Tag: Syria

The long diplomatic game in Syria

It is past time to take a look at the possibility that the protests in Syria will not bring down Bashar al Assad any time soon.  While some of the opposition appears in frustration to be calling for violence on the part of the demonstrators, my inner voice tells me that would be a big mistake.  Bashar has the advantage in use of force, and he has demonstrated willingness to use it.

There is no real possibility of external military action in support of a violent Syrian rebellion, which is what made the difference in Libya.  The Arab League is far from advocating a UN Security Council resolution authorizing force.  The Russians, who enjoy the use of the Syrian port at Latakia, would block it anyway–they haven’t even allowed a resolution condemning regime violence.

If the protesters take up arms, they will elicit a response in kind and drive the violence in Syria in the ethno-sectarian direction, which is precisely what Europe and the United States fear the most.  Even Iran will agree:  a Sunni-defined uprising against the Allawi regime would be particularly unwelcome in Tehran.

So the question becomes this:  how can the protesters sustain their nonviolent efforts over the longer term, defined as months or even a year or two?  Only if they are clearly able and willing to do so will Bashar yield.  If he thinks he can outlast the demonstrators, why would he give in?

First, the international community needs to warn the protesters that there is no real alternative.  There will be no external military action.  Not even a “no fly zone,” which has become code for the kind of aggressive air campaign NATO conducted in Libya.  Syria is not Libya.  Damascus has strong backing from Tehran and Moscow.  Ankara has talked tough but has not backed it up with action.  Ditto the Arab countries, several of which have withdrawn their ambassadors but done little else.

Second, the international community needs to reward and encourage those among the protesters prepared to keep to nonviolence and maintain unity of purpose.  Monday’s formation of the Syrian National Council (SNC), an analogue to the  Transitional National Council that has become the post-Qaddafi governing structure in Libya, is a good development.  It will need wholehearted moral and financial support from Europe and the United States, though at this stage formal recognition would be premature.

The SNC, led by a diaspora professor, will necessarily be an outside Syria affair for the most part, unless the protesters can somehow carve out some liberated space inside the country.  They have tried to liberate particular cities several times, only to see the regime security forces eventually surround and retake them.

An alternative approach is to use cyberspace, as the Libyans also did, to publish their intentions and plans for post-Bashar Syria.  This could include a constitutional charter or framework that projects the kind of Syria they would institute, including a roadmap for preparation of a new constitution as well as local and national elections.  This would give the international community something to respond to and provide a blue print for future preparations and eventual implementation.

Third, the SNC will need to encourage defections from the military and business communities.  This can be done by making it clear, as the Libyans have done, that contracts will be maintained, revenge avoided and continuity valued once Bashar is gone.  There is time enough in the aftermath of a revolution to vet and re-vet government officials, military officers and crony businessmen.  It need not be done immediately, or used as a threat against the regime.  The trick is to get regime elements, especially the security forces, to turn on Bashar, which they will do if they believe it will help protect them after the regime falls.

Fourth, while the SNC figures out how to convey the impression of knowing what to do if Bashar steps down, the international community needs to give him a stronger shove in the right direction.  Europe has still not blocked imports of oil and oil products from Syria.  Over time, that would deprive the regime of at least some revenue (assuming Damascus sells the oil at a discount elsewhere) and signal to businesspeople that the European Union is serious about getting him to step aside.  Secretary of State Clinton needs to spend some quality time beating up the Europeans on this subject when she sees them Thursday at the Libya contact group meeting in Paris.

Getting the Russians on board for a Security Council resolution, even a relatively weak one, would also be useful.  At some point, Russia needs to begin worrying about making sure that any new regime is not going to throw its fleet out of Latakia.  The SNC might start raising questions about the Russian presence there and suggesting that it could be sustained, but only if Moscow goes along with a resolution taking the regime to task for its treatment of the protesters.

What else can be done?  It is better in my view to maintain the U.S. ambassador in Damascus rather than withdraw him.  But he needs to continue his visits to demonstrators and do what he can in other ways to provide encouragement and succor.  Also on the diplomatic front:  we should of course be consulting constantly with Turkey and Lebanon, encouraging these frontline states to confront the regime as best they can.  Turkey in particular could wield a bit more clout than has so far been apparent with Syria’s business elite.

Jordan has already spoken up against the Syrian regime, but Iraq Prime Minister Maliki has preferred to toe the Iranian line and suggest that the Arab spring can benefit no one except Israel.  Apart from the patent inaccuracy of that allegation, Maliki’s attachment to Bashar, who spent years shipping terrorists into Iraq, is passing strange.  Our man in Baghdad has presumably objected appropriately, but we need to do a bit more to ensure that Maliki is not actually helping Bashar, presumably on the theory that the enemy of my enemy (Saudi Arabia detests Maliki) is my friend.

Fifth, more unanimity against Bashar in the Arab League might help a good deal.  The Secretary General of that august but ineffectual organization was supposed to visit Damascus earlier this week to plead for an end to violence and more reform, but the Syrians rejected his not too vigorous plan before he even arrived.  Not clear to me whether he was able to make the trip. Iraq is not the only problem–Algeria is also Qaddafi-sympathetic and welcomed members of his family yesterday.

The Syrian regime will find it difficult to resist unanimity in the international community, if it can be achieved.  When even Iran and Hizbollah are distancing themselves, you know you are in trouble.  One of Qaddafi’s serious mistakes was to alienate Arab governments, two of which even joined in the NATO military action against him.  But it will not be easy to get everyone aligned in the right direction.  The diplomats have a big job to do.

PS:  For a pessimistic view of the Syrian opposition, see Kinda Kanbar’s piece at Middle East Progress.

Tags : , , , , , ,

What was it like 48 years ago?

Credit for this post, if credit is due, goes to Zaheer Ali, a New York City historian who asked in response to a tweet saying that I was at the March on Washington if I had ever written anything about it.  No, I haven’t, until just now, when I should be working on a book proposal.

I remember as much about the circumstances as I do about the event.  My aunt tried to convince my mother she shouldn’t let me go.  I was 18, age of the immortals.  Just graduated from high school, working in a factory for the summer before starting at Haverford.  I was determined to march despite rumors of violence.  I certainly did not want to take advice from my rascist aunt, who went livid.  Fortunately a more liberal uncle weighed in on my side.  Defiance proved unnecessary–my mother was a liberal and thought it natural that I wanted to go.

It’s all about witness, wanting to testify to your beliefs by moving your body to the right place at the right time.  I’d been to Washington before, as a child and tourist.  It was still a segregated city then, though as best I understand it more by tradition than by law.  My parents would only eat in chain restaurants that had integrated. Returning by bus that August day of 1963 was a right of passage for me:  a first opportunity to witness on my own.

What has become known as Martin Luther King’s greatest moment I thought of at the time as Bayard Rustin’s.  No, I did not know he was gay, or even what gay was, but I knew he was the great organizer.  He proved it that day, assembling an enormous mass of people, whites as well as people who then mostly still called themselves Negro.  There was a long list of speakers.  Martin Luther King was the climax, but I can assure you that many of the others stirred the crowd as well.  I particularly remember being moved by A. Philip Randolph, but don’t ask me any longer what he said.  And the music!  Dylan, Baez, Peter, Paul and Mary:  mostly white, but “radical” as it was known then.

I had to leave New Rochelle, where my family lived, early in the morning, around 4 am.  I grabbed the brown bag from the fridge with what I thought was my lunch in it, only to discover as we arrived in DC that the smell of raw fish was coming from my brown bag in the overhead rack.  I had to borrow a couple of dollars from a cousin to get a hot dog or two for lunch.

We marched from somewhere not too far–maybe Thomas Circle.  Memory confuses this occasion with the several later occasions I joined antiwar marches in DC.  The spirit was good, really good.  Everyone singing, chatting, laughing.  I don’t remember a moment of tension all day.  I guess the segregationists decided the crowd was too big and stayed home.  Certainly it was nothing like the venomous atmosphere I endured two years later demonstrating in Cambridge, Maryland, where the national guard fixed bayonets and gas masks to confront us in the main street.

The message of the day was integration.  Those who cite MLK’s “little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls and walk together as sisters and brothers” have got it right.  It is hard to appreciate today how much imagination was needed then to picture integration of blacks and whites in the United States.  None of us were sure though at the time that MLK had quite risen to the occasion.  Was his speech really eloquent enough?  Did it rise to the occasion?  Would anything make a real difference in a country that seemed hopelessly attached to segregation and racism?

We all think we know the answers to those question now, but at the time nothing was clear, except the day and the overwhelming power of that crowd of witnesses.  These were people who really could sing “we shall overcome.”  And they were determined to do it, though they had no idea how long it would take.

What does this have to do with peace and war?  Everything:  Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen and Syria have all trod the path of nonviolent witness, some more successfully than others.  Even Libya did it briefly.   Hesitatingly, sometimes inadequately but increasingly the United States has come out on the right side, witnessing for the world to see that it supports human dignity.  There really is no other choice.  Bashar al Assad and King Khalifa of Bahrain should take notice.  Washington may hesitate, it may equivocate, but it will not fail in the end to support the radical proposition that all people are created equal and endowed with inalienable rights.

Tags : , , , , ,

Bashar unabashed

Bashar al Assad, Syria’s beleaguered president continues his crackdown, despite growing international condemnation and pressure.  What has happened to Muammar Qaddafi, who is hiding somewhere, and Hosni Mubarak, who is on trial, has likely given him renewed determination to avoid a similar situation.  The only way he knows to avoid it is to use violence to repress the demonstrations, which continue even if they are not gaining headlines during this Libya week.  The regime even took the trouble to injure a cartoonists hands, a bizarre but telling acknowledgement of its own impotence against the humor and spirit of the protest movement.

The opposition claims to still be moving toward forming a Syrian National Council, but this week’s meeting in Istanbul does not appear to have been a brilliant success.  I’m not sure what the problem is, but in my view unity is overrated.  There is no reason the opposition today should agree on much more than getting rid of Bashar.  There will be time enough in the future to quarrel over politics.

Nor do I think the lack of “leadership” is really a big problem.  The demonstrators have been remarkably effective at coordination and coherence without clear leaders.  United is important, but regimes enjoy decapitating movements.  Only when the time comes to negotiate do they really need an empowered group to undertake that thankless task.

What the Syrian opposition needs now is a program.  What are they going to do if Bashar does step aside?  The Libyan Transitional National Council did itself a great service when it put out its “constitutional charter,” which included a political roadmap for the next year.  It gained some support inside Libya, but just as importantly it enabled the internationals to say they know what the Libyans want. Something like that is needed from the Syrians.

Next week the international community needs to move ahead with European Union sanctions targeting Syria’s energy sector.  That would be a serious contribution to depriving Bashar of the resources he needs to continue his brutal repression.  But it really isn’t sufficient.  Turkey needs to step up its game, which once seemed headed in the direction of toughening but somehow went flaccid in the last ten days or so.  There is a lot at stake for Turkey:  its “no problems with neighbors” policy is teetering, and it gets 20% of its gas supplies for its booming economy from Syria’s principal supporter, Iran.

There isn’t a lot else out there, though David Schenker offers a few more “incremental” (that means small I think) ideas.  I fear that we are going to end up with a long-term stalemate in Syria:  the demonstrators unable to unseat Bashar, Bashar unable to repress the demonstrations.  This situation will bleed the finances of both Syria and Iran, but it will also bleed the protesters and increase the likelihood of a chaotic sectarian breakdown in Syria.

The Syrian regime continues to portray the uprising as an armed rebellion of terrorists.  That is clearly untrue, as the Syrian protesters have chosen a nonviolent course from the first.  They are fired up about dignity.  The demonstrators haven’t got a lot more than daring, cleverness, unity, and amazing good humor on their side.  And me, I’m on their side too!

PS:  The question on some minds today is why not have an international intervention in Syria, since it worked so well in Libya?  In my way of thinking, it did not work well in Libya:  it  worked in the end, but only at a high cost in lives and other destruction.

Just as important:  the Russians, who have a naval base at Latakia on the Syrian coast, are not going to allow a Security Council resolution to pass authorizing force (they haven’t even let one pass denouncing the regime violence), the Arab League is not on board and the topography of hilly Syria weighs against effectiveness from the air.  The Syrians are likely going to have to sustain their efforts until the security forces turn on Bashar and tell him they are not prepared to continue on his behalf.

PS:  Ali Ferzat, the cartoonist the Syrian government felt it had to beat up, responds eloquently today with this:

@aliferzat's auto portrait after he was kidnapped, threa... on Twitpic
PPS:  The UN humanitarian mission to Syria has completed its visit and is calling for protection of civilians, who are under “constant threat.”  Not bad for a group shepherded around by government minders.

Tags : , ,

Rebuilding Libya: the first few steps

Theatlantic.com published my piece this morning:

Aug 22 2011, 6:39 AM ET

The most immediate challenges facing post-Qaddafi Libya

serwer aug21 p.jpg

Reuters

Muammar Qaddafi’s finale in Libya is coming faster than even the rebels likely anticipated. They are reported to have arrested Saif al Islam, his favored son. If they take Qaddafi alive, the rebel leadership body Transitional National Council (TNC), or its successor organization, will presumably transfer him and his son to The Hague, for trial at the International Criminal Court. This would be a remarkable end to a 42-year reign as Libya’s chief governing authority and a first opportunity for the court to try a chief of state, even if he did not claim that title.

Some may prefer to try him in Tripoli, but it is going to be years before the Libyan courts are able to meet the necessary international standards. A show trial will not help Libya in its understandable passion to lay the foundations for a freer society.

Qaddafi’s continued resistance risks making the situation inside Libya far more chaotic than it need be. Some of his loyalists may go underground as people harmed by the regime seek revenge, rivalries among rebel groups may emerge, looting and rioting could break out, and criminal gangs are sure to try to take advantage of any disorder. Restoring public order will be job one, with restoring electricity, food, and water close behind. Oil installations will need to be protected, weapons depots guarded, and secret police files preserved. It is certainly a good sign that the rebels are reported to have thrown up a protective cordon around the National Museum.

The rebels say they believe everything will go smoothly, and they appear to have trained some police to protect sensitive infrastructure and maintain law and order. But hope is not a plan. They need to get things under control as quickly as possible, appealing for foreign help if need be.

European governments could step up to this challenge, since they are tied to Libya via gas pipelines that float beneath the surface of the Mediterranean. If Libya succumbs to chaos, it will be to Europe that refugees will flow, and mostly European investments in Libya that will be lost. Unfortunately, Washington seems to have allowed Europe to remain distracted with its own financial problems. There does not appear to be any serious plan for dealing with chaos in Libya, which could quickly turn into a humanitarian disaster. American boots definitely do not belong on the shores of Tripoli, but it has happened before and may happen again.

The TNC will have to be particularly alert to risks of revenge killings against Qaddafi loyalists, and of score-settling among rebels. They have already lost one of their military commanders, apparently to rebel-affiliated attackers who resented his role in Qaddafi’s army. In immediate post-war situations, the urge to exact quick justice is enormous. But allowing vigilantes to even the score will only lead to a spiral of violence that is hard to stop and inimical to democratic evolution.

Virtually overnight, the rebel leadership will need to shift its focus from fighting Qaddafi’s forces to protecting them. In the past few months, the local councils that have emerged in liberated areas have not generally allowed violence against regime supporters. But that is partly because many of Qaddafi’s loyalists have fled from newly liberated towns to Tripoli. Their concentration there and in his hometown of Sirte is going to make the challenge of transition much greater there than anyplace else in Libya.

It is critical that regime loyalists and rebels alike do not grab and “privatize” state assets, as often happens in chaotic moments and takes years to reverse. In the Democratic Republic of the Congo, for example, the government has been trying for years to recover valuable mines from those who took possession of them during the civil war. The liberty Libyans have fought for will require massive rebuilding of the country’s infrastructure and economy, which is in miserable condition. Early efforts to ensure transparency and accountability could help Libya avoid the kind of corruption that has plagued Afghanistan and Iraq.

Only the most selfish and egotistical leader would fail to make arrangements to transfer power and try to avoid bloodshed. Tunisia’s President Zine el-Abidine ben Ali fled, but left the country with a constitutional succession that is enabling a relatively smooth transition. Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak tried to leave power in the hands of his vice president, a move negated only when the army stepped in. Yemen’s President Saleh has so far refused to allow a constitutional succession, leaving his country seized with violence.

Qaddafi is still calling on his supporters to fight and vowing to restore his own version of law and order in Tripoli. This is Qaddafi’s last misdeed. There is no constitution in Libya, so no clear constitutional succession. The revolutionaries have wisely written their own constitutional charter, but the real challenge will not be on paper. It will be in the avenues and alleys of Tripoli.

Tags : , , , , , ,

Step aside

I discussed current events in Syria and the Obama Administration call for Bashar al Assad to step aside, along with a bit of Libya, this morning on C Span’s Washington Journal:

 

Here are the notes I did for myself on Syria in preparation:

1.  The contest continues:

  • Military assault is undiminished, security forces still united
  • Demonstrators trying to mark beginning of the end

2.  The international community is speaking louder and with a more unified voice

  • U.S. “step aside” echoed in Europe, Turkey had already given “final warning”
  • Arab ambassadors withdrawn:  Kuwait, Bahrain, Saudi, Tunisia
  • Europe getting ready to bar oil imports
  • UN fact finding report “scathing”:  torture, murder, disappearances, arbitrary arrests,  supposedly going this weekend (Navi Pillay and Valerie Amos)
  • IAEA found NPT violation
  • Unrelated, I think, to current events:  Syria disqualified from 2014 World Cup!
  • Diplomatic observers possible

3.   Bashar still has internal and external pillars intact

  • Iran solid, Russia still protecting in UNSC
  • Army and business community still backing him
  • Republican Guard (10k) and 4th armored division show no signs of cracking:  Deraa, Banias, Homs, Idlib
  • Shabbiha still active

4.  Opposition strong

  • Widespread protests
  • Still relatively weak in Aleppo and Damascus, but growing
  • Good unity:  several iterations, now Syrian National Council
  • Good nonviolent discipline, though some arms
  • Good planning

 

Tags : , , , , ,

Good show, now what?

While my twitterfeed remains skeptical that the U.S. has any leverage to get Bashar al Assad to step aside, I think the Administration put on a pretty good diplomatic show in the last day or two, with more to come.  In addition to the US moves, the UN published a fact-finding report that Colum Lynch appropriately describes as “scathing.”  The Europeans and Turkey seem to be lining up to say the right things.

More important is what Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the Europeans do now.  The Administration is hinting that the Europeans will block their own Syrian oil imports.  This they can do because it is not much oil, but it accounts for more than a quarter of Syria’s revenue.  Turkey’s National Security Council today called for democratic change in Syria, but that likely won’t have much impact as the Foreign Minister has already issued several final warnings to Bashar al Assad.  What is needed is some action from Turkey in blocking trade or investment, which would signal clearly to Syrian businesspeople that the end is near.  The Saudis can make life hard for Bashar in many ways, not least just by indicating that it supports the protesters, as the King did late last week.

New York will be the center of the international action the next few days.  The Americans are pushing a Security Council resolution.  The Human Rights Council is to meet Monday to discuss the fact-finding report.  That should provide an occasion for lambasting the Syrian regime.  Legitimacy counts, even for autocracies.  When the UN is taking you to task for murdering your own citizens with their hands tied behind their backs, legitimacy comes into question.

Today in Syria is also key.  Already this week there have been demonstrations in Aleppo, Syria’s largest and most important commercial city.  A big turnout there and in Damascus would confirm that the judgment that it is time for Bashar to step aside.  How widespread the demonstrations are will also count.  The international moves may elicit a big response among the Syrians.

What we can’t really know is how all this will affect the small circle around Bashar al Assad.  It would take only a few of them to abandon his cause for Syria to turn quickly in a new direction.

The problem is what to do with Bashar.  Pressure is building for the Security Council to refer him to the International Criminal Court.  I am not as opposed to an indictment as many diplomats, who believe it would only strengthen his resolve to hold on to power.  That it may do, but it may also make those who work for him begin to wonder whether carrying out his orders to kill civilians is a smart thing to do.

I have my doubts though that evidence can be gathered in a time frame that would make an indictment meaningful.  More likely, a referral would be followed by a long delay, which would make matters worse rather than better (remember the Hariri case, and the case against President Bashir of Sudan?).

So what happens next?  Bashar al Assad won’t step aside until his security forces crack more dramatically than they have so far.  I don’t know anyone who can even pretend to know when that will happen, but the American/Turkish/Saudi/European/UN pressure being brought to bear this week is pushing things in the right direction.

Paul Pillar, in a piece published yesterday by The National Interest focused on Gary Locke, the new American ambassador to Beijing, notes:

The incidental influence that the United States exerts simply through people around the world observing its behavior is consistently underestimated, just as the influence the United States can exert intentionally by exercising its economic, military, or other instruments of hard power tends to be overestimated.

My twitterfeed is underestimating America’s “incidental influence” on events in Syria.  I don’t know whether it will be enough, but it will make Bashar al Assad very uncomfortable for the next few days, at the very least.

 

Tags : , , , , ,
Tweet