Richard Spring MP: Syria is key to Middle East strategising

Richard Spring is Member of Parliament for West Suffolk

Ahead of Tony Blair’s speech at the Lord Mayor’s Banquet, there was much spinning about getting Iran and Syria involved in helping to resolve the situation in Iraq – a very tall order indeed.  Syria, for all its ambiguities, has no interest in radicalised Islamic rivalry and mayhem in Iraq – it is a secular society where even membership of the Moslem Brotherhood is illegal. 

Fundamentalist Iran, by contrast, is openly supplying weapons and materiel to fellow Shiite Iraqis with all the terrible consequences.  The frequent bracketing of Syria and Iran together is a complete misjudgement.  Their relationship of over 25 years arose out of their shared fear of Saddam Hussein.   Their latter day support for Hizbollah arises out of entirely different interests – even if the consequences are regrettably the same.

The pre-speech spinning proved to be wrong.  Tony Blair quite correctly called for a “whole Middle East” strategy.  But at least he recognised the distinction between Iran and Syria – it should be a key policy objective to try to separate the two, and have two actively different approaches.   He was quite right to return to the core issue of the Israel/Palestine conflict.

Britain’s role in the region is now so diminished, so for us to orchestrate a “whole Middle East” strategy would be impossible. Equally, there is no Western country, singly or collectively, that in current circumstances can now front such a strategy.  However, there is now real urgency. The daily catalogue of murder and destruction in Iraq needs no elaboration.

The breakdown of relationships in Lebanon between Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah of Hizbollah and Prime Minister Sinoria is now threatening the very stability of the country.  There are even rumours of a possible coup. Equally, the situation in Gaza has become explosive.

The first step to breaking through this terrible impasse is to open a dialogue with Syria.   There is a debate about this in Israel, but in the very difficult post-conflict atmosphere there, it would now be very difficult for Mr Olmert to be engaged directly in such a dialogue.  The main sticking point is Syria’s claim to the Golan Heights, which ultimately has to be resolved.  Syria has called for talks without pre-conditions, but the calls have been quite muted. So proper preparatory work needs to be done.   

Any way forward lies with the moderate Arab countries.  King Abdullah of Jordan recently spoke in London very passionately about the appalling consequences of the situation in the region continuing to deteriorate so fast.  He in particular, but with countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt, should be encouraged to lead an urgent exercise to bring the players together.  They should be supported by ourselves and the Americans, and other Europeans.   

Syria is an essential part of this.  At least this is now recognised in London, and by some in Washington and Jerusalem.

We simply have to try.  The consequences of failure in the region are unimaginable, and we too will pay a heavy price.

Comments

[TomTom]

Noone will get anywhere with Syria without France or Russia...........Russia is back in business in the Middle East with its own presence in Lebanon. Israel is the country with problems with a disastrous political leadership and floundering now Ariel Sharon is out of the picture.

The British and Americans would be better placed if France had its election out of the way already..............but Blair is the very last person to be involved with Syria, it would be better to deal with Egypt - but Blair's flirtation with The Muslim Brotherhood is not conducive to Mubarak feeling happy

[SimonNewman]

It's true that Syria, being a secular rather than religious dictatorship and increasingly an island of stability in the Middle East, is somewhere we can do business with if necessary, moreso than Iran. Syria is the place Lebanese and Iraqis are fleeing to as their own countries get worse. On the other hand, it's unclear what Syria would gain by working with us. Hopefully the USA is no longer considering attacking them, which would create yet another failed state & source of disorder.

As far as I can see, there is no way at this point to achieve anything that looks like success in Iraq. I would recommend that the West withdraw from Iraq - and preferably apologise for Bush's hubris. In general we should have as little as possible to do with the Middle East. This article recommends a strategy that has at least a chance of success:

http://www.d-n-i.net/lind/lind_strategic_defense.htm

[SimonNewman]

TomTom:
"but Blair's flirtation with The Muslim Brotherhood is not conducive to Mubarak feeling happy"

Hm, interesting point. It just shows how grotesquely out-of-touch the Bush-Blair strategy has been.

[TomTom]

In general we should have as little as possible to do with the Middle East.

Afraid we cannot unless we cut London adrift - it is the main Arab banking centre and the centre of Arab media like Al-Jazeera and Arab newspapers, it is the Arab centre in Europe..................

Separating London from The Middle East would be like removing carrots from mixed veg

[SimonNewman]

"Separating London from The Middle East would be like removing carrots from mixed veg"

Hm, that is difficult but doable!

[Andrew]

Yeah, it's often forgotten how terrified Syria was of Saddam in the late 80s. After the US, Britain and the Egyptians, the next biggest contingent liberating Kuwait in 1991 was Syrian (about 15,000 troops or so).

As an approach, courting Syria has possibilities. Self-interest will make them amenable for several reasons: first because the terrorist hotbed that Iraq has become over the last two years threatens them next, and second because Syria is in an extremely weak position internationally (wrt US cos of Israel, France cos of Lebanon). Also, Syria has nowhere near the military deterrent to invasion or punitive bombing that Iran has, nor an economic deterrent (effectively shutting down Hormuz with anti-ship missiles).

None of this is new - only complete incompetents would be making such diplomatic overtures at this stage.