Boston Globe
By Robert Pelletreau and Edward S. Walker
September 2, 2008
SOMETHING is happening that could transform the entire Middle East, shape the next American president's foreign policy in the region, and promote vital American interests - talks between Israel and Syria being mediated by Turkey.
Dr. Sami Taki, a close associate of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, said in late July that Syria might change its alliance with Iran if Syria achieves peace with Israel.
The United States stands to gain a great deal from an Israeli-Syrian agreement. Having served as US ambassadors to five Middle East countries, we are convinced that a comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace is essential to American national security interests. As the United States tries to rebuild its image, influence, and prestige in the Arab and Muslim worlds, it needs to help bring about peace between Israel and all its neighbors.
The Bush administration should start this process. If it can dispatch the third highest person in the State Department to participate in a meeting with Iranian officials, it can certainly encourage the talks between Israel, its friend and ally, and Syria. And even though the presidential election is two months away, the transition period between Election Day and inaugural day is important in determining a new administration's priorities. If the new president sees the prospect of progress along any section of the Israeli-Arab front, he is more likely to get involved in these efforts at the beginning of his administration.
Syria impacts many American interests. Chief among them currently is Syria's engagement in Iraq and stabilizing the Iraq-Syria border. As Iraq shows signs of gradual stability, American-Syrian talks in parallel with Israel-Syria talks might yield agreements producing substantial benefits for Baghdad while helping to relieve Syria of the enormous Iraqi refugee burden it is carrying.
Additional American interests include Hezbollah's role in Lebanon and in the Israeli-Arab conflict, and Iran's ability to undercut American efforts on the Israeli-Palestinian peace track, the core challenge of the Arab-Israel peace process.
If an Israeli-Syrian agreement is reached, the United States will emerge as one of the winners, along with Israel and Syria. Iran and Hezbollah will be the losers.
But such an agreement cannot be achieved without the United States. Syria wants the United States in the room, facilitating matters, offering security-related guarantees, and melting the frozen Washington-Damascus relationship. Some argue that Syria wants a warm relationship with the United States more than it wants the Golan Heights from Israel. However, if Damascus wants a positive relationship with Washington, cooperation over Iraq and respect for Lebanon's independence are essential.
Iran, of course, is the 800-pound gorilla in the room. Syrian peace with Israel implies a fundamental change in the Damascus-Tehran relationship. Syrian President Assad will need someplace safe to land as he moves away from the embrace of an Iran still hostile toward Israel. That someplace is the United States.
This means that an Israeli-Syrian agreement must necessarily pull Syria out of the Iranian orbit. Such an outcome would significantly improve the chances of reaching a comprehensive peace between Israel and all of its neighbors. An agreement would bring considerable additional benefits to the United States and to Israel, including:
-Iran's posture would be weakened.
-Syria would no longer provide support for armed action by Hamas and other militant Palestinian groups.
-It would clear the way for Israel's formal peace with Lebanon.
-It would end arms shipments to Hezbollah.
-It would strengthen Lebanon's independence, supporting an exchange of Syrian-Lebanese ambassadors and official delineation of Syria-Lebanon boundaries.
Comprehensive peace on all tracks would trigger Israel's normalization with the entire Arab world in accordance with the Arab Peace Initiative.
The Bush administration should open the diplomatic tool box for the Israeli-Syrian talks as it seems to be doing for Iran and North Korea. If it chooses not to, the next occupant of the Oval Office should pursue a peace whose achievement would mark the way toward broader peace and reconciliation in the region and disappoint only extremists and their sponsors.
Robert Pelletreau, former US ambassador to Egypt, Tunisia, and Bahrain, and Edward S. Walker, former US ambassador to Israel, Egypt, and the United Arab Emirates, are both former assistant secretaries of state for Near Eastern Affairs and members of the Israel Policy Forum American Advisory Council.
By Robert Pelletreau and Edward S. Walker
September 2, 2008
SOMETHING is happening that could transform the entire Middle East, shape the next American president's foreign policy in the region, and promote vital American interests - talks between Israel and Syria being mediated by Turkey.
Dr. Sami Taki, a close associate of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, said in late July that Syria might change its alliance with Iran if Syria achieves peace with Israel.
The United States stands to gain a great deal from an Israeli-Syrian agreement. Having served as US ambassadors to five Middle East countries, we are convinced that a comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace is essential to American national security interests. As the United States tries to rebuild its image, influence, and prestige in the Arab and Muslim worlds, it needs to help bring about peace between Israel and all its neighbors.
The Bush administration should start this process. If it can dispatch the third highest person in the State Department to participate in a meeting with Iranian officials, it can certainly encourage the talks between Israel, its friend and ally, and Syria. And even though the presidential election is two months away, the transition period between Election Day and inaugural day is important in determining a new administration's priorities. If the new president sees the prospect of progress along any section of the Israeli-Arab front, he is more likely to get involved in these efforts at the beginning of his administration.
Syria impacts many American interests. Chief among them currently is Syria's engagement in Iraq and stabilizing the Iraq-Syria border. As Iraq shows signs of gradual stability, American-Syrian talks in parallel with Israel-Syria talks might yield agreements producing substantial benefits for Baghdad while helping to relieve Syria of the enormous Iraqi refugee burden it is carrying.
Additional American interests include Hezbollah's role in Lebanon and in the Israeli-Arab conflict, and Iran's ability to undercut American efforts on the Israeli-Palestinian peace track, the core challenge of the Arab-Israel peace process.
If an Israeli-Syrian agreement is reached, the United States will emerge as one of the winners, along with Israel and Syria. Iran and Hezbollah will be the losers.
But such an agreement cannot be achieved without the United States. Syria wants the United States in the room, facilitating matters, offering security-related guarantees, and melting the frozen Washington-Damascus relationship. Some argue that Syria wants a warm relationship with the United States more than it wants the Golan Heights from Israel. However, if Damascus wants a positive relationship with Washington, cooperation over Iraq and respect for Lebanon's independence are essential.
Iran, of course, is the 800-pound gorilla in the room. Syrian peace with Israel implies a fundamental change in the Damascus-Tehran relationship. Syrian President Assad will need someplace safe to land as he moves away from the embrace of an Iran still hostile toward Israel. That someplace is the United States.
This means that an Israeli-Syrian agreement must necessarily pull Syria out of the Iranian orbit. Such an outcome would significantly improve the chances of reaching a comprehensive peace between Israel and all of its neighbors. An agreement would bring considerable additional benefits to the United States and to Israel, including:
-Iran's posture would be weakened.
-Syria would no longer provide support for armed action by Hamas and other militant Palestinian groups.
-It would clear the way for Israel's formal peace with Lebanon.
-It would end arms shipments to Hezbollah.
-It would strengthen Lebanon's independence, supporting an exchange of Syrian-Lebanese ambassadors and official delineation of Syria-Lebanon boundaries.
Comprehensive peace on all tracks would trigger Israel's normalization with the entire Arab world in accordance with the Arab Peace Initiative.
The Bush administration should open the diplomatic tool box for the Israeli-Syrian talks as it seems to be doing for Iran and North Korea. If it chooses not to, the next occupant of the Oval Office should pursue a peace whose achievement would mark the way toward broader peace and reconciliation in the region and disappoint only extremists and their sponsors.
Robert Pelletreau, former US ambassador to Egypt, Tunisia, and Bahrain, and Edward S. Walker, former US ambassador to Israel, Egypt, and the United Arab Emirates, are both former assistant secretaries of state for Near Eastern Affairs and members of the Israel Policy Forum American Advisory Council.
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق