Syria Today | Syria-US Relations: The Difficult Lessons of 1991 and the Peace Process

Syria-US Relations: The Difficult Lessons of 1991 and the Peace Process

By Ahmed Salkini
Photo Syrian Embassy in Washington

If you thought the view from the region was grim regarding prospects for peace in the Middle East, try visiting Washington. Aside from the fact that people and politicians are distracted by a myriad of issues facing this administration, from healthcare reform and the economy to Afghanistan and Iraq, those who still follow news on ‘peace in the Middle East’ seem unvaryingly exacerbated. Although Obama (the man) might indeed be committed to a comprehensive peace, Obama (the president) cannot deliver given the current state of American domestic politics. If history is a guide, it might take a catalytic event to change the current paradigm, allowing US ‘national interests’ to trump Israeli ‘special interests’.

When assessing the parties involved, reasons for dismay are profound and abundant. On the Arab side, inter- and intra-divisions have rendered it cripple. For this exact reason, since 1974 Syria has maintained that dividing the Arab front into different peace tracks would undermine our leverage – which is exactly why Israel and the US did just that.

On the Israeli side, there is another ‘peace-loving’ government that wants to settle this conflict based on the absurd principle of ‘peace for peace’ rather than the internationally endorsed ‘land for peace’ formula. Taking into account the current extremist right-wing Israeli cabinet, the prospects for peace are about as promising as mine are of learning Mandarin in three days. If Netanyahu can deliver peace (as many ‘experts’ claim), he would require, at minimum, a new coalition and cabinet.

The American side, though, is the primary focus of this article. A new American administration arrived with an ostensibly genuine commitment for a just and comprehensive peace. Yet they are bogged down in the issue of illegal Israeli settlements which, ironically, they continue to indirectly fund. Politics is a realm of power, leverage and, above all else, interests. The inherent contradiction in the case of settlements is emblematic of how the US, the benefactor, lacks leverage over Israel, the recipient. The situation results from the domestic leverage exercised by Israeli interest groups, such as the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), which work to align US interests with Israeli ones. Israel is more than content with the status quo – negotiating over the pie, while simultaneously devouring it. Thus, if the US is to exercise any form of leverage on Israel, AIPAC’s interests and US interests need to be divorced, or at least dis-aligned. How can this happen? History might provide an insight.

When the US led a coalition to liberate Kuwait in 1991, it turned to the Arabs for support. Considering the provocation illegal, Arab countries, Syria included, rushed to the defence of Kuwait. As the US probed Syrian support in the coming conflict, Damascus stressed that it wanted nothing in return except for a US commitment to bring Israel to the negotiating table in order to end Israeli occupation in return for peace. Sure enough, later that year, the Madrid Conference was convened. And although no peace was signed, the breakthrough Madrid terms of reference laid the groundwork for any future peace agreement. While the Gulf War was not the sole reason for convening the conference, sadly it would have never occurred if the war had not taken place.

On this one occasion, furthering a specific US foreign policy goal – by having the Arabs on its side in the war – outweighed the regular carte blanche America provides Israel. It was at this pivotal event that the US exercised its leverage by threatening to stop aid if Israel would not abide by international demands. In turn, this threat provided Israeli officials with the means to sell the ‘unpopular concessions’ of peace to their public as unequivocal demands from ‘big brother’.

It might, just might, take another extraordinary event to liberate US interests from Israeli special interests to create one more push for peace. What would this ‘event’ be? No one knows. Let us pray it is not another war.

Ahmed Salkini is the spokesperson and press secretary of the Syrian Embassy in Washington.