The grotesque rehabilitation of the regime of Bashar al-Assad — Syria’s criminal president has been cordially invited to this week’s Arab League summit in Saudi Arabia — makes sense to cynical Arab governments. They hope to reduce Damascus’ dependence on Iran, encourage refugees to return, halt state-sponsored drug rackets and cash in on reconstruction.
However, from a human perspective, their decision is utterly shameful. More than 300,000 civilians have died since al-Assad turned his guns on Syria’s 2011 Arab spring pro-democracy uprising. About 14 million people, half of Syria’s population, have fled their homes. Most who remain are short of food.
Then came February’s earthquakes.
The conflict is far from over. Hundreds more civilians have been killed and injured in Syrian government and Russian airstrikes, cluster bomb and rocket attacks on displacement camps in northwestern Idlib, in Dar’a and Hama, and in northern Aleppo, the UN Human Rights Council said in its latest report.
“These and other attacks may amount to war crimes,” it said. “Arbitrary arrests and torture, enforced disappearances and deaths in detention continue,” the UN warned. “Returnees saw their homes looted or property confiscated. It’s abundantly clear Syria is still not a safe place to return to.”
Islamist militia were also guilty of egregious abuses, it said.
War crimes and crimes against humanity, including use of chemical weapons, are well documented in Syria. Yet there is no prospect of al-Assad facing justice. Fellow tyrant Russian President Vladimir Putin was swiftly indicted by the International Criminal Court over Ukraine. So why not the butcher of Damascus? It is an inexplicable omission.
Instead, al-Assad is to be feted, forgiven and rewarded by authoritarian Gulf plutocrats who seemingly care more about oil prices, palaces and Premier League soccer clubs than the lives, well-being and human rights of fellow Arabs.
It is not only the neighbors. In Syria, there is plenty of shame to share. The US and allies bottled a direct intervention in 2013 that could have stopped the slaughter. That let in Iran and the Russians, and ensured al-Assad’s survival. Western sanctions aimed at toppling the regime hurt civilians instead.
Looking for an upside, analysts suggest that al-Assad’s return to the Arab fold, coupled with the Chinese-brokered rapprochement between his ally, Iran, and Saudi Arabia, might spawn a homegrown Middle East security order.
Widening detente could potentially pacify Yemen, stabilize Lebanon, and relieve Jordan’s and Turkey’s refugee burden.
This proposition should be handled with care. Latest developments accelerate the sidelining of the US in a region it once dominated, and leave Western policy in tatters. Israel’s own, unedifying attempts at “normalization” — by building alliances with Gulf autocracies to counter Iran and confederates such as Hezbollah — are imperiled if not confounded. China’s leverage will grow. Beijing’s amoral outlook resonates in the Gulf.
Is a new era of Arab-Persian amity and unity a plausible prospect or mere wishful thinking? Al-Assad’s Syria will remain deeply unstable whatever happens — divided between the partially Turkish-occupied northwest, where jihadists roam free; the Kurdish-governed northeast, viscerally hostile to Damascus; and the mostly regime-controlled center and south. Its people remain at constant risk.
This evolution, marking a break with the Western-led, post-1945 world order, is part of an eastward power shift.
“Syria today is a multiring circus where armed forces from Turkey, the US, Russia and Iran engage in clandestine conflict with no obvious objective,” Charles Glass, a veteran American correspondent, reported from Damascus.
The Israel Defense Forces might also be added to that list.
The Arab League’s unconditional invitation ignores this febrile reality.
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken reiterated the Western view, based on a 2015 UN resolution, that a peaceful transition involving free elections and al-Assad’s defenestration was the “only viable solution to ending the conflict.”
Sounds good — except it is more wishful thinking.
Iran-Saudi Arabia detente should be treated skeptically, too. Iran’s internationally ostracized, domestically reviled mullahs are out for what they can get. Their disruptive behavior will not change. For its part, Riyadh wants to avoid being drawn into a full-on fight with Tehran — if Israel were to attack Iran’s nuclear sites. It no longer trusts the US to defend it.
Saudi Arabia also looks askance at anti-hijab and economic protests that have rocked Iran for months. Lacking democratic legitimacy themselves, its leaders fear insurrection. Iran-Saudi Arabia detente is designed to bolster the rulers. It will do nothing in either country to advance justice and equality for the ruled. In any case, the idea that entrenched historical and religious rivalries can be successfully suppressed for long seems highly fanciful.
It is striking nonetheless that these developments are taking place independently of and in opposition to the US, Saudi Arabia’s long-time protector, to Europe — and to post-imperial Britain, reduced to has-been hanger-on. This evolution, marking a significant break with the West, is part of the eastward power shift.
Alongside the Syria disaster, the Western powers’ failure to make the Iran nuclear deal stick has further undermined regional credibility. As always, Iraq provides a toxic legacy. And then there is their longest-running failure of all — the unfulfilled promise of Palestinian statehood.
Palestinian civilian suffering has intensified as Israel, unchecked by Arab governments or the West, has lurched to the extreme right. The West Bank has seen more than 100 killings by security forces this year. One outrage among many: Last weekend, an EU-funded Palestinian elementary school was torn down; 58 more are threatened with demolition.
Meanwhile, renewed Gaza-related violence is claiming more innocent lives, predominantly Palestinian. Yet many Western politicians, media and commentators behave as if this is not happening. This is what normalization truly means in the Middle East. The killing of civilians has become routine.
Arab leaders are no better. For them, too, self-interest and narcissism blind them to a common humanity. Al-Assad’s victims, Iran’s women, protesters and oppressed Palestinians can expect no help from that quarter, either.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers
RSS