Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Syria

871. Iraq after the Surge II: The Need for a New Political Strategy

Publication Date:
04-2008
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
International Crisis Group
Abstract:
Against the odds, the U.S. military surge contributed to a significant reduction in violence. Its achievements should not be understated. But in the absence of the fundamental political changes in Iraq the surge was meant to facilitate, its successes will remain insufficient, fragile and reversible. The ever-more relative lull is an opportunity for the U.S. to focus on two missing ingredients: pressuring the Iraqi government to take long overdue steps toward political compromise and altering the regional climate so that Iraq's neighbours use their leverage to encourage that compromise and make it stick. As shown in these two companion reports, this entails ceasing to provide the Iraqi government with unconditional military support; reaching out to what remains of the insurgency; using its leverage to encourage free and fair provincial elections and progress toward a broad national dialogue and compact; and engaging in real diplomacy with all Iraq's neighbours, Iran and Syria included.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Conflict Prevention, and War
Political Geography:
United States, Iraq, Middle East, and Syria

872. Dealing with Damascus: Seeking a Greater Return on U.S.-Syria Relations

Author:
Mona Yacoubian and Scott Lasensky
Publication Date:
06-2008
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Council on Foreign Relations
Abstract:
Punctuated by conflict in Iraq, an ascendant ran, and continued instability in Lebanon and the Palestinian territories, rising volatility in the Middle East threatens U.S. interests in the region. Meanwhile, sectarianism, al-Qaeda–inspired terrorism, and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) all serve as troubling overlays to this complex mix. Mired in Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States has yet to develop a comprehensive strategic framework that addresses these interrelated challenges. Instead, U.S. policy has been largely crisis-driven, attempting to put out fires by confronting issues on an ad hoc basis rather than seeking to respond to the underlying forces and tensions that catalyze conflict and instability in the Middle East.
Topic:
Foreign Policy and Diplomacy
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, United States, Iran, Middle East, North Korea, Palestine, Lebanon, and Syria

873. Failed Responsibility: Iraqi Refugees in Syria, Jordan and Lebanon

Publication Date:
07-2008
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
International Crisis Group
Abstract:
A refugee crisis was feared before the coalition invasion of Iraq in 2003, but it came later than anticipated, and on a greater scale. It started not because of the military action, but two years later, when American efforts to rebuild the country faltered, violence escalated, and civilians became the targets of insurgent groups and sectarian militias. And while exact numbers are uncertain, the scale of the problem is not in dispute: today, Iraq's refugee crisis – with some two and a half million outside the country and the same number internally displaced – ranks as the world's second in terms of numbers, preceded only by Afghanistan and ahead of Sudan. While the security situation in Iraq shows progress, the refugee crisis will endure for some time and could worsen if that progress proves fleeting.
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan

874. The EU and Syria Move Closer

Author:
David Schenker
Publication Date:
12-2008
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
On December 14, the European Union is slated to initial an association agreement with Syria. The pact had been on hold since 2004 because the EU "deemed that political circumstances were so far not right for its signature and ratification." These "circumstances" mostly concerned Damascus's pernicious policies in Lebanon, including its presumed role in the 2005 assassination of former Lebanese premier Rafiq Hariri. In recent months, however, Syria has rehabilitated its image in Europe, helping the pariah state end a lengthy period of international isolation. If it is signed, the agreement would be the latest in a series of cost-free diplomatic gains for Damascus in Europe.
Topic:
Foreign Policy and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:
Middle East, Lebanon, and Syria

875. Syrian–Israeli Peace: A Possible Key to Regional Change

Author:
Paul Salem
Publication Date:
12-2008
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
Peace between Syria and Israel is a real possibility—it was almost achieved twice before in 1995–1996 and 1999–2000. Both sides have indicated their interest through indirect talks hosted by Turkey. Syrian–Israeli peace would have positive effects on U.S. interests in the Middle East, including Lebanon, Iraq, and other tracks of the Arab–Israeli peace process. The downsides of U.S. mediation are limited. The two sides cannot and will not reach a peace treaty without U.S. leadership. The Obama administration should develop an integrated policy including pressure, incentives, and robust diplomacy to make this possibility a reality. The pressure would be to keep Syria out of Lebanon and Iraq. This would mean continued support for UN Security Council resolutions on Lebanon and the International Hariri Tribunal, as well as continued U.S. sanctions as long as Syria violates its neighbors' sovereignty. The incentives should include the return of the Golan Heights, ending Syria's political isolation, U.S. help in securing World Trade Organization accession, and encouraging foreign direct investment.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution and Peace Studies
Political Geography:
United States, Iraq, Turkey, Middle East, Israel, Arab Countries, Lebanon, and Syria

876. The keys to understanding the Israel-Russia

Author:
Pierre Razoux
Publication Date:
11-2008
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
NATO Defense College
Abstract:
The world financial crisis, the Iranian crisis and the Georgian crisis illuminate through different prisms the complex relations between Israel and Russia.The seeming contradictions of this odd couple are a constant source of serious concern and perplexity to theWestern world, and to NATO in particular, all the more so since Russia sent its army into Georgia and is back on the world stage as an essential player.Why is it that only six weeks after the verbal clash over the Georgian crisis in August 2008 (when Russia accused Israel of having armed and trained the Georgian army), Russia and Israel abolished their visa regulations, thus facilitating reciprocal trade? How do we explain the acceleration of capital flows between the two countries, at a time when world trade is clearly slowing down? And why is it that Moscow, after Washington, is still a destination of choice of Israeli prime ministers, while the Israeli authorities continue to insist that Israel has a special relationship with the United States? Are we to infer from this, then, that Israel and Russia are upgrading their strategic ties, as a popular Turkish magazine suggests ? Lastly, why was Israel one of the very few states in the Middle East to maintain regular relations with Russia after the ColdWar, unlike the many Arab states who coldshouldered their former arms supplier just as it was preparing to deliver sophisticated missile systems to Syria and a nuclear power station to Iran? For many observers, trapped in Cold War thinking, it was impossible to imagine Israel and Russia, the USSR's successor, as anything other than irreconcilable adversaries. This perception of Israel as the West's champion against Sovietsupported Arab countries overlooked the fact that the Arab-Israeli conflict arose from a regional conflict that went way beyond the confines of East-West confrontation. It also failed to take into account the deep and longstanding bonds between Israel and Russia, particularly in the area of immigration.
Topic:
Diplomacy and International Affairs
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Middle East, Israel, Arabia, and Syria

877. D4. Former Pres. Jimmy Carter, Notes on Meetings with Hamas Leaders and Syrian Pres. Bashar al-Asad, and Observations Regarding the Peace Process, Atlanta, GA, 22 April 2008 (excerpts)

Publication Date:
06-2008
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Palestine Studies
Institution:
Institute for Palestine Studies
Abstract:
From 13-22 April, former U.S. Pres. Jimmy Carter held high-profile meetings with political and civil society leaders in Israel, Palestine, Egypt, Syria, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia. The trip occasioned heated debates in the U.S. and Israeli media, largely because Carter planned to meet with Hamas leaders, particularly Khalid Mishal, who agreed in the course of their Damascus talks to put Hamas's position on final status talks with Israel in writing, which Carter formally unveiled at the end of his trip (see excerpts). Initially, Carter intended to make the trip part of a larger delegation led by Nelson Mandela to raise awareness of the urgent need for Israeli-Arab peace and the interlocking nature of the region's conflicts. After Israel denied the group's request to meet with senior officials during the tour to protest the planned meeting with Mishal, the delegation canceled its trip, and Carter opted to go on his own on behalf of the Carter Center. Israel agreed to receive him but denied permission for him to travel to Gaza to meet with Hamas's Ismail Haniyeh. Carter instead met with Hamas officials in Ramallah, Cairo, and Damascus. Israeli PM Ehud Olmert, Vice PM and FM Tzipi Livni, and opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu, as well as Palestinian pres. Mahmud Abbas, turned down requests to meet. Carter was received 4/13 on behalf of Israel by Pres. Shimon Peres, who reprimanded him for having "caused many problems in recent years with your comments and meetings," and 4/14 on behalf of the PA by PM Salam Fayyad. During the trip, he alsomet with the PA's negotiation advisers, various Israeli MKs, Israeli and Palestinian student groups, U.S. security envoy Lt. Gen. Keith Dayton, Syrian pres. Bashar al-Asad, Jordan's King Abdallah, and Saudi Arabia's King Abdallah. The State Dept. urged (4/10) Carter against meeting with Mishal, arguing that it went against U.S. policy of isolating Hamas. Carter responded that peace could not be achieved without including Hamas and stressed that he was traveling in a personal capacity. The following excerpts from Carter's "Trip Report" cover his meetings with Hamas leaders and President Asad, and his overall impressions regarding the status of the peace process. The full text is available online at www.cartercenter.org.
Political Geography:
Israel, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Egypt, Jordan, Cairo, and Damascus

878. The Role of Epistemic Communities in Offering New Cooperation Frameworks in the Euphrates-Tigris Rivers System

Author:
Aysegul Kibaroglu
Publication Date:
10-2008
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of International Affairs
Institution:
School of International and Public Affairs, Columbia University
Abstract:
The Euphrates-Tigris region has faced significant political changes since the late 1990s. These changes can be attributed to improvements in bilateral relations, mainly in the security domain, between two of its major riparians, Turkey and Syria. In the meantime, another major riparian, Iraq, has lived through devastating war and occupation, which has had implications for regional water issues. These changes have brought new actors, involved or interested in the hydropolitics of the two-river basin, to the region.
Topic:
Security
Political Geography:
Iraq, Turkey, and Syria

879. A Missed Chance for Peace: Israel and Syria's Negotiations over the Golan Heights

Author:
Marwa Daoudy
Publication Date:
10-2008
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of International Affairs
Institution:
School of International and Public Affairs, Columbia University
Abstract:
In the Middle East “no war is possible without Egypt, and no peace is possible without Syria,” as suggested by former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger in the 1970s. From 1991 to 2000, Syria entered into extensive peace negotiations with Israel, another key actor in the Middle East. The objective of this article is to understand these negotiations, which involved periods of intense discord as well as moments of rapprochement. Spectacular progress was made, for instance, between 1993 and 1995, when the “Rabin deposit,” Israel's promise to withdraw from the Golan Heights to the 4 June 1967 border and thus allow Syria to recover access to Lake Tiberias, was proposed to the U.S. mediator. The two actors came close to an agreement but failed to put an end to the Israeli-Syrian conflict at the Shepherdstown negotiations in January 2000 and the Asad-Clinton summit on 26 March 2000 in Geneva. What lessons can be drawn from the process which took place between 1991 and 2000 in terms of the actors' objectives, motivations and perceptions of each other? Why did the talks fail to produce an agreement? What was the weight of water in stimulating or blocking the process?
Political Geography:
United States, Middle East, Israel, Syria, and Egypt

880. Palestine Divided - Middle East Briefing

Publication Date:
12-2008
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
International Crisis Group
Abstract:
The current reconciliation process between the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) and Palestinian National Liberation Movement (Fatah) is a continuation of their struggle through other means. The goals pursued by the two movements are domestic and regional legitimacy, together with consolidation of territorial control – not national unity. This is understandable. At this stage, both parties see greater cost than reward in a compromise that would entail loss of Gaza for one and an uncomfortable partnership coupled with an Islamist foothold in the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) for the other. Regionally, Syria – still under pressure from Washington and others in the Arab world – has little incentive today to press Hamas to compromise, while Egypt and Saudi Arabia are tilting more pointedly toward Fatah. It will take significant shifts in domestic, regional and international attitudes for this to change. Palestine's political-territorial division, now over a year old, is set to endure.
Topic:
Diplomacy
Political Geography:
Washington, Middle East, Israel, Arabia, Gaza, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Egypt