Syrian President Bashar Assad is in a box from which he cannot escape, Western diplomats say, after UN investigators implicated senior regime figures in February's murder of Lebanese prime minister, Rafik Hariri. But while Syria's president is no Houdini, rumors of his imminent demise appear exaggerated.
One reason is international divisions about what to do. The US and Britain want UN action, leading to possible sanctions.
But French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said on Monday that any decision-making should be left until the UN's inquiry was complete.
Damascus has credible grounds for hoping that Russia and China will oppose Western-initiated punitive action through the UN, as has been the case with other "states of concern" such as Sudan, Myanmar and Zimbabwe.
And Washington may yet be distracted by a bigger target. US National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley was in Moscow on Sunday seeking Russian support for UN action against Iran. The Syrian dossier barely got a mention.
"I expect the UN Security Council will only issue a warning this week," said Rime Allaf, a Syria expert at the think tank Chatham House. "But if the UN inquiry's final report on Dec. 15 says regime figures should be handed over, Assad will be in a very difficult position."
Syria's leader has other options. He would play for time and to the Arab gallery, Allaf suggested, presenting his country to the Muslim world as the latest victim of a familiar US antipathy.
That is already happening. Syria rejected the UN report as being politically motivated; at the same time, the foreign ministry dangled the possibility of increased cooperation.
And the war for Arab ears has already begun. Mass pro-government demonstrations in Damascus and Aleppo on Monday illustrated the leadership's determination to mobilize regional opinion in support of what is being portrayed as a confrontation with the US as much as the UN. "Wake up Arabs, your turn will come soon!" said one banner.
The officially organized protests were a reminder that despite public dissatisfaction over living standards, 20 percent unemployment and falling oil income, the regime still knows how to exploit nationalist sentiment -- and faces little political opposition.
Assad's second line of defense follows the Gaullist model: Apres moi, le deluge. This posits that there is no obvious or acceptable successor to the ruling Baathists that he and his late father, Hafez Assad, have succeeded in holding together in an ethnically and confessionally disparate country, and that civil war merging with Iraq's could ensue if the regime fell.
Malik al-Abdeh, spokesman for the exiled Movement for Justice and Development opposition party, said such dire eventualities could not be ignored.
"The Sunni Salafist movement with its jihadist offshoots is a growing force within Syria, especially among the rural young," he said. "It is not under the influence of traditional Islamist parties like the Muslim Brotherhood. It is a relatively new phenomenon, greatly boosted by the Iraq insurgency ... it represents the strongest challenge to the regime on the ground."
But Abdeh argued that was a reason to replace Assad, not tolerate him. The US wanted "a more seasoned and pragmatic politician than Bashar" to confront the Islamists, he claimed.
Allaf disagreed.
"The Americans are buying into the deluge argument," she said. "They have stopped hinting at regime change. I think a number of countries are telling them this is not the time -- even the Israelis. It's in their interest to have a weakened Syria, a Syria on its knees, but not a Syria in chaos."
If all else fails, Assad could offer a deal involving concessions on Iraq, Lebanon and support for Palestinian militants.
But while that might satisfy the US, it could be too much for his Alawite godfathers. In that case, regime change may come not from without but from within.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath